Posted on 04/29/2014 8:21:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A private recording of racist remarks by the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, Donald Sterling, in a telephone conversation was released last week. Among other comments, Sterling said to his former mistress, a black Mexican woman known as V. Stefiano:
It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that youre associating with black people. Do you have to? . . . You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want. The little I ask you is not to promote it on that . . . and not to bring them to my games. . . . Im just saying, in your lousy f****** Instagrams, you dont have to have yourself with, walking with black people. . . . Dont put him [Magic] on an Instagram for the world to have to see so they have to call me. And dont bring him to my games.
That these comments are racist and therefore contemptible goes without saying. But the incident raises other issues that are not as clear as the racism in Sterlings comments. And at least as important.
One is the increasingly common release and acceptability of private recordings and videos. Take the video released last month of a married congressman engaged in a passionate kiss with a married member of his staff. This was a security surveillance video. Isnt the only reason for the very existence of surveillance cameras to catch criminals? Why didnt the release of such a video shock the media and the country?
I have consistently defended these ubiquitous video cameras against those who argue that they violate our privacy. I am convinced that they are indispensable to apprehending violent criminals, as they were in the case of the Boston Marathon terrorists. But, I have repeatedly added, if these cameras are ever used for personal or political reasons in order to ruin peoples lives or careers, the perpetrators of the release must be punished severely, including prison terms. And if this abuse becomes widespread, the cameras must be taken down.
The fact that whoever released the surveillance video of the congressman has not been apprehended is a threat to all of us. Yet this aspect of the incident has not even been discussed. All we heard was gloating over catching a conservative congressman in an act of infidelity.
Similarly, recordings of private speech must also remain private unless they pose a danger to others. When the media report private conversations that pose no threat of violence, they encourage more and more people to record and release private conversations. That, far more than the NSAs trolling of billions of phone calls in order to identify terrorists, poses a real threat to privacy. Where are the civil-liberties groups and libertarians on this issue?
Now, the second issue: How important to the public are the private remarks of public individuals?
On July 18, 2000, I wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal titled: Hillary Isnt an Anti-Semite.
It was a response to a book titled State of a Union by Jerry Oppenheimer, in which the author claimed that Mrs. Clinton had called the Jewish manager of husband Bills failed 1974 congressional campaign a Jew bastard.
I wish to defend Hillary Clinton, I wrote, against the charge of antisemitism.
I do so as a practicing Jew and a Republican. . . . We must cease this moral idiocy of judging and labeling people by stray private comments. As David McCulloughs biography of Harry Truman revealed, one of the most courageous friends American Jews and blacks ever had in the White House frequently used kike and nigger in private. He even wrote them down: In a letter home from New York, Mr. Truman described the city as kiketown. Was this unfortunate? Yes. Important? No. Defining of the man? Absolutely not. . . .
I am repulsed by the loose talk about Mrs. Clintons long-ago utterance. If that renders her an anti-Semite, then virtually every Gentile is anti-Semitic and almost every Jew is an anti-Gentile bigot. . . .
It is highly misleading to probe private comments for evidence of anti-Semitism, racism, bigotry, and sexism. The present trend emanates largely from a lethal combination the totalitarian temptation inherent in contemporary liberalism and the medias sensationalism.
It may well matter to God what people say in private. But what should matter to us is what people say in public and how people act whether in private or public.
Now, as it happens, Sterling does seem to have behaved in a racist manner in the past. And these actions do matter in assessing Donald Sterling. It is worth noting, however, that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) apparently felt that all the charges of racist conduct meant nothing. It was scheduled to award Sterling a lifetime achievement award at its upcoming Los Angeles gala in two weeks.
Yes, the private remarks attributed to Sterling are racist and awful. But the growing acceptance of leaks of peoples private non-criminal behaviors and comments and the consequent judgment of these people will ultimately injure society far more than who owns the Los Angeles Clippers.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His most recent book is Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.
He’s a mean foolish old fart but cat woman set him up....no question
Thou shalt not speak ill of thy physical lords
Watching whites squirm over this is amusing and disgusting
Meanwhile the Mongols are at full sack
And we fret over racism
That’s what I thought too. The tapes sound so scripted. I figured she was trying to set him up.
I think the tapes could have been part of a blackmail attempt. Then, maybe she tried blackmail, but that failed. So she decided to release the tapes publicly, to try to destroy him.
There is much more here than meets the eye. I’m glad the issue of taping someone and releasing private conversations is getting some attention now. At first, the uproar was about Sterling’s comments, without context, and without regard to how it is that these tapes even exist.
Wait for the whole story to unfold.
How many of us would be simon pure, if some of our private comments were broadcast on national television?
There was an article posted last week about a disabled kid who recorded his abuser at the public school with his cell phone. The phone was taken away by the school officials, and the court determined that the bully had a “reasonable expectation of privacy” - in a public school, in a public setting. Shouldn’t this guy have more than a “reasonable expectation of privacy” while in his mistress’ domicile? (Not that I agree with his statements - just with his right to privacy.)
I don’t like the selective outrage of the race baiters.
The biggest race baiters are in the highest offices in this country,isn’t it ironic they are the biggest purveyors of this,pointing figures and shooting off their big mouths about racism and Eric Holder talks about taking care of his PEOPLE while having his justice dept announce they will not enforce civil fight violations against black people.
Indeed
When angered, I rarely (if ever) say something I don’t mean. But most people do. And they usually do it to hurt the person they are angry with. This means that if one is really angry at a black friend, they may call the friend a “stupid jungle bunny” for the soul purpose of trying to hurt the person. The only way they are racist is they know it would hurt the friend, while a white friend, when called the same name, might say “WTF?”.
Comments made in anger rarely expose a person’s true feelings unless they are someone like me. I cut people huge slack regarding name calling.
Aside from that, it is now necessary to expose and discuss the pervasive racism by many in the Black and Latino community against whites as well. Gringos, crackers, actin’ white, the NBA is a black league, we need an all black (NBA) league, 'my people' Holder, 'we need to make this a chocolate city', Jamie Foxx, Sharpton, Jackson...and how the msm bends over backwards to dismiss it all. Few payed any attention to Jesse Lee Peterson who's B.O.N.D. organization's motto is "Uniting the races with truth instead of dividing them with lies"
The key is to never say something you don’t mean.
If that is the case, then why is everyone racing to call Sterling a racist?
His comments don't suggest that he is a racist, but that he has racist clients that he works with. Those racist clients don't seem to mind that he is openly violating his wedding vows, but they are upset when they see his floozy out with black people.
Sterling may be a scumbag and a hypocrite, but he seems to be more a mercenary racist, i.e. racist for moneymaking purposes then an out-and-out bigot.
Believe me....I’ve said the n word
As fists flew and meffing cracker was hurled my way
Its just life sometimes....you gonna get pushed around or fight back.....
Whites might know this if they got out from under video games and latte
And what he said about blacks in Israel?
Folks can go there and judge for themselves
However..some of his rant was nutty..
Nonsensical
Please honey....take your mulatto self out and bang all the black stallions you wish just don’t bring them to my games I make happen?
Being 80 and rich yet being played by an alien looking tart one third your age is not pretty
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.