[circlecity]

"You guys have to admit, this guy is a scumbag. Especially in light of what he did with his housing units years ago. The NBA had evey right to do what they did."

I may agree the guy is a scumbag but I don't agree that anyone should be fined and banned for life for a private comment made in a private conversation. Where does that end?

[Dan Nunn]

I don't agree that anyone should be fined and banned for life for a private comment made in a private conversation.

The NBA has a revenue sharing program. There are 29 other NBA teams. Because of the stupid comments and subsequent boycotts, it is devaluing the investments and costing the 29 other owners real money.

And you can bet his franchise agreement provides the ability of the NBA to monetarily penalize him.

The NBA has every right to protect their business interests.

[thefactor]

This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. An dit does not matter that the recording was made illegally. The NBA contracts inculdes clauses about making the NBA, a private entity, look bad.

Privtae companies can put whatever they want in their contracts. And you are free to not sign them if you'd like. The 'rule of law' holds no jurisdiction.

[Dubh_Ghlase]

Yes, not only was the conversation private and illegally recorded, it also seemed the ('ahem') young lady seemed to be badgering him into responding to her questions in an incriminating way.

Agreed, he is a scumbag from the get-go, so wonder how many other big-buck leftist are shaking in their boots over when the next hot-mike comment may show up from them? Also, how many of those leading the charge here would stand up under the same scrutiny, even with the double-racist-standard applied?