So...just have been itching for some good political banter lately, thought I'd see if we could draw a few flies if I put a stinking pile of poo out.

So what's everyone's take on this whole Donald Sterling mess?

Firstly, being white I'm sure I'm not qualified to speak on the matter, so let me drop a note from someone who might be.....Mr. Kareem himself, great read on the topic

http://time.com/79590/donald-sterling-k ... ar-racism/

So first of all, I'm all over the map on this one.

1. Let's just clear the air and state that, yes, this guy is monstrously bigoted pig. Technically he's not a racist....but let's face it, that word has been given a whole new meaning the last 50 years.
2. These damning excerpts were illegally leaked from a private conversation, and I think we set an awfully terrible precedent in supporting or ignoring this fact, even if it's in the name of social justice.
3. Was this possibly a set up from the beginning? I don't support or deny that claim, but it makes for interesting discussion. Could this have been a ploy to force him out from the start?
4. As noted in Kareem's article, the status of Mr. Sterling's dark heart should be no surprise to anyone who knew him, or at least a portion of his past. Why wasn't he ousted before, over more public domain things?
5. Why has received awards, and even scheduled to receive another from the NAACP if he's known to have these stances?
6. Should he be forced to sell his stake in the team? I mean, honestly, I feel like he'd be a fool not to, I'd want to disassociate myself from this whole debacle as much as I could. But should he be forced to? If the NBA charter allows, specifically, for this type of thing, then it's a no brainer, but if it doesn't specifically allow for it, what standing is there to force it? I think, if he IS forced to sell, then really all bets are off, and you'd have to cease from calling the owners "owners", as if you're forced to part with something, compensated or not, you really never owned it. And if he IS forced to sell, I think it's only a matter of time for someone to claim it a precedent for forcing the Redskins owner to change the team name.

Let's throw the LA NAACP in with him, since they willingly accepted money from him on more than one occasion.