Post: #26

(09-07-2014 02:42 PM)Jeans Wrote:  Something's up here. Even the NYtimes wouldn't fully endorse this as racist language, titling the story (note quotations around 'offensive') "Co-Owner to Sell Hawks Because of ‘Offensive’ Email."

The fact that Levenson self-reported this, had purportedly tried to sell his share previously in 2011(and failed), and furthermore clearly considered the franchise's business to be lagging, suggests that he might have been so desperate to sell that he self-engineered a scenario in which ownership of the franchise would necessarily be usurped one way or another.

Damn.

This makes a lot of sense, actually.

When I saw self-report, I assumed he has been blackmailed.

But you could be on to something big.

Either way, I like the way you think.

Post: #27

So this is just another media engineered story to help the wealthy transfer their wealth while the peasants squabble over whether or not its racist.

Post: #28

(09-07-2014 03:04 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(09-07-2014 02:42 PM)Jeans Wrote:  Something's up here. Even the NYtimes wouldn't fully endorse this as racist language, titling the story (note quotations around 'offensive') "Co-Owner to Sell Hawks Because of ‘Offensive’ Email."

The fact that Levenson self-reported this, had purportedly tried to sell his share previously in 2011(and failed), and furthermore clearly considered the franchise's business to be lagging, suggests that he might have been so desperate to sell that he self-engineered a scenario in which ownership of the franchise would necessarily be usurped one way or another.

Damn.

This makes a lot of sense, actually.

When I saw self-report, I assumed he has been blackmailed.

But you could be on to something big.

Either way, I like the way you think.

Im not sure I agree. That doesn't make sense. Of all the possible ways to sell a team you want to make it look as if you were a well-qualified leader of a respected. This just damages his reputation both looking back during the time he managed the team and going forward he will have the racist stigma, and no one wants that especially when you've worked so hard you're whole life to amass a fortune and lots of power.

Post: #29

Quote:The NBA and Levenson say he self-reported the email, but a high-ranking league official with direct knowledge of the probe told Yahoo Sports on Sunday that wasn't completely accurate, that the email had come back to haunt the owner within his organization.

"Semantics," the source called the NBA's insistence of a self-reporting scenario.

Silver is no liar, but he's a gifted lawyer and carefully scripted an apology and framed his ouster to make easier Levenson's decision to sell his majority share of the Hawks.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/in-the-post...17439.html

Guy wants out of a multi-million dollar corporation that only appreciates in value, and to do so, he's going to publicly make himself look like a racist to a melting pot society?

I mean come on, I say it again, for a red-pill community, guys need to start putting their thinking hats on and/or opening their third eyes.

There are better ways to go about these things.

An owner making a remark like "the music is hip-hop", when they play hip-hop in every major arena in the world, not to mention hip-hop is owned by individuals like him, not the individuals who are the faces/figureheads of it and "the kiss cam is too black", this level of stupidity shouldn't be defended by anybody.

He should be shaking his fans' hands for supporting a treadmill team with no superstar talent instead of shitting on them and the money they spend to support his also-ran business.

Post: #30

(09-07-2014 12:37 PM)Roosh Wrote:  It's just a matter of time until these racist/sexist witch hunts hit against basic economics and business sense, where actually believing in true equality and lack of race will cause your business to lose a lot of money.

"Until?" Is the US not already there -- favoring racial ideals over cold hard facts and business sense?

Will the US ever recover and once again become a place where people (leaders) can speak their minds and not be publicly shamed for such truths?

Post: #31

NBA Owners are scared

Quote:In the aftermath of the Donald Sterling scandal, the dirty little secret within the NBA had played itself out in a most pronounced and predictable way: For all the public declarations of support on commissioner Adam Silver's banishment of the Los Angeles Clippers loathsome owner, there were untold peers privately peppering Silver with misgivings on this perilous new NBA world.

"Adam had far less support on Sterling than anyone knows," a league source who speaks frequently with Silver told Yahoo Sports.

All around the league, owners started to take inventory on loose memos, audio and video remnants of speaking engagements and staff meetings. From race to gay rights to fears of camera phones getting turned on them half-cocked in bars well past midnight, there were assuredly more than a few owners dispatching high-level cleaning crews to try and retrieve and expunge past indiscretions.

Dallas owner Mark Cuban had come out publicly with a fear that the rest of his peers only shared privately: Are we all headed down a slippery slope with these Sterling tapes?

As owners issued statements decrying the racist rants of Sterling, they feared a thousand scenarios that could unfasten them of ownership, including how it's happened to Atlanta Hawks majority owner Bruce Levenson.

Across the past several days, several high-ranking NBA officials, including owners, flew to New York to meet with Silver and discuss how the NBA would proceed on the contents of Levenson's 2012 email, sources told Yahoo Sports.

So few owners and Board of Governors members had been included in the conversation, so secretive had been Silver and league executives on the identity of Levenson, that only tiny parcels of information escaped a fortified inner circle. Through the league's back-channel gossip circles, this was known: An NBA owner is in deep trouble, and as one high-ranking official told Yahoo Sports on Friday, "I'm told it's Sterling-esque in nature."

Fear spread rapidly, because without knowledge of Levenson's identity, more than one owner wondered: "Do they have something on me?" Other high-ranking officials in organizations wondered, "Do you know if it's my guy?" Until the NBA issued a statement – deftly buried within hours of the NFL season's start on Sunday – the league was littered with guilty consciences bracing for the worst.

Everyone accepts this fact: Sterling's banishment was a lifetime achievement award on racism, discrimination and a downright despicable life. For legal reasons, the NBA could never make it about anything but that deranged old man's words to his girlfriend, but everyone knew the truth. The tapes had come public, and Silver had a chance to make him go away once and for all. From a business perspective, the NBA would've struggled to function without that action – from player revolts, sponsorship withdrawals and legitimate public disgust – Silver had to make his stand.

The Levenson case was a far more complex issue, and Silver was spared a far more divisive fight with owners had Levenson been unwilling to simply bow out and sell his stake in the Hawks. He had no public history of racial issues, and his 2012 email to general manager Danny Ferry clumsily tried to make sense of a legitimate business issue: How could the Hawks make game-night inclusive for a diverse Atlanta population? In some segments of the email, Levenson decries a racist attitude.

"…I think southern whites simply were not comfortable being in an arena or at a bar where they were in the minority," Levenson wrote in the email. "On fan sites I would read comments about how dangerous it is around Philips [Arena], yet in our 9 years, I don't know of a mugging or even a pick pocket incident. This was just racist garbage. When I hear some people saying the arena is in the wrong place I think it is code for there are too many blacks at the games."

Still, the email was an exacerbated, rambling stream of unscientific and largely uniformed spate of theories that made clearly insensitive and inappropriate assertions to make sense of why the Hawks couldn't sell tickets. Much of the email made a case for how African-American fans were more to blame for the Hawks ills than white fans, and Levenson's apology acknowledged it. Throughout the email, Levenson played into the very stereotypes of African-Americans that he claimed elsewhere to decry. Too many "blacks" on the Kiss Cam? Good lord.

Levenson had sent the email to Ferry, whom he had had hired himself. Levenson has a close relationship with Ferry's longtime agent David Falk, and worked closely with Falk on a six-year contract that gave Ferry tremendous autonomy with the franchise.

The NBA and Levenson say he self-reported the email, but a high-ranking league official with direct knowledge of the probe told Yahoo Sports on Sunday that wasn't completely accurate, that the email had come back to haunt the owner within his organization.

"Semantics," the source called the NBA's insistence of a self-reporting scenario.

Silver is no liar, but he's a gifted lawyer and carefully scripted an apology and framed his ouster to make easier Levenson's decision to sell his majority share of the Hawks.

Once the NBA delivered its proclamation on Sunday, there were some unmistakable sighs of relief throughout the league. As one high-ranking team official texted within moments of the Levenson announcement, "It isn't my guy!" Everyone's heart stopped pounding so furiously, thrilled they had survived one more round of cuts in the roulette the post-Donald Sterling era has brought the NBA.

Yes, they survived the weekend, but Monday will come, and all around the NBA they'll start wondering and starting worrying again: Am I next?

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/in-the-post...17439.html

Post: #32

Welcome to the USA where racism is our greatest sin and sodomy is our highest virtue!

Personally, I think it's great. Saves us a whole lot of time from doing the whole witch hunt thing. All white men with naughty thoughts should immediately self-report themselves to the diversity & sensitivity training centers for re-education.

Post: #33

(09-07-2014 05:00 PM)monster Wrote:  Im not sure I agree. That doesn't make sense. Of all the possible ways to sell a team you want to make it look as if you were a well-qualified leader of a respected. This just damages his reputation both looking back during the time he managed the team and going forward he will have the racist stigma, and no one wants that especially when you've worked so hard you're whole life to amass a fortune and lots of power.

The current narrative is that he self-reported.

Didn't that have the same negative effects you report?

Why is the official story more trust worthy than alternative theories?

Post: #34

(09-07-2014 05:11 PM)jariel Wrote:  I mean come on, I say it again, for a red-pill community, guys need to start putting their thinking hats on and/or opening their third eyes.

There are better ways to go about these things.

The current narrative is that he self-reported.

Do you believe he self-reported?

Or was he black mailed into "self-reporting"?

Or is something else going on?

What's your theory? Is it your believe that an article from a mainstream media outlet is absolute gospel?

Post: #35

(09-07-2014 06:07 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(09-07-2014 05:00 PM)monster Wrote:  Im not sure I agree. That doesn't make sense. Of all the possible ways to sell a team you want to make it look as if you were a well-qualified leader of a respected. This just damages his reputation both looking back during the time he managed the team and going forward he will have the racist stigma, and no one wants that especially when you've worked so hard you're whole life to amass a fortune and lots of power.

The current narrative is that he self-reported.

Didn't that have the same negative effects you report?

Why is the official story more trust worthy than alternative theories?

My post wasn't clear in that I agree it says that he self-reported. B it seems suspicious to me. No one who has worked that hard in life wants the stigma of being a) forced to sell rather than sell out of one's own volition, and b) considered racist going forward, which will effect his public perception in his city and potentially other biz deals.

Post: #36

(09-07-2014 06:09 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(09-07-2014 05:11 PM)jariel Wrote:  I mean come on, I say it again, for a red-pill community, guys need to start putting their thinking hats on and/or opening their third eyes.

There are better ways to go about these things.

The current narrative is that he self-reported.

Do you believe he self-reported?

Or was he black mailed into "self-reporting"?

Or is something else going on?

What's your theory? Is it your believe that an article from a mainstream media outlet is absolute gospel?

Adrian Wojnarowski is considered one of the best sportswriters in the league, he's one of the few guys who consistently breaks news, so do I believe what information was provided to him versus believing whatever I'd like to believe without any basis for doing so?

Yes.

I don't see what Levenson has to gain for outing himself in this manner, if he wants out of the team, by selling his share, he can just do it, he's not bound to hold on to the franchise.

For the record, the guy isn't a racist, he's definitely not on Sterling's level, but that doesn't change the fact that he made some rather insensitive, ignorant comments in his e-mail, and as I've already stated, I highly doubt that's the first time and that's the only e-mail.

You don't allow any racism or prejudice over at D&P, which is one of the reasons you have a broad audience who respects and looks forward to the information you provide, I get the impression you're going to bat for this guy, yet I question if you would allow such comments on your own blog.

Post: #37

(09-07-2014 06:15 PM)jariel Wrote:  Adrian Wojnarowski is considered one of the best sportswriters in the league, he's one of the few guys who consistently breaks news, so do I believe what information was provided to him versus believing whatever I'd like to believe without any basis for doing so?

Yes.

I don't see what Levenson has to gain for outing himself in this manner, if he wants out of the team, by selling his share, he can just do it, he's not bound to hold on to the franchise.

Why isn't this expert journalist digging deeper into the self-reporting aspect.

It the story that an NBA team owner told on himself consistent with your view and experiences with and understanding of the world?

Post: #38

I don't believe he self-reported.

He probably has some enemies within the organization, and they put him in a bad position.

That seems more probable to me than it ate at him for two years including while he publicly denounced Sterling, and then he woke up one morning recently and decided to dig it up and forward it to the league office.

The issue here isn't really whether he self-reported it or not, it's rare you get real insight into the minds of individuals like Levenson and Sterling, it's eye-opening to say the least.

Post: #39

"that doesn't change the fact that he made some rather insensitive, ignorant comments in his e-mail, "

Any time people use the words insensitive and ignorant to discount someone, I instinctively disagree with them, before I even read their argument. Because if their concern was truth, they would simply say something is false and a pack of lies. When they don't, and use those terms instead, odds are good it's something a lot more wishy washy.

"An owner making a remark like "the music is hip-hop", when they play hip-hop in every major arena in the world, not to mention hip-hop is owned by individuals like him, not the individuals who are the faces/figureheads of it and "the kiss cam is too black", this level of stupidity shouldn't be defended by anybody."

The dude doesn't care what music plays, as long as it brings in the customers who will pay top dollar.

People of all races avoid places that are full of the 'wrong' kind of people. That college is too Asian. That club is too black. The chicks there are too fat. He's trying to erase that reputation about his games. Some white people need to be convinced that a certain activity is not something only black people do, before they'll patronize it.

Post: #40

(09-07-2014 06:26 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  "that doesn't change the fact that he made some rather insensitive, ignorant comments in his e-mail, "

Any time people use the words insensitive and ignorant to discount someone, I instinctively disagree with them, before I even read their argument. Because if their concern was truth, they would simply say something is false and a pack of lies. When they don't, and use those terms instead, odds are good it's something a lot more wishy washy.

"An owner making a remark like "the music is hip-hop", when they play hip-hop in every major arena in the world, not to mention hip-hop is owned by individuals like him, not the individuals who are the faces/figureheads of it and "the kiss cam is too black", this level of stupidity shouldn't be defended by anybody."

The dude doesn't care what music plays, as long as it brings in the customers who will pay top dollar.

You're welcome to disagree, and I support your right to do so, but unfortunately that doesn't change the validity of the statement.

If you go to any NBA arena, hell any sporting event in North America, you will hear hip-hop, that fact is not unique to the Atlanta Hawks experience.

Obviously he was equating Hip-Hop to what he wanted to equate it to, for him, going to an Atlanta Hawks game was too much of a Black experience, and he wanted to change that.

Post: #41

Google 'too white': About 1,400,000,000 results

Headlines from search results:

Green groups too white and too male
Houston grand juries: too white"
MPs are too white, says David Cameron
Springbok rugby team is still too white
Apple's work force is mostly white and male, too
CBS' fall programming: Is it too white?
Our TV shows are far too white, says Lenny Henry
Are NJ police departments too white?
Is the Oxford Dictionary Definition of Racism Too White

Post: #42

(09-07-2014 12:37 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Seems like he's just talking demographics and marketing.

That was exactly my thought. I know of at least one Fortune 500 company that everyone in the U.S knows (and 50% of people use) that spent YEARS saying, internally, "we need to appeal to Hispanics more...we want to be one of Latina magazine's 'top 10 places for latinos to work". Likewise, this same company said it had to promote many more women than men for a few years, because women were "under-represented in our executive ranks" and "we want Working Mother Magazine to name us one of the 10 best places for mothers to work".

Is that racist/sexist? All they are doing is 1) observing a fact, that women and latinos are make up a smaller part of their clientele and of their executive ranks. And then 2) proposing actions to increase greater participation amongst those potential customers. Likewise, as a kid i worked at Kentucky Fried Chicken and learned that they did demographic studies that indicated that African-Americans made up a large part of their clientele but that Jewish americans were underrepresented amongst their customers, relative to their share of the population. And so, logically, they set out to retain their existing customers while simultaneously appealing to the under-represented groups, which were of course a large source of POTENTIAL customers.

Demographic composition are facts, not value statements. But talking about race, in any form, is now "verboten".

Post: #43

(09-07-2014 06:26 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  People of all races avoid places that are full of the 'wrong' kind of people.

This part of your argument is DOA.

There's nothing in Levenson's statement that even insinuates that the type of people going to the games were the "wrong kind".

Do some research on NBA tickets, they're not cheap.

There's a sizeable Black population in Atlanta, and it happens to be one that can afford to go to major sporting events.

What you're getting at is certain things in society, people have to be placated and pandered to so that they can feel comfortable about getting involved.

The Atlanta Hawks have no real history, especially recently, that it would even make sense to conclude people should be buying season tickets and jerseys like there is no tomorrow.

They have been at best a treadmill team, and they haven't have any legit superstar talents who can sell out arenas, in fact, when they do, it's because the visiting team has superstars on it.

I think that information is rather relevant, Levenson took some details and connected dots that weren't there based off stereotypes and his own personal beliefs, not hard data and information.

Post: #44

(09-07-2014 06:29 PM)jariel Wrote:  going to an Atlanta Hawks game was too much of a Black experience, and he wanted to change that.

The merits of the case aside, does anyone else find it odd that this guy bought a BASKETBALL TEAM and then complained it was too much of a black experience? Is this very different than, say, Magic Johnson buying the Montreal Canadians and then complaining they were "too much of a white experience"?

And you were expecting...?

Post: #45

In bad economic times, when people feel (and are) powerless, they become susceptible to suggestion by the media. They are easily swayed by fake "scandals" and fake "outrages."

These fake scandals and outrages are useful for the powerful structure, as they deflect the mob's attention away from what really matters: the decline in wages, the decline in services, the fall in educational levels, and in the lack of job opportunities. When people feel powerless and not in control over their lives, focusing on make-believe and on imaginary bugbears can make them feel empowered.

But they're mistaken. Because they're being swindled. They're being manipulated. Running around feeling "outraged" about all this nonsense means that you're just lining the pockets of the media manipulators, race baiters, and carnival barkers. But people just don't learn.

Stories like this boil down to: someone called me a name, and I'm so offended.

Or: someone was mean to me, and I'm so offended by it.

Instead of feeling outrage over some comment made by some businessman, people should instead be outraged about community violence, the lack of job opportunities, the collapse of black families, and every other social malaise that's out there.

But instead, we have to hear media stories about "someone called me a bad name." Or "someone was mean to me."

These little scandals are ways to keep the masses entertained and distracted, so that they dare not notice how miserable they are.

We're all spectators in the great media Circus Maximus, just as in Roman days the emperors used the Circus Maximus and Colisseum to divert the mob's attention from social problems that they could not--or would not--solve.

Instead of chariot races, mock naval battles, gladiatorial combats, or animal baiting, we have:

Race baiting
Race trolling
Fake racial scandals
Fake rape scandals
Fake political scandals
Beheadings
Sex photo releases
Celebrity outrages

And everything else under the sun. Meanwhile, the population gets fatter and fatter.

Burn everything. We're done.

Post: #46

Relevant:

Quote:Being Offended Is Meaningless

"I find that offensive!"

Translates roughly as:

"I'm lucky enough to live in a country where I have freedom of thought, freedom of movement, plenty of food, unlimited drinking water and even occasionally spare money to treat myself with, which is why I also have a television, a DVD player, one or two computers and a games console.

The trouble is, I'm also staggeringly pompous, filled with a sense of bourgeois entitlement and lacking any real sense that my problems are "First World Problems" as opposed to "Real Problems".

So: rather than celebrate the fact that I live in an age of unprecedented personal liberty and wealth where a good portion of the world still wakes up and eats dirt every day, what I've decided to do as an utterly flatulent waste of skin, organs and oxygen is lose touch with any objective reality, sanity and perspective and begin to actually believe that me encountering an idea that I can't handle or disagree with equates to actually physically or mentally harming me.

If I read something that offends me, I will not only act as if you've firebombed my house and raped my children, but I'll DEMAND that you justify yourself to me - in my unquestioned position as lord and master of the universe - immediately and in full!

That's how small, unremarkable and completely devoid of perspective I am. And I'm not willing to change, so anyone and everyone I encounter must work around my mental weakness. For ever. Because after all: asking me to simply up my game and take responsibility for my own feelings is an infringement on my human rights as a flacid bourgeois sleepwalking consumer.

Essentially: I'm a very limited person who's unable to handle emotional stimulus like an adult - and that's everyone's problem to deal with but mine."

So, to sum up:

If you're offended by something you read on a social media site today - do us all a favor and just for once Shut Your Fucking Mouth about it. Just let one momentary encounter with a new idea pass without chirping your fucking fragility alarm to all and sundry. Nobody needs to justify themselves to you if they're not harming someone directly.

Did you get that bit? Because it's so important I'll say it again: NOBODY HAS TO JUSTIFY THEMSELVES TO YOU. EVER. Did you get that?

By all means offer ideas and converse frankly. But don't ever mistakenly believe that the sentence "I'm offended by that" holds any relevance or meaning as a statement. All you're really saying is "Waaaahhh! Don't like it!". I've got a two year old who's mastered that. Fuck off, grow up and try harder.

Post: #47

Just once I wish someone would respond to the cry of "I'm offended by what you said!" with something like, "Oh, you're offended, huh? Well, I'm offended that you think my priorities in life should revolve around ensuring that your precious feelings never get hurt, you entitled piece of shit. Get a fucking life."

Post: #48

Ive been thinking more to this and I think the racism angle is probably BS.

Here's why:
The investigation began several months ago - regardless of whether it was self-reported or not. The investigation has NOT concluded yet but the Owner stepped down anyway out of "shame" for his comments.

We've dissected above that the email in question is not particulary racist, rather it's capitalistic by trying to garner more customers.

What I suspect is that the investigation uncovered something else that was far more embarrassing than the supposed racism. And the racism angle became the easy way out.

Perhaps he knocked up a cheerleader. Perhaps he fucked some male intern in the bunghole. Perhaps he was embezzling funds improperly. Perhaps he pissed off someone royally in the Commissioner's office. Who knows?

The racism angle has got to be smoke & mirrors because let's face it: that letter is not racist. But I don't think we'll ever know the truth.

Post: #49

This situation reminds me way back to the 80s when Larry Bird came in to save basketball because of the abysmal ratings it had at the time. In the 1970s almost 98% of basketball players were Black and it didn't sit too well with White America where they saw legendary teams like the Knicks, and the Lakers be 100% Black. White Americans stopped watching basketball and ratings plummeted in the 70s. The owner of the Boston Celtics at the time pushed for an all White team and started by drafting Larry Bird. Larry Bird came into the Celtics off the bat being a monster, talking trash and not afraid of anybody and gave white America a reason to watch again (that Great White Hope) and it virtually saved basketball from total extinction. Over the years the Celtics became an all white team and all of a sudden the Celtics became "America's team" and Magic Johnson became the villain sort of speak (outside of LA). Race played a HUGE part in making of the NBA what it is today, even Larry Bird was offended when opposing teams would put a white guy to guard him. Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were very aware of what they represented in the 80s and understood the racial politics at the time.

I see a similar situation ensuing in Atlanta. Maybe a white player or superstar can help with more white attendance. Lets be honest, people take great pride seeing someone who looks like them tear it up in the sports arena of any race. We're tribal by nature as you can see in the Michael Brown case. At the same time, I'm not sure if this guy has trouble selling seats or if he has a problem with the color of the people on these seats. If he is selling tickets and making money, why would it matter if the people on the stands are Black or not? I side with Jariel, there is a huge Black community in Atlanta and no one seems to point that out. So what if they are Black? What's the problem?

I honestly don't think it was his intent to be racist and in no way at the same level of bigotry as Donald Sterling. I just think subconsciously he has many racial entrenched biases that many white Americans have of Blacks like "they are all poor and can't pay" or "hip-pop=Black" (70% of all rap albums are bought by whites) or there aren't any "affluent Blacks" and many others.

Post: #50

If this is really becoming a national story, people are becoming way too damn sensitive. I wasn't offended by anything in the email really, I actually found it pretty interesting because I'm quite curious about the different spending patterns of various demographics.

What this guy is talking about is what every nightclub owner talks about in the back room. It's the same reality. They have to figure out how to attract the people with money, and in America where most people are white, that's going to be white people. And there's also the reality that if too many blacks are at the club, it's going to scare away the whites. It's not racist of the owner to point that out, it's just the reality. And they have to make decisions on how to attract people with money.

Nothing Hawks owner said is surprising to me. It's the south, Atlanta is a mostly black city and conservative suburban whites in the south especially aren't that comfortable around large numbers of blacks, even if they are well-behaved(as was pointed out in the email when he said there have been no crime incidents). As a business owner, he has to try deal with this situation and starts with acknowledging the difference between spending patterns and how race factors in. I don't know why we can't talk frankly about this stuff. This type of PC in my opinion actually makes race relations worse because everyone is overly sensitive and quick to be angered about comments that have no malicious intentions behind them.

(09-07-2014 09:02 PM)MidWest Wrote:  I honestly don't think it was his intent to be racist and in no way at the same level of bigotry as Donald Sterling. I just think subconsciously he has many racial entrenched biases that many white Americans have of Blacks like "they are all poor and can't pay" or "hip-pop=Black" (70% of all rap albums are bought by whites) or there aren't any "affluent Blacks" and many others.

Midwest, that was a good post, but just one thing on the hiphop comment you made...Even if most hiphop is bought by non-blacks, I'm not sure it matters because the people making the music are overwhelmingly black and it's rooted in black culture. Despite whoever the consumers are, hiphop is pretty much seen as the de facto official music of inner city black youths since that's where it originates and that's where the talent, lingo, clothing style etc is drawn from.