So, Aubrey McClendon got his knuckles rapped by the league
for his ill-chosen words about the Sonics and Oklahoma City.
How badly rapped? Try $250,000 on for size, ya big Okie.
What do you think bugs McClendon more:
A) That he got embarrassed on a national scale, or
B) That he just gave $250,000 to an ultra-liberal organization (the NBA) that repeatedly endorses gay folks, Democrats (seriously, look at who David Stern donates to and think about the kind of folks he probably hires at the NBA offices), and all the other things that McClendon is against?
This is great news!!! Finally, the league has taken a stance against these comments made by McClendon. I think it shows that the NBA front office and Stern want the Supersonic franchise to make every effort possible to stay in the Northwest.
All that said... Nuss, there was no need to bring McClendon's personal politics up, again. Did we really need to know that McClendon's $$$ might be used by the NBA in a way that wasn't inline with his political ideology? I really didn't think that your note about "gay folks" was necessary and in fact brings up gender issue were they're not needed or warranted. Now we all know that Stern is big supporter of the DNC, but the $250k didn't go to Stern, in fact I'm sure not all the owners in the NBA would approve of NBA funds going to political parties or PACs with any degree of favoritism for one party over the other. I mean for all the Cubans, Cohans and Allens in the league, their guys like Shinn, Bennett, Sterling, & Miller who are generally thought of as conservatives. To insinuate that McClendon $$$ is just going to go to some PAC or straight into the DNC's coffers is just a short sighted kick in the face to McClendon and although I hate the Okie bastard, wasn't necessary in the post.
Don't get me wrong I love the piece written on this blog; I just felt I need to put this issue in check. Keep up the great work. Here's hoping Aubrey spouts off about the fine and does even more good towards the Supersonics staying in the 206.
now its time for someone to fuck mclendon up when they see him around town..if he ever has the balls to walk around intown
I couldn't disagree more with McWalter--I think it's very important to look at these issues when examining who is owning the team and where they spend their money. If you found out that the owner of McDonald's gave millions of dollars to the KKK or NAMBLA, would you want to spend your money there?
This is exactly the kind of stuff that separates Supersonicsoul from the average lunk-head sports blog. We're a lunk-head sports blog with a conscience! Good work, Nussbaum!
To Paul's point, I think it's a good one. Most of us can say it doesn't matter the owner's politics, simply because the owner's politics are not that far out of line from our own. For example, McClendon is anti gay rights and anti-abortion. That stuff is the opposite of most folks in Seattle, but they aren't issues that make people sweat too much. After all, there are plenty of people in this area who agree with McClendon, and as citizens in a free society, we have to learn to co-exist with others who disagree with our opinions.
But, as Paul said, what if McClendon advocated separate lunch counters? Or euthanisizing gay people? All of sudden, the owner's politics matter a little bit more, don't they? After all, by buying a ticket to a Sonics game, you're turning over money to a group of people that support those actions.
Now, I am not in any way saying that McClendon would advocate those two examples, or anything close to it. What I am saying - and I think Paul's on the same side here - is that you can't just bury your head in the sand about it, either. When I mailed my check to Chunk for the tickets we bought, I felt a little twinge of apprehension, knowing that a portion of my check was going to support McClendon/Bennett's politics. Not enough of a twinge to make me reconsider, but a twinge nonetheless.
I agree that knowing who the owners contribute money out to is good and I applaud you guys for letting it be known. That said, you can't just make up the facts like the NBA is going to be donating his fine money to political groups that he doesn't like. Stern certainly does, but he doesn't control were the NBA's $$$ goes. Also, I just thought was an unnecessary jab McClendon, when the fact is that he messed up by talking move to OKC. I mean if he was give millions to La Raza's PAC to help illegals get into the US (an issue labeled liberal) then would you guys have taken a shot at him? Or if he was the one donating to the DNC and pro-gay marriage and NBA was against it would supersonics.com be ripped the NBA like they're ripping McClendon. I just see bias, and even though I might agree with it, it isn't necessary and it further opens Pandora's Box on issues that aren't that political. However, given that the Sonics are in a political battle to save their team I see the relevance, I would just like to see it reported a little more even handedly.
I posted before see your response. Thanks, that clears everything up.
I'm not advocating that we not investigate our team's owner's political background, I'm just saying we shouldn't resort to cheap political jabs, but rather if you going to ripped them politically make a comprehensive argument. I know that this a blog and in the our world of online rants quick shots at people is easy. But it just makes it easier for those against us (say the people in OKC) to rip us Sonics fans as crazy liberals and right off our comments as liberal garbage. I think that makes our whole effort in finding a political solution towards keeping the Sonics in Seattle more difficult. Just for the record I'm a moderate in San Francisco, so what does that make me?
I not saying to censor you posts, I'm just asking for consideration so that we don't have to defend ourselves ideologically when comes to defending the Sonics to say in the 206.
Look, most of the money that I spend on stuff will go to fund somebody whose beliefs and values differ from mine. I realized that a long, long time prior to today.
Nevertheless, it's aggravating that an ultraconservative blowhard such as Aubrey McClendon can treat a $250,000 fine like a drop in the bucket.
As a side note, Harrah's is building a 20,000 seat arena on the Strip in Vegas to be opened in 2010, which is the year that I'm hoping to be moving to Vegas for UNLV Dental school. Sorry fellas but now the 2010 NBA champion Las Vegas Supersonics doesn't sound so bad...
Fair enough, McW, I can see your point. In all honesty, I didn't write what I did with the sole intention of ripping McClendon for his politics. Rather, it was just for how ticked he must have been about the situation.
Which leads me to think: As frustrated as we are with the Sonics' situation, can you imagine how bugged the owners are? They bought this team a year ago and nothing constructive has happened in the meantime. In fact, the situation has gotten worse, and it looks as though they overpaid for the team. Now, it may be that the owners will pay the lease and still leave (in other words, just eat the lease payments), but that's a huge financial burden to shoulder, and it doesn't address the mess they will be in in Oklahoma when they try to convince the people there to build them a new stadium. Nor does it address the fact that they won't make nearly as much money in OKC as they would in Seattle (as Aubrey himself said). In other words, they've poisoned the waters here and their backup plan is worse than the situation they've got.
"Did we really need to know that McClendon's $$$ might be used by the NBA in a way that wasn't inline with his political ideology? I really didn't think that your note about "gay folks" was necessary and in fact brings up gender issue were they're not needed or warranted."
blah, blah, blah.... Shut the fuck up. Go drive off a bridge.
I love that the NBA fined this dumbass redneck. Keep your mouth shut and be part owner play your role, in the background. I would've loved to be a fly on the wall when Bennet back-handed this clown.
TheBigO - Well since you said so I think I'll just jump of the Golden Gate Bridge after work today. Thanks for directing my life in the right direction.
Nuss - I totally agree that Bennett and Co must be steaming by now about the situation they are in. To think that if they'd waited 6 months that they could have put their bid in for the Memphis Grizzles (who still haven't been sold) and mostly moved them for the same reason they're citing in Seattle. That being because they want to move them, and not to make the NBA more profitable.
Brandon - As for LV getting a team. I have one other team to throw in the mix, the Sacramento Kings. They have a similar problem in that their city can't pass a new stadium initiative (think they're up to two failed votes). Plus the Maloofs own the Palms and several other place along the Vegas strip. Furthermore, their father used to owe the Houston Rockets, who he tried to move to Las Vegas in the mid-90s. It makes perfect sense for the NBA to have the Maloofs (owners with Vegas ties, but have a clean record with the NBA) to owe the first franchise in Las Vegas.
Up until early this morning I would have agreed that Stern had done much more to keep the Kings in Sacramento than he had to keep the Sonics in Seattle. However, this fine of $250k to McClendon sends a clear message that you can't poison the current city you are in just to move to city you like better. Especially, when the city you like better isn't the number one place the NBA is looking to expand to, because Vegas baby is the next city to get an NBA team, not the OKC.
I too am reveling in the idea that this @#%#@^ is $250,000 poorer, but I am not sure it means that Stern is in our corner on this one.
The fine may very well be for embarrassing the NBA brand by speaking out like this as it damages the relationship and trust between the owners and the city of every single franchise. It doesn't mean that Stern thinks the Okies shouldn't be able to buy the team, con the city, and then move it as they please. They just can't say that is what they are up to.
"TheBigO - Well since you said so I think I'll just jump of the Golden Gate Bridge after work today. Thanks for directing my life in the right direction."
All right, that's an amusing comeback.
"TheBigO - Well since you said so I think I'll just jump of the Golden Gate Bridge after work today. Thanks for directing my life in the right direction."
well quit your incescant whining all the damn time. Grow a pair, sothefuckwhat Nuss felt the need interject his own opinions into his post. Oh and you're welcome for the direction.
Again, the opinions are what makes this a BLOG and not a robotic stat-o-matic news wire.
To answer Nuss' original question "What do you think bugs McClendon more" I would have to answer the national embarrassment. However, I think that what irks him the most is not the $250k or even looking like a jack-ass. Instead I think it's that he has to be a yes man to Bennett's overall plan. In reading the fully Journal Record article it appears that McClendon is a pretty power individual, not only that, but he's damn proud of it too. I'm sure being one of the top brass at the Chesapeake Energy Co (one of the larger energy company in the US) that he's gotten used to being one of the most power people he knows. Yet when it comes to the fraternity that is the owners of NBA franchises is upset that the Sonics ownership group having less available amounts of funds than most franchises, but he's been marginalized with his own ownership group. In fact he's been dismissed to the point that his personal opinions aren't be counted as the direction of the PBC group. To guy powerful enough to all his own shots just about every other matter not being about to speak his mind has to irk him the most.
Since I've been vocal about my political viewpoints in the past here, I must agree with Paul, Pete, and TheBigO's stance on this one.
That link exemplifies our previous politicalization of an issue concerning the Seattle Supersonics.
I think Mr. McClendon's comments were despicable and his intentions may be despicable. And his political views are despicable.
However, using the word "Okie" with derogatory intent is hateful, contemptible and plain wrong. I would prefer to see a civil discourse and condemn their actions rather than condemn the individual.
That said, I am extremely pleased to see the $1/4 million fine. I would also like to see the NBA's franchise relocation fee increased to $100 million.
"Oklahomans usually use Okie without prejudice, but it is often used jocularly too; similar to the use of Hoosier by Indianans, Yankee by New Englanders, or Canuck by Canadians, none of who consider their terms for themselves particularly denigrating."
I think "big retard" would have been a better choice, myself.
bigo, you kind of remind me of cancer. actually, maybe not that bad, but some sort of virus at least. Maybe the herp?
I think the last time "Okie" carried seriously derogatory content was somewhere around chapter 24 in the "Grapes of Wrath."
Heck, it is just a lot easier than typing Oklahoman every dang time. Maybe in the circles you run in though....
I certainly agree that McClendon's political views are despicable, as are those of Bennett, both of whom give GENEROUSLY to political causes and/or candidates that help keep Oklahoma an undesirable destination for those who embrace diversity and free thought. Many progressive - thinking Oklahomans are sick of this, and I am one of them.
What troubles me about this is the "now or never" attitude displayed by Bennett and his group. This haste and rush to get a team, any team, makes Oklahoma City look needy and impatient, and in the long run does more harm than good to Oklahoma City's image.
I won't lie to you, I'd love to have an NBA team in Oklahoma City. I DON'T want that team to be the Seattle Supersonics, and I'm also embarassed that someone from MY state has caused this heartache and anger among Sonics fans, because trust me, I don't view Bennett as anything like a hero. I know expansion is not an option -- as a matter of fact I think the NBA could stand to go on a diet and lose some of the bottom-feeding teams like so much thunderthighs -- and I don't honestly understand why "gotta have an NBA team NOW!" is suddenly a civic priority in Oklahoma City when there are other things that need to be worked on first (like revising/modernizing Oklahoma's ridiculous liquor laws, for example). So if its not meant to be right now, it's not meant to be, and I don't see what's the problem in waiting a little longer -- Oklahoma has managed to go 100 years without a major professional sports franchise, what's a few years more and DO IT THE RIGHT WAY instead of getting the rest of the nation POd at Oklahoma because some rich fat cat Republicans want to go the carpetbagging route.
BTW, anybody looking for an OKC point of view (not that you would and I can't say I would blame you) also needs to know that Oklahoma City media is monopolized by The Oklahoman -- a newspaper that happens to be owned and run by Bennett's in-laws. In my view that taints any reporting (or editorializing) with respect to the Seattle Supersonics or the future of the NBA in Oklahoma City. This is also troubling to me because there is no competing daily newspaper (the alt-weekly Oklahoma Gazette, while a great paper, doesn't exactly count), and, thus, NO objective reporting on this issue in Oklahoma City.
Aubery gave to Clinton as well. So lets not put him in a box as a GOP $$$.
I live in Oklahoma, and "Okie" is certainly a derogatory term.
It is very similar to another certain racial slur that is acceptably used by those of the race, but not by others.
Remember, Californians are solely responsible for bringing negativity to that term, which Dust Bowl migrants once used for themselves.
As a life-long Oklahoman, I don't really feel that people outside the state are in any position to comment on whether or not the term is derogatory.
Fitch store in general abercrombie and fitch , everything a good matrimony before marriage have nothing to retain the preceding "female mad batch - abercrombie" part of the two is the first home in new york city a horde promotion sportswear for men and it is a successful lawyer, that is, ezra fitch.Ezra fitch in a charge over a very intricate to read from the abercrombie is obstinate to read and long abercrombie & fitch. He's also very good brand hollister, including abercrombie mens and abercrombie womens, abercrombie and fitch clothing, Ruehl No.925. Has become a fashionable personage's first choice, abercrombie outlet is all over the world, of course, is also expected to 2009 New Arrivals,abercrombie hoodiesabercrombie hoodies
abercrombie sweatersabercrombie sweatersabercrombie jeansabercrombie jeansabercrombie t shirtsabercrombie t shirtsabercrombie jacketsabercrombie jacketsabercrombie saleabercrombie sale
Post a Comment