DukeNukeEm

David Stern is the hero we deserve, but not the one we need right now. So we'll hate him, becuase he can take it.

Indiana is back!

Because adding a bunch of old players and tons of salary is just what the Hornets need to be competitive. Were being duped, everyone knows LA wins and that's just the way they like it.

Chicago is arctic compared to NJ and NY.

Mavericks. Oh boy, here we go.

10 Cent Beer Night

ESPN put a Simmons article where he flagrantly drops an F-bomb right on the front page. I kinda like that, even if I totally disagree with Bill Simmons.

So they make a Derrick Rose rule. Derrick Rose laughs about it and says its cool that they named a rule after him (which implies he'll excerise it, which he totally should because he totally deserves it). But when it comes time to get paid he ignores the rule and takes less. I wanna bake him a f***ing cake right now.

The Nuggets actually got better without Carmelo Anthony.

Honestly, SPUSA has a better candidate this year with Stewart Alexander than 2008 with Brian Moore; but I'm not sure I'm willing to vote for him. I'll probably go Obama and hate it but I'm definitely an "undecided" voter right now.

I have no problem with the league stepping in (especially in the NBA) to stop this roster stacking. If it means GM's, players and coaches' have less ability to dictate how they handle their rosters then so be it. Those GM's and players are the ones who allowed this practice of hoarding superstars to happen, and its killing the NBA*. The leagues' interest should be the broader success of the NBA, not how a select 6 or 7 franchises can be allowed to take part in a meaningful offseason and players like Chris Paul can simply get out of their contracts with one team by forcing a trade to go to one of those 6 or 7 lucky teams. This is not the NBA's fault, they really dont like it when this happens. A majority of the owners despise it and so do a lot of fans. I really hope this sets a precedent that the NBA is not going to sit idly by and let smaller market teams become farm systems for the breadwinners. I understand this situation is unique because the NBA owns the Hornets, but its also indicative of the push-back from a lot of people in basketball to this roster stacking bulls***. *The Heat situation generating interest really is an outlier. LeBron became the villain because of The Decision and what he did to Cleveland and people wanted to root against the level of arrogance. Chris Paul was not about to generate nationwide disgust by forcing himself to the Lakers, even if I think he should.

Why? Because the league exercised ownership rights over a team that it owned?

The Lakers have been f***ed pretty hard by this. Odom is beyond mad, he might not even want to play there anymore. The Howard deal has to be off if Dwight knows there is no way Paul winds up on the Lakers too. I mean, can we just bask in the beauty of this? The league and ownership actually stepped in and cockblocked the s*** out of the league's biggest earner.

STERN DID IT

I get the feeling familiarity breeds contempt unless its an absolute stud like Rose. There really is no reason why Gibson cant improve massively and Boozer cant get back to his old self.

I'm not entirely convinced the Bulls need to bring in new players to improve. If Rose keeps improving, Gibson's game takes a leap and Boozer goes back to being a 20/10 guy we have upgraded more than any team this offseason. None of those things are outside the realm of possiblity.

Again--the fanbase asked for it and that will be what the fanbase gets.

Your birthday present was a decently sized prison sentence for Blago. I wont get anything that nice for my birthday sad.jpg

Haha this Magic CEO/Dwight Howard/drunk dialing thing is pretty funny.

The Walking Dead has to be the worst show I've ever seen.

Chicago or NYC. I love the whole megacity thing and really those are the two to choose from.

I just watched the video of that. The woman they interview says "I just wish liberals would leave our kids alone." I mean, that's a little bit too much.

Except my comparison stretches globally. Working from right to left the global political landscape looks something like: Far right: 1880's style American capitalism Right: Modern-day American capitalism Center-right: Capitalism with some stronger elements of the welfare state (Universal healthcare is the big one) Center: Capitalism with a powerful welfare state Center-left: Democratic socialism in some industries, a very powerful welfare state, but still private enterprise in more dominant parts of the economy Left: Democratic socialism Far left: Communism The UK is pretty centrist as far as Europe goes, but really look at the stronger political parties globally. The communist parties in most countries hold about the same level of support of total free market capitalist parties. The only structural impediment to that being reflected in the USA is our single-member districts; admittedly a huge piece of our political infastructure, but still the only thing blocking those parties out.

Its actually really difficult to think of many parties in the world, aside from the anti-immigrant nationalist parties in Europe, that are further right than the Democrats here.

This is what blowing up the team looks like.