On Slate, I ask: if it's so important for the NBA Finals to feature teams like the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Clippers, why is the league scheming to move the Sonics to Oklahoma City?
When it comes to comments on pieces I've written, I usually take the Joe MacLeod approach:
I don't Type Crap for you to Discuss in the first place, you know? It's not a fucking Discussion. I write, you read, and move the fuck on, thank you very hard for reading, seriously, I *HEART* Readers. You don't like? Fine, that don't make you a Hater. You are certainly entitled to your Opinions and shit, so I guess if you want, you should go right ahead and Discuss, but if you turn out to be a Hater, whatever you go ahead and put in the "Discussion" zone ain't gonna compel me to do anything except remind you: I Am Pro.
But I did notice that asking this question (and pointing out that flyover-state teams get lousy TV ratings) seems to have made the people of Oklahoma angry. Or maybe they just don't like being called "hicks." Too bad, hicks! Stop stealing other people's teams, and I'll stop calling you hicks. Because with any luck, I'll stop having to call you anything at all.
Oh, wait, I almost forgot to say anything nice about Kobe Bryant. Well, the point of the piece is, since the league does revolve around him and the Lakers, his me-first attitude is actually more honest and a better business plan than the cynical, fake-inclusive posturing of commissioner David Stern. Yay, Kobe! And nice shooting yesterday!
