The Desk.

I just have to respond to the NBA Draft a little bit. First I'll say that I am, as you know, a die-hard fan of college basketball. I root for Duke, of course, but first I am a fan of the sport itself. I only watch the draft to see where the prominent college players go, and other than that I only watch the conference finals and the finals just to keep up with what's going on. That's because the NBA is a mockery of the sport. I could go into greater detail about how the NBA is too full of egos and nobody plays defense and the refs don't call anything and it's the hardwood equivalent of professional wrestling, but that's not what this post is about. I found out tonight that starting next year, players will not be able to enter the draft until they are at least 19 years old and a year out of high school. As much as I hate that so many talented but unexperienced players go straight to the NBA out of high school, and they would be benefitted so much by going to college, somehow I think this rule will make things worse. The intent of this rule is to force high school players who would have been drafted out of high school to go to college, but what will really happen is that they will now either A) play in Europe or a semi-pro league in the US (the equivalent of the baseball minor leagues), or B) go to college for a year. For an individual player, this is a great idea. Any player, regardless of skill level, is still raw in high school and has not played with or against other quality players in a quality league. The experience one player recieves from even one year in college is tremendous, but overall it will kill the college game and turn it into a farm system for the pros.

As it stands, there are already too many college players that decide after a year or two years that they want to go to the NBA, but with this rule in place, they will be making the decision to leave after a year before they even get to college, and that year in college will turn into a formality. So here's what I propose: Get a panel of the class coaches in the NCAA, and develop an agreement where they say to prospective recruits "If you come to my school, you're going to graduate." The LaBron James' of the world who really want to go pro right away will be sentenced to the D-League, but the Chris Paul's and the Carmelo Anthony's won't be enticed to leave early. I know Coach K would support and follow up on an idea like that, I can't think of an ACC coach who wouldn't. Williams, Williams, Hewitt, Prosser, Sendek, Gillen, are all class coaches, and I know the ACC fans take their basketball more seriously than anybody else. If John Swofford, the ACC commissioner would agree to something like that, he's the one with the power to make it happen. Even to set up at least a two-year deal, just within the conference, would make a world of difference in the college game.

The NBA does not exist without the NCAA, and everything that happens here is mirrored there. Just look at the rivarly. I shouldn't have to tell you which rivalry, as there's only one that matters. These two schools are not only the pinacle of college achievement, with more combined National and ACC championships than any other two schools, and an almost unbroken Final Four appearance streak between them, but their success continues to the NBA. As of tonight, they are the top two schools in first round NBA draft picks, and the only two to send four in the first round in one year. The difference? No Duke player has gone on to win a professional championship. The only ones to win any national championships came as assistant coaches back at Duke, and of course formal Blue Devil Jeff Capel took the CAA championship as head coach at VCU, and Tommy Amaker and Quinn Snyder are also conference winning Duke alumni. What's my point? Duke raises perrenially successful teams, and college teams at that, while UNC raises superstar players, transcendent of their teammates like Jordan and Vince Carter. Anyway, back to my point.

Since a deal like that's not going to happen, and all the major basketball conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 10, Pac 10) are going to turn into breeding grounds for kids going to college for a year, I imagine that the mid-major and lesser conferences that are going to be the saving grace of college basketball. You can't rouse the pride and the passion that is the NCAA when no one face is in it for more than a year. You can't coach a team like that year after year, and you can't even make accurate brackets and rankings because nobody knows who anybody is year to year, and you certainly can't have a Duke or UCLA type dynasty without senior player leadership. Therefore it's going to be the lesser-known schools that will become the heart of the game and eventually dominate. Kids who want to go to the pros will go to the big-name programs, and kids who want to play competitive and passionate college ball will go to a school like UAB or Gonzaga. These schools that win their conference's automatic bid to the dance are always fun to watch, just for the stories, and that's what the college game is about. The kids at the lesser-known schools will stay, partially because they have to. These schools get less national exposure and attention, and the programs exist pretty much exclusively within their local fan-base. And usually the kids at these schools are student-athletes, meaning they are there to get a degree, and they also play basketball while they're there. And that's what college athletics are about in the first place - as a supplementary character-building establishment. So while Arizona and UConn are making dirty deals as middle-men between high school seniors and sleazy NBA agents, the schools of the SEC (major football conference not really known for basketball except for Florida), SoCon, and WAC, among others, will become the big basketball show of the future. And of course you know what I'm about to say next. One of the most prominent rising sub mid-major conferences in the NCAA is the CAA. Between UNCW, VCU, and ODU, our fine basketball-oriented conference has the potential to become the new ACC, at least in terms of play style, league parity, and internal competitiveness and passion. Go Seahawks.

Why does this matter? If you don't know, get the hell out of my state.

Remember these? These are my favorite posts to write. Everybody gets one of these, and this is yours, if you know who you are.

This gentleman and scholar is probably, if I had to choose one, my best friend at Wilmington. And though he has to his name naught but the scraps from my table, he is one of the few people to whom I show any shred of respect. The thing about me and him is that we can sit and shoot the shit about anything for hours when none of my marks are around (or they've kicked me out of wherever they are), or when everyone we know is out getting trashed and/or taking advantage of my tool-box roommate. Of course our friendship, or bipartisan sidekickery, as it is better described, has caused a great amount of distress to a lot of people. The marks began to think he was in on all my plots, and it was not my intention to drag him into the target of hatred with me, but it happened a little bit. Either that or they'd try and get out of him everything I said, having assumed I tell him all my plans. He didn't appreciate that. Then of course there's his roommate. He'll never say anything about it because he's too nice a guy, but dude hates me. It's a combination of the fact that my abbrasive personality just doesn't click with him, and that he has the same problem of hearing the trickle-down from all my crap. So I mess with him just because I can. Just for that face he makes when I open their door and he gets all excited because he thinks somebody's coming to talk to them and then sees that it's me and I say "Good evening, bitches." It's classic. Anyway, back to the guy this is about. Because he was involved in a good bit of my life in Wilmington, he comes up a lot in conversation about such. And despite the fact that I talk about him or at least mention his name a good three times a week, mother never remembers who he is. She can remember one person that I mentioned in passing one time at Christmas and asks me if I'm dating her, but her brain just can't conquer the concept of this particular human being.

That's pretty much all I got, y'all knew who it was from the first sentence anyway. Really I just needed to update.

Forcing all individuals making court testimony to swear on the Christian Bible is equivalent to a state endorsement of religion, and worse than that, is completely useless and stupid. Religious texts have no place in government buildings, especially as points of centrality to the proceedings therein. Making someone take an oath on the Christian Bible before they give testimony is just like saying they have to be a practicing Christian in order for their testimony to be valid. All metaphysical arguments aside, our constitution clearly states that all citizens, and therefore the court testimony of all citizens, are equal under the law, regardless of their religious practices. Even for the 8% of the population for whom swearing on the Bible has any relevance, the practice is still irrelevant in comparison to the law, i.e., even if your oath is more sincere in your heart if you have your hand on the Bible, the oath you take in court is a legal one, and it is a criminal offense to knowingly lie when you take the stand, Bibles notwithstanding. Can you imagine if that Bible oath were the only policy at work in the court? The vast majority of Americans would have no obligation to tell the truth on the stand, and justice would never be done. Give him a Quran to hold and he might care, but swearing on the Bible doesn't mean a thing to a Muslim. And even if you have a Bible, a Torah, a Quran, a Bahgavad Gita, a Book of Mormon, an Eight-Fold Path leaflet, and the fucking Tao of Pooh, you've still got my crazy ass to deal with, and there are more of me than Christians like to think. Basically, the practice of swearing on the Bible in court is both thoroughly illegal and entirely useless. So why does this antiquated ritual remain in practice? For the same reason causing everything that's wrong in America - this country is run by the beaurocratic, go-around-your-ass-to-get-to-your-thumb Christian establishment. Get a couple of atheists on the bench who don't give a fuck about your little Jewvows, and we'll get something accomplished - I'll skip the Bible and your pathetic little fear that God will smite you if you tell a fib, and show you the wrath of the great American penal system should your testimony prove untrue.

And another thing: do liberals not have to take Economic, Legal, and Political Systems in high school? The job of the judicial branch of the government is to interpret the written word of the law, not to write it. With the exception of the Supreme Court, no judicial body has the right to set judicial or legal precedent. That's the job of the legislature. Once they make the laws, then you can put people in jail for it, but not until then. I don't care who you put in Congress or what sort of liberal, fascist laws they might pass, but conservatives and only conservatives belong in judge's robes. Because conservatives won't illegally legislate from the bench, nor will they read technicalities into the law that aren't there. Similarly, the job of the legislature is to represent the wishes of their constituency. The idea behind a representative democracy is that the citizens elect people to cast their votes for them. Those representatives are not supposed to make decisions on their own accord, but rather they are involved in the voting district from which they are elected, and they find out what the people want and then they cast a vote respecting that, regardless of whether they personally agree with it. Much like the Presidential Electoral College, they are middle men and nothing more, and the only reason Congress exists at all is because it's impossible or at least extremely difficult to have a true democracy with a population this size. Sorry about that, I just know too many people who don't know how the government works, and far fewer who know how it ought to work.

Allow me to let you in on the thought process of a pathological liar, and some of the characteristics therein that make that classification distinct from just a guy with a lot to hide.

I told a simple lie of moderate signifigance yesterday, so I'll use that as my example. After my mom left for work, I couldn't get my Jeep to start. So I called my boss and told him, and he said he would call back after he took care of something. So I went back to sleep on the couch where I could hear the phone, but he never called back. I didn't go to work yesterday. When mom got home, I came up with a story to tell her. I needed to tell her about the car so we could get it fixed, so I did say I couldn't get it started. But instead of the rest of the truth, I told her that my boss sent one of my coworkers over to pick me up and I worked a regular day and he brought me home around three. Later I made up some details about what we did, based on my assumption of what probably got done. It was easy to fabricate, since that was what I was working on actually happening when I was expecting my boss to call back; the hard part was coming up with a reason I had cooked a can of ravioli since I don't do that unless I'm home for lunch. I had already stated I got home at three, so I just said we had very little for lunch and I figured supper would be pretty late again, and she didn't suspect anything.

The lying part isn't hard - like I said, it's always easy to work out the story, and I can improvise and play a part well enough that I can keep up a lie and still be natural. The hard part is figuring out why I'm so content to tell complete fabrications for no reason. Before she got home I decided it would do me no good to lie, and I might as well just tell her what happened, but when she got home, I didn't even think about it. I didn't even wait for her to ask about my day; I just started rambling off a complete untruth as soon as she came in. Anyway, I really didn't stand to gain anything by covering up the truth; she wouldn't have been mad or anything, from what I imagine I know of her. The closest I came to having it come back and bite me was this morning when she dropped me off at work; I was afraid she might start talking to my boss or somebody else about yesterday and I'd be exposed, but I managed to make her let me out at the top of the driveway so she wouldn't drive down to the shop. So I got off completely clean, and I'm totally clear; I even threw in a few references to what we did yesterday when I got home today, just cause I can. But it all comes back to the fact that I had no reason to do it. Even now, I'm no better off for having told her what I told her, and in fact I may yet run into some bumps because I tried to cover my tracks.

The only thing I can come up with is that I'm more comfortable in the lie. Even though I know it doesn't matter or change anything, I still feel better if, in her perception of the truth, I went to work yesterday. I can deal with my mistake (and is was my mistake for not calling back after it had been long enough), and it doesn't matter to anybody, my boss least of all, but I need her to have a certain perception of me. It's either that or just for the sport of seeing what I can get away with. Either way being here brings out the worst in me. I shouldn't have to put on a total farce just to carry on a conversation, and I don't think I'm supposed to be able to, especially not without even thinking about. Oh well, I'll be better when I go back home and meet a bunch of strangers so I can be myself.

I also randomly mentioned to Danny that they're now issuing night sticks and mace to inner city high school teachers. It was a joke, but he believed me, so I went with it.

People have accused me of being a lot of things I'm not, so to clear up confusion among the pinnacle of ignorance that is Christendom, here are some things I am not (and yes, I have been called all these things recently):

I am not a Christian. Have you met me?

I am not a heretic. A heretic is someone who is a member of a religous group and actively practices the religion, but disagrees with some aspect of how the formal church establishment does its business. They may want to split away from the church or create reform from within, but either way it is the institution with which they have their quarell, and they do not argue the religion itself. Notable heretics include Martin Luther and Geoffrey Chaucer, among others.

I am not a Pagan. Paganism is a term used by Christians to describe any one of several Earth-based polytheistic or animistic traditions of Britain and Northern Europe popular between the fall of Rome and the spread of Christianity to those areas. Many involve witchcraft and/or Earth worship, but the term can be applied to any pre-Christian rituals in Europe, but not simply to anyone who is not Christian. The reason for this is that technically the term refers to someone who has not been exposed to Christianity. For this reason, even a modern person who practices one of these traditions cannot, by definition, be a Pagan. Notable Pagan traditions include both the Norse and Greco-Roman pantheons, as well as Druidism and Wicca.

I am not a Satan worshipper. The idea of Satan is found only in Christian theology, and even they can't decide among themselves exactly what the deal is there. The fact remains that I put exactly as much stock in Satan as I do in God, which is none. God does not exist, neither does Satan; I don't know where you got the idea that I believe in Satan.

All that having been said, I hate ignorant Christians, and it genuinely surprised and scares me that people still follow that ridiculous and archaic cult.

Today I had one of those rare (for me) moments when I feel like I'm not worth the air I breathe. One of the things I hate most is being taken care of. Not because it makes me out to be weak, which I do despise, but more because I cannot tolerate being a burden on other people. I can't stand the thought of someone having to expend their time and resources on me when I haven't earned it. Now I'll cheat and lie and steal and do whatever else that gives me an unfair gain at the expense of someone else, but all those things still require a conscious initiative and acquired ability to perform, which means that, in my mind, they are still in the same realm as using any other skill to one's advantage in the capitalist free market system. We all knew going into this arrangment that I'm not some big diesel-armed hoss of a man like most guys in this business, but Jim and I were both aware of my capacities, and he gives me stuff I'm able to do. So I may not be able to lift and throw around big slabs of concrete and what-have-you, but I can do what I'm told, and so far I've been able to do everything that's been asked of me. So even though I'm not doing everything that needs to be done, and every once in a while I have to be shown how to do all this mechanical stuff I've never been around before, but I'm doing my job, and at the end of the day I pretty much feel like I've earned my pay, so I can deal with that. But today I not only didn't feel like I was earning my pay, but even felt like a burden, an $8/hour burden to be exact, on a man who works hard for his living and has always been too damn good to this skinny little kid. I hate that they did every fathomable thing for me when it was my own damn fault for not getting some water earlier, even when he suggested it. I hate that after all these years and everything I've done, I still feel like I have something to prove to the people I respect, and I can't just take a break when I know I need one. Because, friends, when you've got this much pride, shame is not an option, but the choice I made today was even worse. And it was a choice, and I still say it was my own damn fault no matter what they say to convince me these things happen to the best of us. That was the biggest kicker; had I been struck down through the fault of somebody else's stupidity, I wouldn't mind aid at all, but it kills me to recieve aid when I did it to myself through my own stupid choices. I even knew it was coming, too, damnit, because it's all too familiar.

That's why I've always thought heat stroke was the worst of the common first aid cases. For me at least, it's always accompanied by that total psychological meltdown where I feel completely worthless like I just described. I don't know if there's something neorological process going on there or if it's just my nature to have all these conservative, social Darwinist principles riding on my every mistake, but whatever it is, it's far worse than any physical pain. I can cut myself all up or break a bone or light my face on fire (last Monday) and not even care because no matter how bad it is, it's isolated and it's temporary, but with a thing like heat stroke, your entire body just shuts down right there. I don't think I lost consciousness totally today, at least not for more than a moment, but that it such a weird thing when you're only half-way here, or worse yet when your mind is totally lucid but you can't move at all or even talk.

Whoever said my pride would kill me came a little bit closer to being right today, in more ways than one - first on my refusal to prevent the heat stroke that took me totally out of comission, and second on the psychological anguish that is always so much worse every time I pull that shit.

Since I just burned a ton of my mom's cd's onto my computer, putting me in the mood to make fun of current music, and because I've got nothing else to post, here's something a little bit different. Whenever Thomas played one of the four songs on his computer that I didn't tell him to download, I had to ask him the name of the band, so here's some of my responses to what he told me:

"Maroon 5? What, are they just reading crayons to get band names now?"

"Yellow Card? What, they're naming bands after soccer penalties now?"

"What the hell is an Avril Lavigne?"

"3 Doors Down? What, is that the band name or was the drummer looking for the john?"

"Good Charlotte? No, I hate Charlotte."

"Trapt? What, did they just toss out the Scrabble tiles and see what came up? You know that's how they name children in Latvia."

"Sum 41? Okay, now you're just making stuff up."

And my personal favorite:
"What the hell is a Hoobastank?"

And no, I really hadn't heard of any of these people until he told me what they were. But can you blame me? Did I really miss anything? Seriously though, I swear the boy didn't know music was recorded before 2002, which is sad because they stopped reording good music ten years earlier. I blame MTV. That's right, MTV is the reason my roommate is an idiot.