I'm Retired

Finito.

Censure

The Republicans are lawbreakers, but the Democrats are idiots. Not backing Feingold's censure resolution, pretty much the only thing we can do at this point to hold the president accountable for his potentially lawbreaking actions, is a completely political move that will completely backfire.

Democrats have become so accustomed to attacks at the hands of Fox News, Newscorp, and the rest of the right-wing media that they have become afraid to do anything politically.

OF COURSE the censure resolution will make waves. That's the point!!! The Republican majority congress is too afraid to investigate this program, so they've chosen not to. Without pushing this program into the spotlight time and again, this program will NEVER be investigated, just as prewar intelligence, and the potential fabrication involved in the buildup to war, has NEVER been investigated 3 years after the fact.

If elected democrats aren't willing to question this president's actions and do whatever's necessary to check his power, then we'll elect people who will. And if we can't, we'll become disillusioned and you will lose to a republican.

Fuck if I care if democrats, who only care about political ramifications and not constitutionally mandated oversight, lose to republicans. The republicans are doing what's expected of them; the democrats are not.

It's fucking pathetic.

Redskins Update

Well, the Redskins got every player they targeted in free agency. Brandon Lloyd, Antwaan Randle El, Adam Archuleta, Andre Carter, Todd Collins, and Christian Fauria are all Redskins now. Khary Campball and Cedric Killings have been re-signed.

I like most of these acquisitions. The most valuable, by far I think, is the signing of Andre Carter. He's tremendously talented, but was going to waste on a bad 49ers team. Signing him gives the Skins the depth they desperately need on the defensive line. Renaldo Wynn will now be a top reserve, and he'll be a great one. Hopefully, signing Carter won't keep us from re-signing Demetric Evans, a good young player.

I like the signing of Antwaan Randle-El and, to a lesser extent, the trade for Brandon Lloyd. Randle El can do so many different things, and simple receiving statistics do not account for his entire effect on a game. He's also very mature and motivated. Lloyd, I'm not sure about his character. He seems to want to be a rapper more than a football player. He's also very slender, and could really serve to bulk up and gain muscle. He's very talented, though, and if he matures, could develop into a top receiver. I'd rather have had Antonio Bryant than Lloyd, though.

The signings of Christian Fauria and Todd Collins are good ones. Fauria will replace Robert Royal. He's on the downside of his career at 35, but he is a cheap replacement with 3 championship rings. He is a solid blocker and won't drop as many balls as Royal did, either. Collins will be the 3rd quarterback and his most important job will be to mentor Jason Campbell. Nobody knows how good he can pass, since he hasn't had much game experience in years, but he knows Al Saunders' system, and is apparently a genial guy. His signing signals the end for Patrick Ramsey.

That brings me to Adam Archuleta. He's a talented guy, but I don't like this signing. He got more money than any other safety has ever gotten in the history of the NFL. He simply isn't worth that money. He's pretty fast, and is in great shape. He can hit hard and intimidate, but he isn't the best tackler, and his cover skills aren't very good. Most disturbing, though, is his tendency to get injured. He seems to miss 2 or 3 games every year. He'll be 29 in November and is no spring chicken. I'd have much rather signed Ryan Clark for less and brought him back than sign Archuleta for this incredible amount of money.

Hopefully the Skins aren't done in free agency though. Rumor has it that they are working to sign Jeff Mitchell, center/guard who could backup the middle of the toffensive line. They're also apparently interested in Jamar Fletcher, a former first round pick who has been a bust so far but is only 27 and could revive his career as a nickle corner. The Skins probably also need to sign some help at linebacker after losing LaVar Arrington. And, of course, they continue to attempt to trade Patrick Ramsey for a late pick this year.

We'll have to wait and see what happens. Free agency is always exciting around these parts.

Free Agency!!!

Free Agency is finally here. Despite my earlier proclamation, the Redskins are not doomed. The new CBA saved them, and they will have enough room to work under the cap and make some improvements.

In fact, according to this article from ESPN, the Redskins plan on bringing 4 players to Redskins park within the next 24 hours, presumably with contracts signed. I'll copy the relevant portion of this article here:

"The Redskins came out swinging. They made contact after midnight Friday with 49ers defensive end Andre Carter, Rams safety Adam Archuleta, Chiefs quarterback Todd Collins and Steelers receiver Antwaan Randle El and have them flying in as early as Saturday.

The Redskins are also working on a possible trade for restricted free agent Brandon Lloyd of the 49ers. Lloyd was given the first round tender, but the Redskins have initiated trade talks that could give the 49ers two mid-round draft picks. Lloyd agreed Friday night to make a visit to the Redskins on Sunday. There is a good chance Lloyd will come to an agreement with Redskins for big money before the end of the weekend. The plan for the Redskins is to sign Antwaan Randle El and Lloyd."

I wouldn't put it past Daniel Snyder to sign each and every one of these guys. He has the money, he has the will, and he has the smarts to make it all fit under the salary cap of 102 million. Assuming he signs all these players, what will happen??

Well, Archuleta would presumably start where Ryan Clark started last year, assuming Sean Taylor isn't incarcerated following his trial in April. Archuleta is very talented and probably faster than Clark, but he has a tendency to gamble too much. I don't like this signing too much; Clark would be cheaper than Archuleta, he knows the system, and is younger. This is a name signing more than anything. If Taylor is incarcerated, though, we could still re-sign Clark and start him opposite Archuleta.

Signing Andre Carter would be a good move, provided we don't overpay. John Abraham is too expensive for us, our draft picks are too late to get any defensive end help, and the only other guy who could have helped us, Aaron Kampman, re-signed with the Packers today. I'm assuming we would play Carter at defensive end, which is where he has been more sucessful, but he has spent some time at outside linebacker as well. His signing would strengthen our defensive line depth all around. Both Phillip Daniels and Renaldo Wynn can play defensive tackle too, so with Carter in the lineup, one of them (Wynn probably) will rotate in and out of the line. I'd still like to re-sign Demetric Evans, as he was a valuable reserve for us, but signing Carter will give us a speed threat from the outside.

The Todd Collins signing is a no-brainer, I think. Once we trade Patrick Ramsey, we will have only two quarterbacks on the roster in Brunell and Campbell. Since Campbell is the qb of the future, getting a young qb to fill the third QB role wouldn't make much sense. Collins has spent a ton of time with new offensive coordinator Al Saunders, and knows his system. He can help tutor Campbell and is a good locker room guy. Best of all, he'll sign for the veteran minimum probably.

Finally, we get to the wideouts. The revelation here that the Redskins plan on signing both Brandon Lloyd AND Antwaan Randle El really surprises me. I'm not surprised they would go after both, but I would have thought that if they signed one, theyd lose interest in the other. If they sign both, Randle El and Lloyd will have to compete for the second wide receiver spot opposite Santana Moss; I'm guessing Lloyd would have the edge here, since Randle El has already proven his worth as a third receiver out of the slot. Randle El would become the primary punt returner. Getting Brandon Lloyd, who is a restricted free agent, would likely cost us our second AND third round draft picks this year, making our draft class negligible to the extreme. Lloyd was tendered a first round tender, but since we don't have a first rounder, we would have to negotiate with the 49ers on an alternative deal.

I don't really like the signing of Lloyd. He has a tendency to go for one handed grabs when he doesn't have to. His talent is good, but he has a tendency to get banged up, and he has never played on a winning team before or proven his mettle in tough situations. Randle El I like, though I'd be surprised if he signed to only be a third receiver.

If we sign both receivers, its likely curtains for David Patten and Taylor Jacobs. James Thrash will probably stay because of his versatility, and see more time at H-back. A guy like Jimmy Farris would be the fifth and final receiver and be inactivated for games.

Another guy we have been rumored to be interested in is Maake Kemoetu, a huge defensive tackle who has played in Baltimore the past few years. Signing him would make less sense for us than a signing of Andre Carter, though, since Cornelius Griffin and Joe Salave'a can't play outside, while Daniels and Wynn can move inside. He's definitely a good, young player, though.

Also, one position these signings would neglect is the outside linebacker void created by the release of LaVar Arrington, although Carter could play some there. Assuming Carter plays at end, though, we would still probably need to sign a veteran linebacker to compete with Robert McCune and others at that position, to add depth at the very least.

Male Reproductive Rights

This is something I had thought about, but I hadn't heard it discussed publicly until the past few days when CNN ran this article. I had actually thought of a policy like this on my own, and that made me happy that my idea had been thought up by others as well.

Anyway, this argument may be moot considering the attack on abortion coming from South Dakota and other states. If abortion is illegalized, a policy like this has no chance of standing up in court. So, defending a woman's right to an abortion is the first order of business for the sane among us. Firedoglake has an interesting post up about this.

However, assuming abortion remains legal in most states, the argument goes like this: when a woman gets pregnant, she has three options: abort it, carry it to term and give it up for adoption, or carry it to term and keep it. Men have no such options. If the woman wants to abort it and the man wants to keep it, the baby is aborted. If the man wants to abort it and the woman wants to keep it, the man is still subject to required child support payments.

This lawsuit only concerns situations where a woman has deceived/misled a man into thinking she would abort a baby if an unintended pregnancy occured, only to change her mind once that happens. In such a case, I think it's reasonable to view the woman and man as having had a verbal agreement that the woman later reneged on.

Final say on whether to have an abortion should always remain in the hands of the woman. After all, the baby grows inside of her, and it is her that would undergo abortion surgery if that is the choice made. However, if a man is led to believe that an unintended pregnancy would get aborted, he should not be responsible for child support payments if the woman changes her mind. It is only fair.

Critics will say that child support still should be required since the baby is what is at issue, and the man's rights are irrelevant compared to the baby's. I will counter by saying that having a father spending his money on a baby he does not want, being resentful of the child for draining his bank account, this isn't good for anyone. The man has rights too, and while his rights are the easiest to violate in this instance (most criminals are men, men fight and die in wars, civilian women and children are viewed as more regrettable collateral damage than civilian men are; men are viewed as more expendable, in almost any instance, than women and children are), this shouldn't be the case.

This isn't chauvenism, as many men would likely view it. It's about equal treatment and insisting that the courts remember we exist, and our rights matter.

Iran

We've heard alot of concern from this administration and other public officials concerning Iran recently. And for once, I agree with them. Iran having nuclear weaponry is not good for anyone. Anyone having nuclear weaponry is a bad thing, but Iran is especially worrisome, given the religious climate of the area.

What the fuck can we do though??? Our military is stuck in Iraq. I have favored immediate withdrawal from Iraq for a few years now, but with civil war erupting there and Bush desperate to save face, that's not going to happen anytime soon. Our manpower is committed to Iraq, and Bush won't withdraw the troops in a time of civil war. Also, Iran hasn't been crippled by sanctions as Iraq was. Their military will put up much more resistance than Iraq ever did. So, realistically, a ground invasion of Iran is impossible.

One thing that would certainly cripple Iran, though, is a nuclear attack on our part. But do we really want to nuke them to keep them from getting nukes?? That's hypocritical and paternalistic. For political reasons as much as anything, we cannot nuke Iran.

The only option we have, realistically, are air bombing raids, attempting to destroy their nuclear facilities. And this is what will likely happen. But bombing Iran will only serve to further unite the Arab world against us; Iraq will sympathize with Iran, and Iran will do all they can to de-stabilize Iraq.

What we have to remember is that religion makes people act irrationally. There are no atheistic suicide bombers; only irrational faith in another world after this one allows people to believe that martyring themselves is a good thing. We can't expect Iran to act rationally.

Many Democrats think if we would just leave Muslims alone, they would leave us alone; this certainly isn't the case. They think western society is evil and working against Muhammad. Killing us gives them a free ticket to heaven and virgins and rivers of honey. If you think I'm exaggerating, read some writings, and watch the joy communities show when a young man martyrs himself. It's completely and utterly irrational.

Really, there is no easy answer to this problem. If I were commander-in-chief, I would propose isolationist military policy. We are a world economy, so complete isolation now is impossible, but I would try to avoid angering the irrational crazies as much as possible. Our support of Israel is at the root of our problems with Arabs. We don't have nearly the same responsibility to Israel that we have to ourselves, so my first order of business would be to distance ourselves from Israel and all the other middle-eastern nations. Border security would follow; we have to control who enters the country. I would try to change our image abroad through public relations and speeches; this is as big a problem as we have right now, with a bumbling idiot in office.

We have to identify the irrational acts with religion, because that is the problem. Too many people are willing to ignore the real problem, for the sake of "tolerance". That's just burying your heads in the sand, folks. I thought we were smarter than ostriches.

On a serious note...

We have had two additional events in recent days, once again showing that Republicans believe in a sliding scale of what is legal and illegal, depending on who is in power and doing what.

Back when Bill Clinton was president, he favored legislation enacting a line-item veto. Republicans were strongly against it, and in the end, the Supreme Court ruled that a line-item veto was unconstitutional.

Now, Bush believes he can get the Supreme Court to reverse their earlier ruling, allowing him to have a line-item veto.

Also, the senate intelligence committee refused to investigate George Bush's warrantless wiretapping program. They didn't find it legal; THEY REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER IT IS LEGAL OR NOT. Some Republican senators will undoubtedly claim that they thought it was legal, but this is impossible, since without a full investigation, the program can't even be understood, let alone judged on legal grounds.

The congress has, basically, abdicated its authority under this presidency. This has allowed Bush to pretty much do whatever he wants, the laws and precedent be damned.

These are only he two most recent examples. IF our country survives this period of time, we will look back in horror at what has happened. That is, unless Bush and his cronies are sucessful in their attempt to rewrite history (they've already started doing this, by re-classifying public documents from as far back as the 1930s.)

The Passion of the Christ 2: Judgement Day

Watch the trailer.

And another take.