EckerNet.Com

Honorable Members of the Executive Council,

I realize we’ve already selected, designed, and budgeted our 2008 project. However, if I may be so bold to publicly offer up our 2009 project??

We have to build this….

Now I’ll be the first to admit our current fleet of “support vehicles” is adequate, it not downright nice. However, just imagine how quickly we could get things done in this thing?? For example, just imagine how quickly we could retrieve a fresh keg in this thing??? Trees, hills, ponds, liberals, buildings and Yoda’s braided cheese* be damned.

Faithfully submitted this day November 26th, 2007

Kevin Ecker
CINC-BOND
CINC-BOSD
CINC-BOMN

*Inside joke….and I can’t tell it to you, it’s classified.

Last week I gave my analysis/summary of the SAVE Act which has been introduced in the House. At roughly the same time two versions of the bill were also introduced in the Senate, one by Senators Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.). The other by Senator David Vitter (R-La.).

NumbersUSA has confirmed that both bills are identical so I’m guessing that they might eventually just merge them, or at least cross-support their bills. Although it might raise an interesting scenario were Democrats and/or Republicans would oppose one or the other simply because of whose bill it is.

These two Senate bills are necessarily different than the House version, because the House version has funding provisions in it, which can only originate from the House. NumbersUSA is endorsing the two Senate bills as well, so I have to assume that any differences between the current House and Senate version are restricted to either those funding provisions or else other minor differences. However, I do plan on confirming that for myself when I get a chance.

As I indicated in my analysis of the SAVE Act, I do like and support the bill. However, like any bill there can be improvements. Bloggers are sometimes (rightly) criticized for only complaining about things and not offering alternatives. So I thought I’d offer up a few amendments to the existing SAVE Act that would improve it greatly. And for your sake I’ll skip putting it in legalese.

Fencing

Specify the actual amount of fencing that must be built. As the current text is written nothing really has to be built. Or if you you don’t want to play the role of the overbearing politician, specify that every single mile of the border has to be covered by either a physical fence or a virtual fence. And then specify that section of the border that can be considered urban must include a physical fence. This would allow forces on the ground to determine the best way to protect the border while still tying the hands of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to actually build something.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Sure the bill authorizes the DHS to share equipment with the military. However, when we are in the middle of a Global War on Terror (GWOT) and are likely to be involved for many years, if not generations, it seems rather short sighted to assume that the military will always have extra drones around for the DHS to use.

The current text doesn’t appear to require the DHS to purchase drones, even though the money will always be there to do so. Modify the text to require the DHS to purchase drones within some time frame. Give them say two years for their pilot program and then require purchases to be made, with a procurement schedule reported to Congress.

Date Of Operational Control

December 31, 2010. That is the date at which a PLAN to obtain operational control of the border must be in place. There is no text in this bill that requires actual operational control of the borders. Without any such date, a lazy unmotivated government bureaucracy (aren’t they all?) can just write up a plan and do nothing.

Penalties For Hiring Illegals

Right now there are monetary penalties for hiring illegals. While they are pretty severe, I am concerned that, like today’s penalties, they could eventually just become “the cost of doing business”. Obviously one answer would be to make them larger penalties until they are more than any one person could theoretically contribute to a business. However, with inflation that would eventually cease to be the case.

Instead, include prison terms for employers, similar to those already outlined for smugglers. I’m not necessarily talking about jailing the grandma that hired an illegal to weed her garden. However, perhaps include a mandatory term for repeat offenders, those employing large numbers (25+) and/or those that refuse to fire confirmed illegals.

Aid To Mexico

Mexico obviously doesn’t have much of an incentive to solve the illegal immigration problem. They export their most problematic and/or poorest residents to our country. In return they get billions of dollars that are wired back to family members still in Mexico. It’s a win-win for them.

As any good capitalist knows, people respond, consciously or otherwise, to incentives. We need to provide Mexico an incentive to help out. Perhaps reducing the amount of foreign aid that country receives by the amount this bill reimburses local communities for dealing with illegal immigration. For example, Mexico received 93 million in 2004, but it has cost our local communities $89 million each year…end result of $4 million.

An obvious drawback to this idea, however, is the fact that we don’t want to cause Mexico’s economy to collapse. Rather we want to improve it. So I agree this idea might need some refinement.

—–

Yeah so those are just a few I was able to put into some sort of coherent form. I’m more than willing to entertain discussion of the above, or suggestions for other amendments.

Murtha’s latest comments about Iraq, prove even further that this senile old fool just doesn’t get it.

“To change the political law, it doesn’t seem to me you need the military stability”

Yes I’m sure Iraqi legislators were just itching to further antagonize Al Qaeda when they knew it was just as likely for their car to blow up than not.

How is this worthless old fool still in Congress doling out pork?

The Supreme Court has announced that it will take up the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, which will almost force it to decide once and for all whether the 2nd Amendment is an individual right or a collective right.  And that decision would likely either completely settle the gun rights issue or at the very least, make it a very very uphill (think Everest) battle for one side or the other.

Now while I am convinced that since  every other amendment in the Bill of Rights that specifies “the right of the people” makes that an individual right, I do have my concerns.  Especially when one considers the makeup of this court.

Even more worrisome is that every person has their breaking point.  How much do they let their government get away.  For many that point is impossibly far away.  For some, the federal government has already passed it.  For others, that point is when guns are banned for individuals.  After all, every single tyrant in history, has sought as one of his first courses of action, to confiscate weapons from the people.

Add into that, that this case isn’t scheduled to be heard until March of 2008, which introduces a political element as the presidential race will just be ramping up.  Both sides seek to court the moderate vote.  Obviously Republicans have the advantage here, although that may not necessarily be true, at least two of the GOPs leading candidates are not really friends of the NRA if you get my meaning.

Regardless, it might be time to officially make the MN Militia into a regulated militia…if only to preserve our sizeable collection of firearms.  We have a executive committee meeting scheduled for later this week, with the honorable 50c presiding.  It might be a good time to propose this to the council.

Ok this made me laugh

If you didn’t understand the ad, congrats on leaving your cave, now go check out this and it’ll all make sense.

I gotta admit, not a bad ad. Simple and totally non-serious, but more importantly it’s the type of ad that’s gonna make people give a little smirk and tell their friends around “the watercooler”.* It may not be the best ad for policy explanation but people will remember it and it’ll leave them with a positive impression.

That and none of us want to cross Chuck Norris….after all, Chuck Norris is the reason Waldo is hiding.

* Ok seriously, do these things (watercoolers) still exist?? Does anyone have them in their office??

Chances are you’ve noticed the new widget above my posts. It’s a chance for your to txt your thanks to our military men and women via txt message on your phone from November 17th to the 22nd.

Give our deployed soldiers your well wishes during the start of yet another holiday away from home.

For more information, or for the code to include this widget on your own site go to America Supports You.

Here’s the quiz…I’m gonna give you a hypothetical situation, and then you answer some simple questions like tell me who the victims are and who the criminals are. Here we go:

In California, a family is asleep in their beds. This particular family consists of a father, mother and their 19-year-old son.
At 4 am, three young men break into the home and tear up the place demanding marijuana. When no drugs are forthcoming they brutally beat the son to the point that he suffers brain damage and later has to be put in a home since he can’t even feed himself.

In response to this, the father shots two of the assailants in the back and then the third assailant runs away.

California has a law called the Provocative Act doctrine which states that if “it was reasonably foreseeable that the criminal enterprise could trigger a fatal response from the homeowner” then the criminal is charged with murder charges for any deaths that occur.

The father has both both marijuana and prescription medication in his system, both of which he has prescriptions for (this is California remember).

Ok here’s the question:

Who deserves to be charged with murder?

A) The homeowner, as the assailant were obviously there to peacefully negotiate the sale of marijuana
B) The surviving assailant, as it is reasonably foreseeable that breaking into a home at 4 am and almost beating someone’s son to death could lead to the homeowner popping a cap in his dumb ass.

Ok here we go….if you answered B, you are a racist and the NAACP would like to talk to you. Because in this case the victims were white. And the assailants who, let me remind you, broke into someone’s home at 4 am, tried to rob them and then almost fatally beat their son, were black. Therefore, clearly the person at fault here is the homeowner, who was peacefully sleeping in his bed of privilege, no doubt bought with funds earned from slavery, dreaming up new ways to oppress minorities. Ooops, sorry, I was channeling Jesse Jackson there for a minute.

Nevertheless, let us not forget Martin Luther King’s immortal words:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the content of their character but by the color of their skin.

Or something like that.

[H/T : Cassy Fiano]

This is obviously a vastly different definition of “undecided voter” than I was previously familiar with. And kudos to HotAir for showing just how different the definition is.

[H/T : Hot Air]

Ok so I promised to sift through the SAVE Act (HR 4088) and give my analysis of it. Sure enough I finally got around to it and I have to say I’m a big fan and apparently I’m not the only one. The bill now has 112 co-sponsors in the House (44 Democrats, 68 Republicans) and it has also been introduced in the Senate by Senators Mark Pryor (D-AR) and David Vitter (R-LA)*. Ok, so what’s it consist of?? Well….

Summary

There is a lot in this bill and my analysis got pretty long so, for those of you that aren’t really interested in even my summarized details, I’ll give you the highlights

• An increase in the number of Border Control agents. (Section 101)
• A requirement for an unspecified number of miles of fencing, vehicles barriers and “virtual fences”. (Section 103)
• A “plan” to secure operation control of the border by December 31, 2010. (Section 111)
• Governors can declare a “Border Emergency” and get 1000 agents, if their union doesn’t complain (Section 121)
• Upgrades and additional equipment for agents (Section 122, 123, and 124)
• Increased penalties for smugglers and expands definition of smuggler to include anyone that conceals or harbors illegals, which is clearly aimed at religious groups. (Section 141)
• “It is the obligation of the Federal Government of the United States to adequately secure the Nation’s borders and prevent the flow of unauthorized aliens and illegal drugs into the United States.” (Section 152)
• Provides Border Relief grants to border communities to pay for costs incurred from border issues (Section 153)
• Makes use of the E-Verify program mandatory for all employers and requires them to verify status of all employees with four years (Section 201)
• Notifies employers of Social Security number mismatches and requires action within 10 days. (Section 202)
• Notifies individuals if their social security numbers are being reported from more than one employer. (Section 202)
• Social Security Administration must share information on abused numbers to the DHS (Section 202).
• Creates a national birth/death registration system (Section 203).
• Severely penalizes the employers with the worst social security abuse numbers.
• Increase in the number of ICE and CAP agents for internal enforcement (Section 301)
• Rewards program provides monetary awards to anyone providing information on illegals (Section 303)
• Increase numbers of beds for detained illegal aliens (Section 304)
• Additional judges to deal with increased caseload (Section 306)

Otherwise the rest of my analysis is in the extended post, so just click on the read more link below.
* The Senate version has not yet been assigned a bill number or had it’s text released, so I have been unable to verify that it’s language is the same or similar to the House version, although that appears to be it’s intent.

(more…)

Well you may already be infected with malware. No it’s not because you were surfing the wrong type of sites, or downloading the wrong type of porn (is there a wrong type?). Reports are that some Maxtor harddrives come from the manufacturer preloaded with trojan viruses.

About 1,800 brand new 300-GB or 500-GB external hard drives made for Maxtor in Thailand were found to have trojan horse malwares pre-installed (autorun.inf and ghost.pif). When the HD is in use, these forward information on the disk to two websites in Beijing, China: www.nice8.org or www.we168.org. The article implies that authorities believe the Chinese government is behind the trojans. A later article pins down the point of infection to a subcontractor company in China. A couple of months back the Register was reporting on pre-installed malware detected on Maxtor disks sold in the Netherlands. This earlier report was downplayed by a Seagate spokesman.

Lead in paint. Date-rape drugs in kids toys. Poison in dog food. Viruses on hard drives. The list goes on…

So now the question becomes….what CAN’T China screw up??