https://docs.google.com/View?id=dhbvr2gz_18gk9wt8gt

Note: the below was created from OCRing screencaps of a Flash based chatroom. Excuse the mistakes.

Xaq Fixx 3:39 pm
Alright… Question 1:
Political Identified Profile field, when will it return

Lee Doren
As soon as I get confirmation to add it back—it was my intention to add at asap Friday, but then it was unclear what my authority was to do so
The only reason why it was removed was so I could add something else asap
Like an open-ended political affiliation
Read More…

http://www.star-telegram.com/…

A $226,000 armored vehicle for the North Richland Hills Police Department SWAT team arrived a few days ago to replace one the agency got in 1990.

To many people that vehicle — and others like it used by police departments across the country — will go unnoticed. The public seems to largely accept the use of military-type equipment, technology and tactics as not only appropriate but also necessary to fight crime and make communities more safe and secure.

Armored vehicles are used by law enforcement agencies in Fort Worth, Arlington and Bedford and at Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, just to name a few. Some police departments have assault rifles, noise-flash devices and grenade launchers. Arlington even sought federal money for a drone aircraft.

But some criminal-justice experts are troubled by law enforcement agencies’ growing use of military-style equipment. Rather than employ such equipment only in extreme situations, the critics say, their use is becoming commonplace, leading police to use unnecessary force and intimidating residents. For example, some cite an episode last year in which police used a battering ram to raid a Duncanville swingers club when no one answered a knock.

“We have been witnesses to a little-noticed but nonetheless momentous historical change — the traditional distinctions between military/police, war/law and internal/external security are rapidly blurring,” said criminal justice professor Peter Kraska, of Eastern Kentucky University, in one on his studies on the militarization of police departments.

Local police officials note that growing populations, rising crime rates and more-lethal weapons available to criminals have forced officers to keep up. They also say they rely on training to make sure equipment is used appropriately.

“For years, there’s always been a parallel between law enforcement and the military,” said Bedford Police Chief David Flory, former director of training for the Texas Tactical Peace Officers Association. “Of course, the big difference is the rules of engagement. The military in Afghanistan or Iraq is dealing with warfare. We as officers have the U.S. Constitution and the Texas Penal Code that we must follow.”
Read More…

I missed this on Wednesday but it’s worth sharing.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/…

What is the appropriate role of government?

Traditionally, the division between conservatives and liberals has been over the role and size of the welfare state: liberals think that the government should play a large role in sanding off the market economy’s rough edges, conservatives believe that time and chance happen to us all, and that’s that.

But both sides, I thought, agreed that the government should provide public goods — goods that are nonrival (they benefit everyone) and nonexcludable (there’s no way to restrict the benefits to people who pay.) The classic examples are things like lighthouses and national defense, but there are many others. For example, knowing when a volcano is likely to erupt can save many lives; but there’s no private incentive to spend money on monitoring, since even people who didn’t contribute to maintaining the monitoring system can still benefit from the warning. So that’s the sort of activity that should be undertaken by government.

So what did Bobby Jindal choose to ridicule in this response to Obama last night? Volcano monitoring, of course.

And leaving aside the chutzpah of casting the failure of his own party’s governance as proof that government can’t work, does he really think that the response to natural disasters like Katrina is best undertaken by uncoordinated private action? Hey, why bother having an army? Let’s just rely on self-defense by armed citizens.

The intellectual incoherence is stunning. Basically, the political philosophy of the GOP right now seems to consist of snickering at stuff that they think sounds funny. The party of ideas has become the party of Beavis and Butthead.

The intellectual incoherence is stunning. Especially that coming from Krugman. There is no incentive to monitor a volcano because there are free riders? That argument applies infinitely. There is no way to have an interaction with others without effecting them in some way. The free rider problem is the way of the world. There is nothing one can do about it. If you can’t peacefully convince people to pony up a few dollars to monitor the local natural disaster in waiting… it’s obviously not that bad a problem. If the residents learn otherwise… they won’t be living there very much longer. Knowing when a hurricane is coming is great for the Gulf coast settlements… too bad since it’s done at the threat of violence and then combined with other risk reductions not directly felt by the inhabitants you have for generations people living in locations they wouldn’t have otherwise.

Did Krugman ever bother to investigate Katrina? How many private firms went to help and were turned away by the government bureaucrats? How they arrived faster than FEMA? Uncoordinated private action is exactly what was needed. Those closest involved know better than some DC bigwig as to what is necessary. The arrogance of Krugman’s statements would be stunning if it wasn’t for the volumes of statist, know it all opinions on how helpless their fellow man is I’ve read. Why not rely on armed citizens? Does this man forget US history? Has this man ever read a history book? The things he advocate have been shown to be self destructive. Whether it be his Keynesian economic beliefs or his etatist beliefs in the power and role of government.

He makes no argument. No logically consistent statement. No means to prove his examples. What is says is mearly assumed true. Rather obvious to the average sophisticated NYT reader. Order comes from above. Man is helpless without the god State’s protection and guidance.  Spontaneous order is a novel but false idea. Or at least inefficient. Man couldn’t possibly know what is best for him. I am the only one with the knowledge to show them the way. For the betterment of himself and everyone else.

Russia Today’s coverage

http://serfcity.wordpress.com/…

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney’s campaign has agreed to participate in the Bailout Town Hall next week. It’s yet to be determined whether the Congresswoman herself will appear or whether she will be represented by a surrogate.

While I disagree with Congresswoman Maloney’s votes for the bailout I think she deserves some credit for agreeing to participate. She could have ignored us but she didn’t. I think she should be commended for that.

The event is scheduled for this Wednesday October 29 from 7 pm to 9 pm at the Ukrainian East Village Restaurant, 140 Seconds Ave, NYC. You can get details here.

The Bailout is co-sponsored by a diverse group of political organizations and campaigns including: The Manhattan Libertarian Party, The NYC Green Party, The Queens Libertarian Party, the Campaign for Liberty (Ron Paul’s grass roots network). Both of Congresswoman Maloney’s opponents, Libertarian Isaiah Matos and Republican Robert Heim are co-sponsors and both will be speakers at the event. Bill Buran who is a candidate for New York State Assembly will speak for the Campaign for Liberty.

The Conservative and Independence Parties and the Nader campaign were also invited to participate in the event but either declined or did not respond.

This will be a truly unique opportunity to see Democrats and Republicans, Greens and Libertarians together presenting their views and answering voters’ questions on the single most important issue of the time.

The format is designed to emphasize getting facts to the voters. In the first hour, speakers will make a short opening statement then take predetermined questions for the moderator. The last hour will be exclusively dedicated to questions from the audience.

This should be interesting. Maloney better do her homework or Bill and Isaiah will likely run circles around her. Good luck gentlemen.

This is part of a longer debate between Dr. Paul and Charles Partee of the Federal Reserve on the Gold Standard. The entire debate can be seen here.