From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

The New Jersey race for U.S. Senate became a little more crowded yesterday with the addition of a serious third-party candidate to the official ballot.

Jason Schuerer, 39, a Mercer County Libertarian, announced yesterday he was approved by the New Jersey Division of Elections to be included on the November ballot.

Schuerer will face-off against Democrat incumbent Sen. Frank Lautenberg and Republican Richard Zimmer. Also in the running are Socialist Sara Lobman and Independents Daryl Brooks and J.M. Carter.

Schuerer, of West Windsor near Princeton, is a private money manager for Wachovia. He previously ran for state assembly in the 14th district.

Campaign manager Lou Jasikoff, said Schuerer had been invigorated by Ron Paul’s presidential campaign and was running on a “platform of common sense.”

“We’re aiming to be the purple party,” Jasikoff said. “When it comes to personal liberties, Jason is more democratic than what the Democrats stand for. From a fiscal standpoint, we’re what the Republican party claims to be.”

More from the New Jersey Libertarian Party’s page.  Scheurer [note correct spelling] has a small website up from his previous campaign for the 14th district state legislature.  Jason Scheurer for Senate website is up, but a placeholder promises content coming July 4th.

TSA’s Badges Are a Sore Spot With Cops

Screeners at the nation’s airport checkpoints are going to start wearing police-style badges - but real officers aren’t too happy about it.

Some sworn officers fear airline passengers will mistake screeners for law-enforcement officials with arrest powers.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is starting to equip its 48,000 screeners with 3-inch-by-2-inch, silver-colored, copper and zinc badges that will be worn on new royal-blue police-style shirts.

The attire aims to convey an image of authority to passengers, who have harassed, pushed and in a few instances punched screeners. “Some of our officers aren’t respected,” TSA spokeswoman Ellen Howe said.

Nor should they be. Not only is what they do an egregious infringement on the 4th Amendment but also the 9th and 10th and perhaps the 14th. It’s also an affront to private property. It doesn’t matter what outfit you wear. This, this, this, or this. You make people’s lives more difficult without any benefit.

“A lot of cops at airports are not real thrilled about it,” said Duane McGray of the Airport Law Enforcement Agencies Network, an airport police association. “It’s another way of saying (to airport police), ‘You’re not important.’ “

Boo fucking hoo. Police in general are far less important then they think they or wish they were. The war on drugs has given the police officer profession a sense of importance that is completely undeserved. Do consumers want protection services? Sure. But the police don’t offer protection.

I hope this leads to a showdown between the local and federal authorities in the same way the Real ID law is. Reminds me of another South Park reference:

AUTHORITARIAN FIGHT!!

http://www.manchester.ac.uk/…

Speaking ahead of the lecture, Dr Alex Belenky, a visiting scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Center of Engineering Systems Fundamentals and author of the book ‘How America Chooses Its Presidents’, said: “Under a certain composition of Congress to be sworn in January 2009, a tie in the 2008 Electoral College may result in a constitutional crisis in the form of an election stalemate, making the US Supreme Court intervention in the 2008 presidential election inevitable.

“Contrary to widely publicised beliefs of the Electoral College opponents, making the nationwide popular vote a decisive factor in determining the election outcome doesn’t require the elimination of the Electoral College.

“Slightly modified election rules would let the country elect a US President with a mandate from both the nation and the individual states and would make all the states ‘battleground’ in election campaigns while keeping the Electoral College as a backup.

Dr Belenky, who holds a PhD in systems analysis and applied mathematics, will tell an audience in The School of Mathematics that in Presidential elections held from 1948 to 2004, only 16.072% to 21.103% of all voting voters could have elected a President under the Electoral College system, and the modified election rules eliminate such election outcomes.

“Numerous publications in the national and international media bear evidence that reporters often offer incomplete and sometimes incorrect information about the system of electing a President in the US.

Moreover, lack of understanding of both the origins and the quantitative features of Electoral College, especially the way it works in close elections, causes some reporters abroad even to question whether the existing rules of US presidential elections are democratic.”

No, they aren’t democratic nor are they supposed to be. The fact we use the Electoral College shows you that it’s a republican form of election and not democratic. A constitutional republic. If they can’t figure out the difference between a republic and a democracy they should go back to school. If they are substituting the work “democracy” for “republic” they should quit misleading people. I agree there are issues with the election of the POTUS but then again I see issues with the entire federal government. If we roll it back to its original function the Electoral College will make a lot more sense.

Ahmadinejad to OPEC: Dump weak dollar

Speaking at a ceremony to open the 29th ministerial meeting of the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID), Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeated his proposal made about six months ago in a rare summit of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries’s heads of states.

“The fall in the value of US dollar is one of the pressing problems of the world today,” warned the Iranian president at the conference in Isfahan on Tuesday.

He further expressed concern over the adverse effect of the dollar depreciation on the international community, especially energy exporting countries through increasing the price of commodities like wheat, rice and oilseeds.

Ahmadinejad said he warned six months ago in the summit conference in Riyadh that there were many indications pointing to continued fall in the value of the greenback.

“And we see that this continues to happen and the resources and wealth of OPEC member countries have been hugely damaged.

“I again repeat my previous proposal; we should have a basket of different international hard currencies as the basis or the member countries should come up and produce a new hard currency for petroleum contracts,” he stressed.

“They get our oil and give us a worthless piece of paper,” Ahmadinejad said earlier after the close of the summit in the Saudi capital of Riyadh.

As I recall Iraq was threatening to trade in Euro’s before the US government invaded. Given all the threatening maneuvers the Bush administration has been making you’d think Ahmadinejad would be less boisterous.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/…

The National Health Service is providing dying cancer patients with drugs that are five times less effective than those available privately and is refusing to treat them if they try to buy medicines themselves.

One drug for kidney cancer, routinely available through public health systems in most European countries but not to British patients, can reduce the size of tumours in 31% of patients, compared with just 6% of those prescribed the standard NHS drug.

The growing row over “co-payments” has prompted the government to reconsider the ban. Alan Johnson, the health secretary, has promised a “fundamental rethink” of the policy.

Research presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology found that kidney patients taking the new drug Sutent lived six months longer than those prescribed alpha interferon, the NHS treatment.

The failure of the NHS to make more effective drugs available to cancer patients has been condemned as “unethical” by leading doctors.

A woman with bowel cancer is fighting for the right to pay for a drug that could extend her life long enough for her to spend Christmas with her grandchildren.

Sheila Norrington, 59, a former NHS medical secretary from Maidstone, Kent, has been told by doctors that if she buys the drug Erbitux, which the health service will not pay for, she will lose her state-funded cancer care. Erbitux is the only drug capable of treating her advanced bowel cancer.

Norrington’s husband, Goff, 61, a former sales manager, said: “We have been told that if we pay for it ourselves we will be thrown off the NHS completely and we will need to pay for everything privately. We are devastated. This is not going to cure my wife, but if it keeps her alive a little bit longer, then we would pay for it.”

The couple say that although they could pay for a few cycles of the drug, which costs about £3,000 a month, they could not pay for all Norrington’s care, including scans, blood tests and consultations.

Goff Norrington added: “We have two young granddaughters and this could make the difference between sitting round the table with them at Christmas or not. We think it is deplorable that patients can get this drug almost anywhere in Europe but we cannot get it in the UK.”

A spokesman for Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust said: “We are governed by Department of Health policy on this issue.”

A poll for The Sunday Times shows strong support for allowing co-payment in the National Health Service, with 89% saying that people who buy additional cancer drugs should continue to get free NHS treatment.

Only 5% think allowing co-payment would create a two-tier NHS. Until now this has been the position taken by Alan Johnson, the health secretary.

Ministers had feared that allowing co-payment would upset less well-off patients, but the YouGov poll of nearly 1,800 people shows strong backing across the social spectrum and supporters of all three main parties.

Lee over at MooreWatch.com I think said it all: “This, of course, begs the question.  If compassionate free government healthcare can’t provide, y’know, actual healthcare to patients, and they are forced to paying massive amounts of money to buy their own treatments, maybe the solution to the problem is less free government healthcare and more private sector solutions.”

When will these people realize that the government can not negate scarcity? The only thing that can bring more and better healthcare to the masses is an increase in their wealth and the only way to do that is capital accumulation through free market capitalism.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

Writes Stephen Fairfax: “Today on page A5 of the War Street Journal, the FDIC has a full-page ad. They have the gall to display a $100,000 Series 1934 Gold Certificate, with the words ‘One Hundred Thousand Dollars in Gold’ plainly visible.

“Of course, the FDIC has never paid an atom of gold to any depositor, and was created as part of the gigantic theft and fraud associated with FDR’s gold confiscation. Wikipedia reports that it is still illegal for private citizens to own the gold certificate whose image leads the FDIC propaganda.”

Things like this make it seem more plausible that some of the many conspiracies surrounding the Federal Reserve are true.