So...how long until the health system in this country is painfully and most likely irreversibly changed?  Its hard not to notice the chatter about saving money and creating efficiency dying away, and the percentages of people covered being trumpeted in their place.  The facts are out there.  The lies from the president and congressmen are in plain sight.  Healthcare needs reform, but this is like trying to hammer in a trim nail with a 12lb sledgehammer. 

Today from the AP-

'Most women should wait until age 50 to get mammograms and then have one every two years, a government task force said Monday in a major reversal that conflicts with the American Cancer Society's long-standing recommendation of annual screening starting at 40.'

We havent even had the government take over the healthcare system yet and you can see the rationing of services begin to take shape.  Its all about saving YOU money until they can find a way to save a dime, even if it means endangering your life.  At least for now, women have a choice to go whenever they choose.  Once the seemingly inevitable take-over is complete(ask Rep. Barney Frank), the story will go like this-

You want to get tested early?  It wont be allowed until women are 50, because the govt. is in charge of your health and will choose what care to provide to you when they choose to provide it to you...not you or your doctor.  How many woman die yearly from breast cancer before turning 50?  I'd imagine it numbers in at least the hundreds.  How many womens lives are saved by getting their testing done earlier?  You can kiss them goodbye, cuz Comrade Sam(no longer 'Uncle') will tell you to wait.  If you die waiting, tough shizen. Why do they care?
They've got no problem paying exponential times the retail value for tools and hardware, but suddenly they get cheap when it comes to your lives, ladies.  That's government efficiency at its best for you.

Dems, GOP split on NY trials of alleged terrorists


These men should be tried in a court of law as any other person would be for other crimes on american soil.  Terrorism did not start here and now. It has been around for as long as humanity itself.  The constitution does not say that those charged with particularly heinous crimes are stripped of the rights afforded those of other crimes.  Men who have killed or attempted to kill presidents in the past in public view have been given trials.  EVERYONE there knew that person was guilty, but they were tried as required anyway.  If their guilt is that obvious, and proof so solid, where is the problem?  It should be a quick trial if that's the case.  I don't want to hear anything from anyone about the courtroom becoming 'a circus', because that's a judge's responsibility to control.  We could show off to the world that we have the best justice system, which when used properly will protect us better than anywhere else.  Instead, some argue that we need to hide their trials behind a curtain, just as they tried to do with their torture.

OK, to start off this blog I'm gonna go with something that ran across my facebook wall.  A friend of mine since high school joined a group named "Revocation of tax-exempt status from churches engaging in political action.".

My first instinct said "hell no, just because they are a church, it should not mean that they can't be politically active".  A few seconds later I began to ask what reasons and exemptions churches actually deserved.  My thoughts-

Why should a church be held in any different view by the government than any other organization? Wouldn't that be the most complete separation of church and state possible? Should a church not be able to support itself if there really is a demand for it? Isn't that whats expected of every business/org? Separation doesn't equal pandering, which is how this appears.  If you are going to impose taxes based on profits, generally churches would fall into a non-profit organization category.  Otherwise, in cases such as property or sales taxes, I think they should be able to pay up like everyone else has to. That would be up to the individual states' Constitutions though.