We all know how the blogosphere is abuzz with the House of Reps health care bill vote passing 220-215. I just have to question the wisdom of celebrating such a narrow “victory”. Sure the fanboys will applaud it as the best thing since sliced bread (or at least since Social Security and Medicare), but the rest of the country will hail it as a prelude to the downfall of civilization (or at least a much more government dominated socialist state). Now I know that Republicans have narrowly pushed things through the government before. So have the Democrats. Those may not have been wise either. But in such a politically divided country, wouldn’t it have been wiser to keep working on the bill until you had at least a 60% majority?

As quoted in many books and movies: “Just because you can, it doesn’t mean you should.”

I was listening to the Diane Rehm show on the way to work today (I forgot my iPod connector) and she used an interesting phrase: “Health Care Reform opponents”. I wondered to my self, why do people have to make such hostile labels? Are those people really against health care reform? I seriously doubt it. More likely they are against the specific form of reform being proposed. This reminds me of “abortion opponent” instead of “pro-life” or “climate change denier” instead of “skeptic of politically motivated eco-fundamentalism”.

Time for me to start up my own movement of “integrity reform” so that I can call everyone I do not like a “integrity reform opponent”.