Is the healthcare debate based on a total lack of logic?

Yes, I would agree with that statement (and the details of the article in the link). People seem to be hung up on certain buzz words like, "socialism," for instance. If they would give it some thought, there are actually many services which could be described as "socialism" but are not generally thought of as such. We have "socialized" water, electric, protection (police/fire, etc). We have socialized education. And indeed, much of the health care system is already "socialized" in that all hospitals have benefited in some way from research grants and knowledge obtained from them. Much of our public transportation is "socialized." Our roads are "socialized." Our parks and museums are socialized.

Socialism is nothing to fear as long as we retain the right to vote for our representatives---and that right will never change in this country.

I agree with this (from the article): "I think strategically it's important that the Obama administration and advocates of a health care plan really pay attention to how people feel and the symbolism they are seeing, and not just the nuts and bolts of the policy," Perrin said. "People don't reason with pure facts and logic alone."

Right or wrong....people reason with their emotions. The health care debate will be one or lost on an emotional level.

Thanks for the link. It gave me something else to consider while I'm trying to convince people to agree with me... ;-)

I think this is the link between a lot of issues - healh care reform, global warming, Iraq War, and so on. The problem is when people start off with a conclusion they want to believe is true, and from there try to find the evidence to support it. This leads them to believe some utterly ridiculous things, like Saddam was behind the 9/11 attacks, Obama wants to create 'death panels', global warming is a massive hoax among tens of thousands of climate scientists to make it easier for them to get grant money, etc.

People like to think they're logical, but in many cases they base their conclusions on a complete lack of logic for no other reason than they want to believe something is true.

That's the only way to explain the viewership numbers of shows like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh. If you can't find any real evidence to support your nutty views, at least you can say "Glenn Beck said so!".

No if you start with the conclusion that you want and then selectively disregard the facts. You will always come to the conclusion that you started with.The problem with the health care debate is the lack of FACTS. This is the main reason the town hall meetings are so rowdy people want FACTS not conjecture.

I doubt many people will read that article, and even if they do they won't think it applies to them.

Everybody should be an independent then we wouldn't have these problems.

Yup.

And batshiot patriots such as myself.