The current health care conundrum is filled with health care non-sequiturs, or conclusions that don't make sense based on their premises. This has resulted in confusion and confabulation due to people arguing the conclusions -- when the premises used to reach those conclusions do not make sense.

Health care reform uses the word reform, therefore it must be good. No, it depends on what is passed into law. We should simply refer to "health care changes."

If you are against the House and Senate bills, then you are against health care reform. No, in fact it only means you are against the House and Senate versions of health care changes. You could be for or against health care changes in a different version.

You would also be with the majority of American voters. According to a Rasmussen Report published last Saturday, 54 percent of voters say "no health care reform passed by Congress this year" would be better than the current bill. Only 35 percent of voters say passing the bill "would be better than not passing any health care reform legislation this year."

A public option will result in lower cost and more access for citizens.

No, a public option will result in a large government entity. There is no evidence that such an option would provide lower cost and more access -- many believe it would result in inefficiency and less personal control.

The government has money to fund health care changes.

No, the government does not have any money -- the government gets citizens' money either through taxing people or borrowing from future generations.

Doing something with health care is better than doing nothing.

It could be better or worse than doing nothing. It depends on what ends up in health care changes.

If you are against President Obama's proposal, then you are against a system that provides choice and competition. No, you might believe that the path the president is taking will not lead to choice and competition for the consumer. Continued...