[tpaine]

Laz, in your efforts to appear clever, you only demonstrate your own ignorance.

Jsuati supports George W. Bush.

George W. Bush supports the AW ban.

Therefore, Jsuati supports [the man in signing] the AW ban.

Case closed.

---

So, according to you:

Roosters crow in the morning.
In the morning, the sun comes up.
Therefore, roosters cause [in the morning] the sun to come up.
-laz-

---

According to me? - Not at all.

You're claiming your silly rooster bit has some analogy to Jsuati supporting Bush in signing the AW ban.

It appears as though you are projecting. Your ignorance in the field of logic is being quite clearly shown.

[Lazamataz]

You're claiming your silly rooster bit has some analogy to Jsuati supporting Bush in signing the AW ban.

It is an analogous example of the form of argument you are falliciously advancing.

Go take a college course in Logic, perhaps you will not appear to be so ignorant, and you certainly won't be quite as smug about it. :o)

I will leave it to lurkers and fellow freepers to make up their own mind on who has a logic minor and who has not had even a passing aquaintance with a logic book. :o)

[Lazamataz]

I know you are purposely getting it wrong in order to provoke angry responses from me -- hate is your favorite snack ;^) -- but I'm having some fun with the logic here.

I think it would be interesting to hone the premises to demonstrate your sillyness even more glaringly:

1. Jsuati supports George W. Bush.
2. George W. Bush does not like Phil Snead of Crawford, Texas.
3. Therefore, Jsuati does not like Phil Snead of Crawford, Texas.

Of course, it does not follow that Jsuati even KNOWS Phil Snead of Crawford, Texas -- but hey, don't let me stop you from proclaiming otherwise! You're on a illogic roll, and it's kinda endearing to watch. :o)

Note that all I have done is removed the term AWB and substituted an arbitrary person's name, thusly keeping as close to the form of your retroductive fallacy of soundness.