[tpaine]

The fact that jsuati doesn't really care about the AW ban is not a reason to claim he supports it.
-laz-

---

"--- I will vote for Bush whether or not he signs such a bill if it is voted out of Congress. --"
576 -justshutupandtakeit-

---

He cares enough to vote for a president who will violate his oath if "he signs such a bill".

[Lazamataz]

He cares enough to vote for a president who will violate his oath if "he signs such a bill".

I cannot speak to jsuati's mindset, but, I conjecture that if he does not really care about the AWB, then it follows that he would not consider it a breach of his oath of office if he signed it.

The funny thing is, you and I agree about the AWB. But I cannot allow you to say things that are inconsistant with logic and reality, unchallenged. That is the reason that I have steadfastly pointed out the consistent logical flaw in your argument. I will continue to do so endlessly, so long as you persist in your illogic. I may attempt to address it through other means. Perhaps I will introduce you to Venn Diagrams and Symbolic Logic. I could use the refresher and you clearly could use the lesson.

Yes.

Yes, I will do this. I will demonstrate in a fashion wherein which it will be impossible for you to deny, that your conclusion is flawed. That is, unless you are willing to be so intellectually obtuse as to claim 1 = 2. :o)

[justshutupandtakeit]

I do not support the AW ban. Bush will violate no oath by signing one however. It will just be something I disagree with him over among several.