LSAT-0210-4-17（lawyer改标题）

17. Mullen has proposed to raise taxes on the rich, who made so much money during the past decade. Yet Mullen’s tax records show heavy investment in business during that time and large profits; so Mullen’s proposal does not deserve our consideration.
The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to the flawed reasoning in which one of the following?
(A) Do not vote for Smith’s proposed legislation to subsidize child care for working parents; Smith is a working parent.
(B) Do not put any credence in Dr. Han’s recent proposal to ban smoking in all public places; Dr. Han is a heavy smoker.
(C) The previous witness’s testimony ought to be ignored; he has been convicted of both forgery and mail fraud.
(D) Board member Timm’s proposal to raise the salaries of the company’s middle managers does not deserve to be considered; Timm’s daughter is a middle manager at the company’s headquarters.
(E) Dr. Wasow’s analysis of the design of this bridge should not be taken seriously; after all, Dr. Wasow has previously only designed factory buildings.
请教答案A为什么不对

谢谢lawyer, 请问对"Yet Mullen’s tax records show heavy investment in business during that time and large profits;"应该如何理解.

就是说M那时候有钱，应该多交税。M的税收记录显示M那时投资很大赚钱很多

我明白了. 其实原文和答案的意思都是要表达如果此人所做的和此人所建议的相反, 那么此人建议的就不可以被采纳. 谢谢lawyer