"what we see is a disturbing case of influence peddling among the media that calls into question everything we read about Barack Obama."
You mean anyone still questions the accuracy of the media's coverage of Obama?

Gregory seems a bit testy.

You make a compelling argument.

Good one!

An ad doesn't get a pass on being true and factual. At least not from me. When a person is running for the highest office in the land I expect better from him that the use of innuendo and sensationalism to defame his opponents. True, he has the right to do so but for myself such behavior speaks to the person running the ads far more than to his target. I'm reminded of an OLD Mad Magazine article about "creative" political advertising in which a candidate accused his opponent of being "a flaming heterosexual", relying on an ignorant public to not know the meaning of the word. You could call a legislator a "big government" type for voting to increase defense spending. Buzzwords are deliberately vague in order to provoke an emotional response.

So true. I've been grossly unjust to the rank-and-file crummy bastards of America and extend my deepest apologies to them.

"Your falling into the trap that just because the phrase has the word 'question' in it then it has to be a question. "
Not really, but I agree with you that begging the question is in fact circular reasoning. I was trying to give a simple and clear example of supporting a premise by merely reiterating it.

A fitting tribute to Whitney's artistic contributions (starts at 6:10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBIgej5GWOU&fe...

She sang very loud.

O'Donnell. Sounds Irish. Catholic perhaps?
He's not siding with the forces of religious reactionary extremism on this one is he?