Did you think your ad hominem and a ping to your support group would somehow make you more credible?
Point us to the slander you repeatedly talk about. What in the article is untruth?
You appear to be looking a gift horse in the mouth. Unam Sanctam was supporting your position. If he's in anybody's support group, it's yours, certainly not mine.
My last post was a response to one of his; I pinged you out of courtesy because I mentioned you.
You have now made two accusations: one of slander and one of an ad hominem attack; yet you refuse to identify either. I consider that to be childish behavior.
As I'm so fond of saying, it must amaze anyone with a lick of sense how people who condemn the media when it runs a headline in adoration of their political enemies or about unemployment numbers will absolutely curl up in its lap and be spoonfed its feces when it tells them what they want to hear.
How exactly is reading an interview the same as being "spoonfed" something by the media? Does that mean that if I watch the president give a speech via CNN I am not actually hearing what he thinks, but am only being given CNN's ideas? Skepticism is one thing, but this strikes me as an easy way to simply bury your head in the sand and never get any information which might threaten your preconceptions. Hardly very healthy, in my opinion.