January 20th, 2012
12:59 AM ET

Truth Squad: 4 checks on Thursday's GOP debate

CNN examines statements by Republican presidential candidates during Monday night's CNN Southern Republican Debate in Charleston, South Carolina.

Rick Santorum on President Obama's budget cuts

The statement: "We have the president of the United States who said he is going to cut veterans benefits, cut our military, at a time when these folks are four, five, six, seven tours, coming back, in and out of jobs, sacrificing everything for this country.  And the president of the United States can't cut one penny out of the social welfare system and he wants to cut a trillion dollars out of our military and hit our veterans, and that's disgusting."

The facts: The Obama administration has struggled to bring down a staggering - and growing - budget deficit since taking office in 2009. Depressed tax revenues due to the 2007-2009 recession, spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, increased aid to the unemployed and the last of Obama's 2009 economic stimulus bill helped the deficit swell to a projected $1.3 trillion for the fiscal year 2011.

The 2010 election put added pressure on the administration as anti-tax, anti-spending Republicans took control of the House of Representatives, resulting in three budgetary standoffs between Congress and the White House in 2011.

Obama has in fact proposed a series of budget cuts, to the dismay of many of his own supporters. In September, he proposed wringing more than $300 billion from Medicare and Medicaid - the federal health-care programs for the poor and elderly - as part of an effort to reduce the deficit by $3 trillion over the next decade. In August, his budget chief warned government agencies to brace for cuts of 5% to 10% for 2013. And in January 2010, the administration proposed savings of $250 billion by freezing all nonsecurity discretionary spending for three years.

The departments of Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs were exempted from that proposal. But the administration projects it will save $1.1 trillion on defense in the coming 10 years - largely because the war in Iraq is over, and U.S. troops are being pulled back from Afghanistan.

And Obama has proposed increases in federal spending on veterans. Its 2012 budget request was up 10.6% "to meet increased need" by Americans who have served in the military over the past decade, and a 3.5% increase is projected for 2013.

One cloud on the horizon is the $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts now hanging over the heads of Congress. Half of that will fall on the Pentagon unless negotiators come up with a different plan.

But that won't happen until 2013 and can be averted if lawmakers can cut projected deficits by an equal amount.

The verdict: False. Santorum is wrong on two counts. Obama has proposed cuts to significant portions of the U.S. safety net, while adding spending on veterans benefits to accommodate the large number of returning American veterans. And a big portion of the planned defense cuts come from the end of two long-running wars.

Newt Gingrich on distrust of government and possible health care repeal

Newt Gingrich said the country's distrust of Washington and fear of centralized medicine would create pressure to repeal the health care act.

The statement: "The American people are frightened of bureaucratic, centralized medicine. They deeply distrust Washington. The pressure will be to repeal it."

The facts: Americans generally "distrust Washington," according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll conducted in September. Only 2% of Americans said they could "just about always" trust the federal government, while 77% said they could only trust it some of the time.  Another poll earlier this month found President Barack Obama's approval rating at 49%, while approval of Congress had plunged to 11%.

By comparison, in 1958 - before the war in Vietnam, Watergate and the revelations that spilled out of Washington in their aftermath - 73% of Americans said they could trust the federal government all or most of the time.
But Gingrich is off when he characterizes public opinion as building up pressure behind a promised repeal of the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the law Republicans call "Obamacare."  A CNN/ORC poll in November found that while the bill remains unpopular, some of the opposition comes from people who don't think it went far enough toward establishing universal health insurance.

Asked whether they approved or disapproved of the health-care law, much of which has yet to take effect, only 38% said they favored it; 56% said they were opposed. But only 37% said they opposed it because it went too far; an additional 14% said they opposed it because it wasn't liberal enough.
And while the public remains divided over the idea of requiring all Americans to buy health insurance - the cornerstone of the law - opposition has softened over the past year. Another November poll by CNN found 52% favored mandatory health insurance, up from 44% in June; opposition dropped from 54% in June to 47% in November.

The verdict: Misleading. Gingrich is right that there is a widespread distrust of Washington, but that doesn't appear to be translating into more support for repealing one of the most controversial acts of the Obama administration to date.

Mitt Romney defends his record on abortion

The statement: "What came to my desk was a piece of legislation that said, 'We're going to redefine when life begins.' In our state, we said life began at conception. The Legislature wanted to change that to say, 'no, we're going to do that at implantation.' I vetoed that. The Legislature also said, 'We want to allow cloning for purposes of creating new embryos of testing.' I vetoed that. They didn't want abstinence education; I pursued abstinence education. There was an effort to have a morning-after pill provided to young women in their teens; I vetoed that. I stood as a pro-life governor."

The facts: Romney ran two statewide campaigns in Massachusetts - an unsuccessful bid for Senate in 1994 and a winning one for governor in 2002 - as a supporter of abortion rights. But in 2005, he vetoed an emergency contraception bill and declared in the pages of the Boston Globe that he was an opponent of abortion, though he "respected the state's democratically held view" in favor of abortion rights.

Romney went on to veto the other bills he mentioned as well, though state lawmakers overrode his veto of a bill that would have allowed the creation of embryos for stem-cell research.
In April 2006, he announced $800,000 in grants for abstinence education programs, which are supported by many religious conservatives as an alternative to sex education.

The verdict: True. Romney's opposition to abortion is still viewed suspiciously by many conservatives, but his record supports the claims he made Thursday night.

Does Ron Paul's WWII anecdote ring true?

The statement: "After World War II, we had 10 million come home all at once.  But what did we do then? There were some of the liberals back then that said, 'Oh, we have to have more work programs and do this and that.' And they thought they would have to do everything conceivable for those 10 million. They never got around to it because they came home so quickly. And you know what the government did?  They cut the budget by 60%. They cut taxes by 30%.  By that time, the debt had been liquidated. And everybody went back to work again, you didn't need any special programs."

The facts: The end of World War II did see a sharp decrease in federal spending as the United States demobilized. The U.S. budget grew nearly tenfold between 1940 and 1945, peaking at about $93 billion - $1.2 trillion in today's dollars. By 1948, it had fallen to $30 billion, or about a third of 1945 outlays, according to federal records.

Taxes went down as well during that period, though rates stayed high. The top tax rate in 1945 was 94%. The rate was cut to 91% by 1948, and the threshold for paying that rate went up from about $200,000 to more than 1.8 million in current dollars, according to the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan Washington research group.

But demobilization was not as smooth as Paul portrays. The U.S. economy saw two recessions between 1945 and 1950 as veterans returned home and factories retooled for civilian work. The war bonds sold to finance the conflict weren't retired until the early 1980s, according to the Treasury Department, though revenue from the eventual postwar boom kept the debt manageable. The top tax rate stayed at 91% until the Kennedy administration.

Most significantly, the libertarian congressman underplays the role of the federal government in helping veterans coming home. The Employment Act of 1946 "committed the federal government to take all practical measures to promote maximum employment, production, and purchasing power," according to a 2003 study by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Then there is the law many historians consider one of the most significant pieces of legislation of the 20th century: the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, better known as the G.I. Bill. It sent millions of veterans to college, provided government backing for home loans and is credited with laying the foundations of the modern middle class.

The verdict: Misleading. Paul is correct that spending and taxes came down after 1945, as would be expected at the end of a conflict that saw the entire might of the United States thrown into the war effort. But he leaves out both the long-term debt and high tax rates left behind as Washington paid off the war and gives short shrift to the efforts made to resettle veterans who came home.

soundoff (585 Responses)
  1. Jaun in El Paso

    This is not a fact check! It is a defense of Obamas' poor policies and democrat control of the senate. It seems to me that CNN and the other liberal media outlets are becoming more and more bias.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Stu in Iowa

      You are completely full of it. Go to factcheck.org, an award winning unbiased website. They will give pretty much the same conclusions.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:06 am | Report abuse |
    • k_sway

      So it isn't a fact unless you happen to agree with it right.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      This is just payback on CNN's part for Newt making John King look like a fool at the debate last night.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:30 am | Report abuse |
    • comeon

      Please point out anything that is incorrect.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:31 am | Report abuse |
    • ohgram

      The American people need the facts instead of the spin that is so obvious at these debates. Truth hurts doesn't it! It's always the media's fault for giving all the details and the media's fault when they don't give all the details. We, the American people, prefer to have all the details whether you like it or not.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:32 am | Report abuse |
    • Jim Bob

      Hey Jaun, if you're going to put a Spanish name up there to try and inflame, at least spell it correctly, please. And, I'm glad you're not letting the facts get you down – nice to live in your world, where anyone that disagrees with you is lying...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:32 am | Report abuse |
    • Ranger 14

      Specifically, what facts that CNN produced are you disputing?

      January 20, 2012 at 11:34 am | Report abuse |
    • Brian

      Juan. Did you even read the article. I doubt it. Why so cynical

      January 20, 2012 at 11:37 am | Report abuse |
    • Ray

      Editorial passed off as "fact check" on CNN. Key points to consider when reading. The high top tax rate in 1945 is taken out of its historical context. Those in the top tax rate were making money off the war. The high top tax rate was a moral decision to prevent war profiteering. The Employment Act of 1946 did not implement any tangible government intervention into employment. Read up on it. The reference to the GI Bill has nothing to do with Ron Paul's statements. Verdict: This "fact-check" is misleading.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
    • McCain-in-4

      An open mind lends itself to painful realities, while fantasy is the realm of fools.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:39 am | Report abuse |
    • balls

      Ok, Juan, get back to mowing my yard. you shouldnt be watching CNN with all this work you have to do!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:49 am | Report abuse |
    • frank

      Agree! FACT: While Obama PROPOSED (word used by CNN) cuts to Medicare and Medicare, he CAN'T (word used by candidate) and still get re-elected;

      CNN FACT CHECK FAIL!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Ray: the top tax rate was not raised to 91% to stop war profiteering. It had been 60, 70, 80 and 90% from the early 1930s on... It was a gradual trend that helped during the war but it is conjecture to consider it the primary reason for raising it. And Yes, the GI Bill speaks to exactly what Ron Paul was stating. He was saying that at the end of the war we didn't need any tax dollar funded programs to get the returning troops back to work and that is false. Along with the GI Bill, many other government programs helped pave the way to the middle class for returning troops... I like Ron Paul but you cannot bend the facts to suit your argument...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Ben

      OMG the facts don't match what I want to be true, they must be wrong!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:51 am | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Frank : And who blocked the cuts in congress? Oh, that's right, the GOP... Because he was making minor cuts to Military spending... nice try...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
    • JamesT

      Hey Ray, doesn't look like Ron Paul mentioned the war when he talked about the budget being cut. Do you and he not realize that no longer waging war with millions of soldiers plus all the other costs is going to save quite a bit of money? Since we went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq without knowing how to pay for it I guess that's par for the course.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
    • Repugants Repent!!

      As Daniel Patrick Moynahan once said: "You have the right to form your own opinion but you don't have the right to create your own facts." No matter what the so-called "leaders" in GOP say, the President can, in fact, get things done and sometimes done well. He's not always correct, but who is??

      January 20, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Report abuse |
  2. OGR99

    I'll take this fact checking by CNN seriously when they fact check Mr. Obama's upcoming State of The Union speech.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:06 am | Report abuse |
    • Ike524

      And they will.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:19 am | Report abuse |
    • DC2003

      So you want "Factcheck" to verify something that hasn't happened or been stated yet?
      -
      FYI ... after the SOTU address ... they always do do a "factcheck" ... you must be very young and/or new to the internet!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:22 am | Report abuse |
    • JohnBoy

      Fact checks balances rhetoric with thruth for ALL politicians including the President. Sometimes they stay close to the truth (Romney) and sometimes they are categorical liars who bank on their talking points becoming propaganda that the masses will accept as fact when they are not fact at all (Santorum, Paul, Gingrich). Fact check has always balanced State of the Union addresses. Thank you for turning off your talk radio propaganda channell and taking the time to read a balanced view of the real facts. I know its alarming to realize you are being taken for granted by both sides.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:33 am | Report abuse |
    • Deej59

      The thing is they WILL factcheck the President. What people like you never seem to get is that these factchecks nail Democrats when they lie, too. During the 2008 campaign they pointed out Obama's misleading statements. You feel they're biased toward the left because there are so many blatant lies coming from the right. There are lies from the left, too. Just not the concentrated assault the right brings.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
    • Ben

      They have fact checked every state of the union speech for several years so...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
  3. Bazz

    I think that I must have missed the CNN fact checking "Truth Squad" checking any of Democrat's or Obama's speeches press conferences or claims.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:07 am | Report abuse |
    • k_sway

      At least they try, the other bozos just report their opinons as facts, left and right.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:28 am | Report abuse |
    • Former Marine

      Yup, you must have, because they do. Any speech or debate of import they will fact-check.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Ummm, yeah

      Statements by Democrats are fact checked here just like statements from Republicans. This event happened to be a Republican debate, so, yeah, it's Republicans who were fact checked.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:32 am | Report abuse |
    • PraiseTheLard

      Yes... you must have slept through it... better cut down on the booze...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:36 am | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      They fact check Dems all the time. As do other sites...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
  4. Sean

    I've got a secure job.
    Why should I care if they extend unemployment?
    I've got mine.
    I've got benefits that cover my entire family.
    Why should I care if they repeal health care reform?
    I've got mine.
    I still have plenty of equity in my home.
    Why should I care if my neighbor is losing his?
    I've got mine.
    I send my kids to private school.
    Why should I care if they cut public education?
    I've got mine.
    I live in gated a community.
    Why should I care if they cut the police force?
    I've got mine.
    My kids have no intention of joining the military.
    Why should I care if we wage never-endi­ng wars?
    I've got mine.
    I'm a Christian. Why should I care if they've blocked a Mosque from being built?
    I've got mine.
    I enjoy good fellowship after the service.
    Why should I care if my neighbor jokes about suicide?
    I've got mine.
    God has blessed me.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:08 am | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      Awesome.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:34 am | Report abuse |
    • Nardami

      I know we don't go to the same church...you appear to worship at the alters of selfishess, haughtiness, and arrogance and give true Christians a bad name through your perceived association. You may sit in a pew but haven't a clue!
      We're taught to be humble people in the version our church practices.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report abuse |
    • RyanE

      Ofcourse you dont care if there are other jobs. you have yours
      And its only right to think you wouldnt need a police force, being your so blessed that fences an windows keep out all criminals.
      Of course your children go to private shool
      ofcourse you dont care if we wage wars, Hey they'll never affect you right?
      but what isnt right is
      "I enjoy good fellowship after the service.
      Why should I care if my neighbor jokes about suicide?
      I've got mine.
      God has blessed me."
      Thats not how a true christian acts. What I pull from the book is a general guideline on how i should view my world.
      I care about the employment possiblities because i care for those without
      I care about our debt because somewhere someone is truly hurt by it
      I care about my neighbors because told me to do so
      Your to love your neighboors an WANT to the one to make a difference
      But i guess you have yours

      January 20, 2012 at 11:46 am | Report abuse |
    • kayjulia

      Very good you've hit the nail on the head and a lot of people should feel the blow .....

      January 20, 2012 at 11:49 am | Report abuse |
    • Sean

      What I wrote doesn't portray my values, just what I see are the current conservative right wing philosophy. Mind you, I also know plenty of Democrats that feel this way too. But since I live in the deep South in an almost all red state, it is the new mantra! All I hear from seniors over 65 is, don't touch my medicare. I'm knocking at that 65 door and nothing is above cuts to me. I'll be working until I die and I'm a DAV combat veteran from over 40 years ago and they can take some of my veterans benefits, because I've never used them anyway. I'm the bottom 75% and college educated, and I ask nothing of uncle Sam!

      January 20, 2012 at 1:13 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Timothy

    What would the GOP have if they couldn't use the words liberal, Obama, or media? Zero, which is the number of ideas I've heard from everybody but Ron Paul. (Perry did have one idea–Send troops back into Iraq...)

    January 20, 2012 at 11:17 am | Report abuse |
  6. TIRM

    You would have thought after their biased moderating of the debate last night that CNN would at least attempt to show some sense of neutrality, but instead CNN doubles down with more false fact checks and bias.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:22 am | Report abuse |
    • Former Marine

      Explain how they're false please.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:30 am | Report abuse |
    • me

      Because they show Republicans in a bad light, therefore they MUST be false.

      The fundamental problem is that reality has a liberal bias, because the liberals and only the liberals have been in touch with reality since the 2000 elections.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:33 am | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Please enlighten us as to which facts CNN got wrong? I hate when people accuse without a shred of evidence or fact to back their claims... Although this is a common GOP tactic, it does not simply wash over the truth. Please cite just one singular thing CNN got wrong in the fact check and I will vote GOP for life...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:37 am | Report abuse |
    • frank

      FORMER MARINE:

      CNN FACT CHECK FAIL!

      FACT: While Obama PROPOSED (word used by CNN) cuts to Medicare and Medicare, he CAN'T (word used by candidate) and still get re-elected;

      January 20, 2012 at 11:55 am | Report abuse |
  7. Obamajoe

    Nobody is perfect,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Mitt Romney is the best choice for GOP,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he is not perfect,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Mitt / Michael is the strongest team for GOP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    January 20, 2012 at 11:23 am | Report abuse |
    • A-PIFF-A-KNEE

      MITT / CHRISTIE would be even better!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:32 am | Report abuse |
  8. DandyStryker

    As usual, the party of god is represented by a bunch of guys that habitually break the 9th commandment.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Obamajoe

      what do you mean when you say party of god???????

      January 20, 2012 at 11:25 am | Report abuse |
    • JamesT

      I agree but would change it to 'the people that believe they are the party of a white, Christian God...'.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
  9. Obamajoe

    God bless America.

    God bless President Obama

    January 20, 2012 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Jim Bob

      Agreed. I can't wait until he debates which ever of these lying sacks of you-know-what come up against him. He'll expose their lies right on stage. When they deny, then those dang fact-checkers will come out the next day and expose them. WHAP!!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Dee

      hell yeah!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:51 am | Report abuse |
  10. A-PIFF-A-KNEE

    So the only one to tell the complete truth was......................Romney. For those of you who continually fact check these candidates statements instead of simply jumping on the bashwagon, it's becomming increasingly clear who is most trustworthy. Paul is also a straight shooter. Newt? Forked tongue for sure! Rick S? Waaaaaay over his head. We don't need another legislator as POTUS.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:25 am | Report abuse |
  11. jay lee

    I'm a Ron Paul supporter and I appreciate the value and objectiveness of this article. Thank you.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:25 am | Report abuse |
    • Obamajoe

      Paul is a good guy,he has a better heart than other GOPs,,,,,,,,,,

      But people cannot see heart,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      and politicians can pretend to be good,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      he can talk about family value and at the same time has affair with other woman,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      January 20, 2012 at 11:27 am | Report abuse |
    • Obamajoe

      Paul should pray

      May God give wisdom to people so they can see heart,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      January 20, 2012 at 11:28 am | Report abuse |
  12. James Foley

    It's unfortunate that valid observations by CNN are viewed by some as biased. Example; Newt complained of the evil media rehashing old news and drumming up a story, when clearly the fault lies in that there is a story at all, through no fault of the media like CNN. John King wasn't expressing an opinion as a CNN moderator, he was asking if Newt would like to comment. Newt then followed that relevant question with an ad-hominem /red herring. What we have here, clearly, is the GOP presidential contenders regurgitating old fear mongering from a by gone era in the form of misplaced attacks on the current president. Each new president deals with the policies, procedures, and SNAFU's of the previous administrations [plural]. We also have a doubling down on support for the same failed policy suggestions that created the fiscal mess we're in to begin with. It wasn't Obama that repealed Glass-Stegill, Sent our troops into Iraq without just cause, or crashed the housing market. Obama isn't responsible for high unemployment either. That there is a high rate of unemployment during his administration is no solid basis for fault. In simpler terms, high employment is happening "during" his administration but NOT "because of" his administration. And once again, we have people blaming the victims as if it's their fault that they were lied to and otherwise misled into thin king they could afford more than what they made.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:32 am | Report abuse |
    • Ray

      I will speak on the Ron Paul fact check. This is an editorial passed off as "fact check". Key points to consider when reading. The high top tax rate in 1945 is taken out of its historical context. Those in the top tax rate were making money off the war. The high top tax rate was a moral decision to prevent war profiteering. The Employment Act of 1946 did not implement any tangible government intervention into employment. Read up on it. The reference to the GI Bill has nothing to do with Ron Paul's statements. Verdict: This "fact-check" is misleading. It belongs under the heading "editorial".

      January 20, 2012 at 11:37 am | Report abuse |
    • heyjo

      IS obama not the leader of this great county? But nothing is ever his fault. So why doesn't he do something? Except spending money. . Why do they play all the numbers have a fact check on that . How high is unployment numbers? Really? How high is the debt? Where was Obama all the years that you cano't find anything on him? Or anyone that knew him.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:42 am | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Ray: the top tax rate was not raised to 91% to stop war profiteering. It had been 60, 70, 80 and 90% from the early 1930s on... It was a gradual trend that helped during the war but is conjecture to consider it the primary reason for raising it. And Yes, the GI speaks to exactly what Ron Paul was stating. He was saying that at the end of the war we didn't need any tax dollar funded programs to get the returning troops back to work and that is false. Along with the GI Bill, many other government programs helped paved the way to the middle class for returning troops... I like Ron Paul but you cannot bend the facts to suit your argument...

      January 20, 2012 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
  13. Chase

    I wanna know the facts about Gingrich's infidelity and desire for an open marriage. Gingrich being applauded last night for getting defensive and deflecting the topic was disappointing. If Cain would have yelled and deflected the topic when asked about his issues would he still be in this race? Our current president got voted into office because he was a good debater. Don't be fooled by Gringrich's debate theatrics.

    January 20, 2012 at 11:33 am | Report abuse |
    • Jim Bob

      What are you saying – that just because Gingrich led the charge against Clinton for the same thing, stands on his soap box about marriage being between one man and one woman but cheats on his wife then dumps her while she's fighting cancer, Gingrich should now be held accountable for his own actions? You're obviously not a good American, as he is!!

      January 20, 2012 at 11:39 am | Report abuse |
    • Chase

      🙂

      January 20, 2012 at 11:42 am | Report abuse |
    • kflanigan

      There's nothing wrong with cheating on your wife as long as you love Jesus as much as your mistress.

      January 20, 2012 at 11:53 am | Report abuse |
  14. Jim Bob

    Gingrich keeps saying what a cakewalk a debate with Obama would be. One inconvenience, here – whomever ends up debating Obama will be up against a smart man, a great debater, and someone what will expose lies on the stage. GOP'ers had better brace themselves for some serious fact-checking! HA!!

    January 20, 2012 at 11:36 am | Report abuse |
  15. frank

    N FACT CHECK FAIL!

    FACT: While Obama PROPOSED (word used by CNN) cuts to Medicare and Medicare, he CAN'T (word used by candidate) and still get re-elected;

    January 20, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17