E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Jason Reed / Reuters
Republican presidential candidates former Senator Rick Santorum, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Rep. Ron Paul participate in a Republican presidential candidates debate in Charleston, South Carolina, January 19, 2012.
Mitt Romney perpetuated one unsubstantiated claim, about his record at Bain Capital, and more or less corrected himself on another, about President Barack Obama's health care law, in the latest Republican presidential debate.
Vote: Should a candidate's private life be open for scrutiny?
His rivals flubbed history, Newt Gingrich blaming a Democratic president for a jobless rate he never had, and Ron Paul painting an idyllic picture of life before Medicare that did not reflect deprivations of that time.
A look at some of the claims in the debate Thursday night and how they compare with the facts:
__—
ROMNEY: "We started a number of businesses; four in particular created 120,000 jobs, as of today. We started them years ago. They've grown — grown well beyond the time I was there to 120,000 people that have been employed by those enterprises. ... Those that have been documented to have lost jobs, lost about 10,000 jobs. So (120,000 less 10,000) means that we created something over 100,000 jobs."
THE FACTS: Romney now has acknowledged the negative side of the ledger from his years with Bain Capital, but hardly laid out the full story. His claim to have created more than 100,000 jobs in the private sector as a venture capitalist remains unsupported.
Romney mentioned four successful investments in companies that now employ some 120,000 people, having grown since he was involved in them a decade or ago or longer. From that, he subtracted the number of jobs that he said are known to have been lost at certain other companies.
What's missing is anything close to a complete list of winners and losers — and the bottom line on jobs. Bain under Romney invested in scores of private companies that don't have the obligation of big publicly traded corporations to disclose finances. Romney acknowledged that he was using current employment figures for the four companies, not the number of jobs they had when he left Bain Capital, yet took credit for them in his analysis.
__—
GINGRICH: "Under Jimmy Carter, we had the wrong laws, the wrong regulations, the wrong leadership, and we killed jobs. We had inflation. We went to 10.8 percent unemployment. Under Ronald Reagan, we had the right job — the right laws, the right regulators, the right leadership. We created 16 million new jobs."
THE FACTS: Sure, inflation was bad and gas lines long, but under Carter's presidency unemployment never topped 7.8 percent. The unemployment rate did reach 10.8 percent, but not until November 1982, nearly two years into Reagan's first term.
Most economists attribute the jobless increase to a sharp rise in interest rates engineered by then-Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker in an ultimately successful effort to choke off inflation. Unemployment began to fall in 1983 and dropped to 7.2 percent in November 1984, when Reagan easily won re-election.
The economy did add 16 million jobs during Reagan's 1981-1989 presidency. Gingrich's assertion that "we created" them may have left the impression that he was a key figure in that growth. Although Gingrich was first elected to the House in 1978, his first Republican leadership position, as minority whip, began when Reagan left office, in 1989.
__—
PAUL: "I had the privilege of practicing medicine in the early '60s, before we had any government (health care). It worked rather well, and there was nobody on the street suffering with no medical care. But Medicare and Medicaid came in and it just expanded."
THE FACTS: Before Medicare was created in the mid-1960s, only about half of the elderly had private insurance for hospital care, and they were facing rising costs for those policies on their fixed incomes. Medicare was hugely contentious at the time, seen by many doctors as a socialist takeover, but few argued that the status quo could be maintained.
A Health, Education and Welfare Department report to Congress in 1959, during the Republican administration of Dwight Eisenhower, took no position on what the federal government should do but stated "a larger proportion of the aged than of other persons must turn to public assistance for payment of their medical bills or rely on 'free' care from hospitals and physicians."
Paul advocates a return to an era when doctors would treat the needy for free. But even in the old days, charity came with a cost. Research from the pre-Medicare era shows that the cost of free care was transferred to paying customers and the insurance industry.
__—
ROMNEY: "I could have stayed in Detroit, like him, and gotten pulled up in the car company. I went off on my own. I didn't inherit money from my parents. What I have, I earned. I worked hard, the American way."
THE FACTS: It's true there's no evidence Romney's wealthy family gave him a trust fund, or helped him secure a job at Bain Capital, where he would ultimately make his fortune. But it's not entirely the case that his success is wholly the result of his own hard work.
Romney's father, George, was an automobile industry CEO and a Michigan governor. He paid for Mitt to attend the Cranbrook School, a private boarding school in the Detroit area. The education didn't hurt Romney's ability to get into Harvard, where he earned law and business degrees in 1975.
While Romney appears to have gotten a job at Bain out of college on his own, the Boston Globe book "The Real Romney" reports that Romney's parents helped him and his wife buy their first home when he was in his early 20s.
On Thursday night, the Romney campaign did not dispute the finding that Romney's parents helped pay for that house, in the Boston suburb of Belmont.
__—
ROMNEY: "The executive order is a beginning process. It's one thing, but it doesn't completely eliminate Obamacare. ... We have to go after a complete repeal. And that's going to have to have to happen with a House and a Senate, hopefully, that are Republican."
THE FACTS: With that statement, Romney essentially corrected his repeated suggestions in early debates and speeches that he would eliminate President Barack Obama's health care law with a stroke of the pen on his first day in office — a power no president has.
In one variation of the claim, he had vowed in a Sept. 7 debate that on Day One, he would sign an executive order "granting a waiver from Obamacare to all 50 states." This, despite the fact that the law lays out an onerous process for letting individual states off the hook from its requirements, and that process cannot begin until 2017.
Now he acknowledges the political reality that a Republican president would need Republican control of Congress to have a strong shot at repealing the law.
Leave a Comment:
List of Republican Budget Cuts, WOW
Notice Soc.Sec. and the Military are NOT on this list.
These are all the programs that the new Republican House has proposed cutting. Read to the end.
* Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy -- $445 million annual savings.
* Save America 's Treasures Program -- $25 million annual savings.
* International Fund for Ireland -- $17 million annual savings.
* Legal Services Corporation -- $420 million annual savings.
* National Endowment for the Arts -- $167.5 million annual savings.
* National Endowment for the Humanities -- $167.5 million annual savings.
* Hope VI Program -- $250 million annual savings.
* Amtrak Subsidies -- $1.565 billion annual savings.
* Eliminate duplicative education programs -- H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.
* U.S. Trade Development Agency -- $55 million annual savings.
* Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy -- $20 million annual savings.
* Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding -- $47 million annual savings.
* John C. Stennis Center Subsidy -- $430,000 annual savings.
* Community Development Fund -- $4.5 billion annual savings.
* Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid -- $24 million annual savings.
* Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half -- $7.5 billion annual savings
* Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20% -- $600 million annual savings.
* Essential Air Service -- $150 million annual savings.
* Technology Innovation Program -- $70 million annual savings.
* Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program -- $125 million annual savings.
* Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization -- $530 million annual savings.
* Beach Replenishment -- $95 million annual savings.
* New Starts Transit -- $2 billion annual savings.
* Exchange Programs for Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts -- $9 million annual savings
* Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants -- $2.5 billion annual savings.
* Title X Family Planning -- $318 million annual savings.
* Appalachian Regional Commission -- $76 million annual savings.
* Economic Development Administration -- $293 million annual savings.
* Programs under the National and Community Services Act -- $1.15 billion annual savings.
* Applied Research at Department of Energy -- $1.27 billion annual savings.
* Freedom CAR and Fuel Partnership -- $200 million annual savings.
* Energy Star Program -- $52 million annual savings.
* Economic Assistance to Egypt -- $250 million annually.
* U.S. Agency for International Development -- $1.39 billion annual savings.
* General Assistance to District of Columbia -- $210 million annual savings.
* Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority -- $150 million annual savings.
* Presidential Campaign Fund -- $775 million savings over ten years.
* No funding for federal office space acquisition -- $864 million annual savings.
* End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.
* Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act -- More than $1 billion annually.
* IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget -- $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
* Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees -- $1 billion total savings. WHAT THE HELL IS THIS ABOUT?
* Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees -- $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
* Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of -- $15 billion total savings.
* Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress. WHAT???
* Eliminate Mohair Subsidies -- $1 million annual savings.
* Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- $12.5 million annual savings WELL ISN'T THAT SPECIAL
* Eliminate Market Access Program -- $200 million annual savings.
* USDA Sugar Program -- $14 million annual savings.
* Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) -- $93 million annual savings.
* Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program -- $56.2 million annual savings.
* Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs -- $900 million savings.
* Ready to Learn TV Program -- $27 million savings.. WHY?????
* HUD Ph.D. Program.
* Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.
* TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years
My question is, what is all this doing in the budget in the first place?
Many are called repub and dem pet projects that they can boost about when they hit folks up for money and re-election. IE look what I brought back to the district.
Bet you can trace many of these to a donor that gave money to a politican and when the project went through, the donor or their companies benefited financially.
Just think back to Hallaburton and the hundreds of billions they got and continue to get with a minor little detail DICK Chaney was VP and as VP received and continues to receive money from Hallaburton.
Facts? They don't need no stinkin' facts. They're Republicans so lies work better and the constituents do not know the difference.
Obama Supporters, Fact Check this:
Obama extended Bush's anti-constitutional Patriot Act.
Obama extended Bush's anti-constitutional TSA.
Obama signed into law a re-written and anti-constitutional NDAA which denies Americans due process.
Obama on jobs: The middle class is not growing. Those jobs are Part Time and Minimum Wage. And the people who fell off of unemployment are no longer counted. Actual unemployment is well above 20%.
If you cherish Obama so much just because he "considers" himself a Democrat like you (which he is not), then you must accept that you no longer care about freedom, civil liberties or higher paying jobs.
I voted for Obama. But Obama is not a real Democrat. His agendas are obvious if you take the time to see what is actually happening to our nation. It is a country of fewer and fewer rights as the days pass by.
But make no mistake: Gingrich, Santorum and Romney are just as pitiful.
Ron Paul 2012!
Obama is, by far, the lesser of the evils...
Fact checking as requested....All of your statements are incorrect as none of them have been deemed "anti-constitutional".
BearDown-3307297
Your anti-American comments don't phase me, as many of us are aware of the "new-wave" agenda. Maybe you have not heard (do you not watch independent news?); Obama is being brought on charges for NDAA as currently written (filed in the state of New York).
Holding Americans without due process is a serious violation of the Constitution. Obama's policy has already suspectedly murdered at least 2 United States citizens in cold blood without even going to trial. Whether the Americans were guilty or innocent, it has not been proven either way in our court of law.
Ron Paul may not win the presidency, but make no mistake; A Ron Paul Revolution is in full swing. We are the people who will restore America. D (democrat), R (republican); those present day ficticious titles don't hold value or mean a thing anymore.
Once the election is over, try to imagine another 4 years of Obama. Then try to imagine 4 years of Gingrich. Next, Santorum. Then Romney. Once the thrill of defeat is over, do you actually believe that America will be once again great under any of these politicians? Didn't think so.
Your effort to sound "intelligent", "correct" and "absolute" in this conversation means nothing to anybody except you. "We the People" who deeply care for our nation are being loud and heard.
Ron Paul 2012!
Big Rog in Michigan,
Ron Paul has no evil. He has the most consistent voting record. He has no ties to corporate elitist. He has no ties to lobbyists. He believes in freedom and civil liberties for all.
Ron Paul 2012!
RP is just a doddering, bigoted old fool. I know that puts him ahead of the average GOP voter, but he is in no way capable of running our country. He IS however consistent in his BS.....
So any speech that you don't agree with is "anti-American"? I believe that sentiment is of course.....wait for it...anti-American. That's how we keep people down in this country. Accuse disenting views of being unpatriotic.
I haven't found one credible report of Obama being brought up on charges. So I'll call that a lie until shown otherwise.
It doesn't take much effort to sound intelligent or correct when I'm dealing with people who's only trusted source of news is news they have an ideological bent towards. It's like talking to a child about Sesame Street. That's all they see so they assume it's real.
ProudAmericanFirst: You have some serious errors in your post. Hell, anyone can file a law suit against anyone else in this Republic. President's are not exempt. Simply because a law suit has been filed does not mean guilt! You have already burned our First Amendment rights with your accusations by equating accusation with guilt.
Second, your idolization of Ron Paul's politico-economic theory is not what you seem to think it is. Raul is a social Darwinist who believes in lassiez faire economics., i.e., "government stay out of regulating business." In other words, Paul wants corporations to be free from government regulation as they operate in the marketplace. You need to understand the consequences of that economic theory in the real world of political, economic, and social life, not only in the American Republic but what it would mean for the entire world. The consequences would be absolutely devastating all across the planet.
I hated what Bush did to this country. After voting for Obama, I hated what he did to continue Bush's legacy.
This nation is becoming nothing but low-income war-mongers. If you don't want freedom and prosperity and see nothing wrong with cameras coming into your living room someday, then so be it. That is my right to my opinion.
Here ya go, chief:
rt.com/usa/news/obama-hedges-ndaa-sued-933/
truthdig.com/report/item/why_im_suing_barack_obama_20120116/
Ron Paul 2012!
TJefferson,
I never stated that the president was guilty as charged. Key word in my prior post: suspectedly. Furthermore, what about the rights of the Americans who were killed? No due process pretty much sums it up.
Your word salad does nothing to support your case. It is in the news. It is being discussed. And all for a reason.
Ron Paul 2012!
Here's one more for the road:
rt.com/usa/news/expatriation-act-citizenship-ndaa-737/
Don't think it can happen? Sit back, do nothing, twiddle fingers and wait...
Ron Paul 2012!
BearDown-3307297, guess you do not know much about the US Constitution, nor about what OUR federal government is allowed to do. OUR Constitution defines the way our federal government is to operate, and to Protect our Rights from those who serve in our government who would take them away. The Bill of Rights sets limits on the federal government, making clear it has no power to infringe on rights we already naturally possess, or limit traditionally held privileges, such as trial by jury.
You might remember that the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take an Oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge. That they have to keep that Oath to meet the requirements of the office or position they currently occupy.
The wording of the Presidential Oath was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure.
Then know that, "domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution. They are also those who support those in action, or by inaction; vote, voice, money, etc who are going against or trying to weaken the US Constitution and the Peoples written guarantee of those Rights".
OK, so now you know that Obama (and most, if not all of those serving in the three branches) is/are an Oath breaker (impeachable, prosecutable and yes, there ARE precedents). Then you now also know that they are Domestic Enemies of the USA, also prosecutable.
The framers wanted to make sure everyone understood that the Constitution only grants the feds prescribed, specific, enumerated powers and nothing else. Also that the first eight amendments making up the Bill of Rights specify rights and privileges the federal government may not in any way abridge.
Who possesses all other powers? The states and the people. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people" Tenth Amendment
Understand now?
Knine,
Perfectly stated.
Listening to CSPAN and watching the news, it is unbelievable how many people are more concerned about Gingrich's ex's than about actual plans to revitalize our nation.
Once again, in case somebody isn't aware, I will repeat my message:
Gingrich, Romney and Santorum SUPPORT Patriot, TSA and NDAA as currently written which were all EXTENDED by Obama.
I can not and will not vote for anybody who goes against or tries to shred our Constitution.
Ron Paul 2012!
This group of Republicants are just pathetic and embarrassing as representatives of our great country...period...
Amen...
What is it with the GOP these days an all of their lies? Ronald Reagan was not like that.
Ronald Reagan had Alzheimers and was an ACTOR....I repeat, an ACTOR....still can't believe anyone voted for an ACTOR as President....sheesh!
how old are you? reagan was the governr of california at one time prior to running for president. and, no, he didn't have atzheimers at that time.
Romney is much like McCain..Neither would have gone anywhere without influential fathers.... Much like Geo 's**t-for-brains' Bush...
I am just soooo glad that they fact checked Romney's claim about being a job creator, he was an investor, and once they taken their initial investment out, plus a huge profit always 2-3 times the investment, you can't take any credit for jobs the Co might create, or how large the Co expands, STAPLES!
The only jobs Willard Romney ever created were in China.
Romney was never concerned with creating jobs, he was concerned with creating wealth. Now he's hiding money offshore in the Caymen Islands to avoid paying taxes (listen up "rich people pay their fair share folks").
He HID MONEY OFFSHORE as a tax dodge and now he wants to tell you how to handle your tax obligation.
Newt is just a mess. I hate to even think about what he's done to the women in his life (including his daughters who followed the moneytrain). Now he wants to tell you what a real marriage looks like and how a real family should behave.
He wanted an OPEN MARRIAGE between him, his second wife and his current wife. Evangelicals. Is that who you want to represent your ideals?
Ron Paul is the Republicans best hope. The problem with Paul is that he lives a virtuous life AND talks about what it really takes to live a virtuous life. Republicans don't really care how he lives. They only care about what he says. And what he says is often times spot on....which makes him unelectable.
The Republican party is in shambles.
One quick correction. Ron Paul is a racist which takes away from his virtuosity. But at least he was willing to admit it until it became politically inconvenient.
Ron Paul and Ayn Rand are both idiots of the highest order. But at least they tell you what they think and live the way they lead.
Candidates and politicians make mistakes all the time. The problem for Gingrich is he loudly proclaims his superior intellect and credentials as a Ph.D historian. Gingrich is the first person to tell us he is the smartest guy in the room. For someone who takes credit for stuff he had little to do with, it is inexcusable for him to mess up history that occurred during his stellar congressional career.
Gingrich is not the smartest guy in the room. He is just the nastiest and takes the most pleasure in being obnoxious, sarcastic and misdirecting.
No story here. Conservatives have been using revisionist history and flat out lies since the conservative revolution began under Reagan. The only difference today than during the time of Reagan, is that their rhetoric has become more extreme, divisive and vitrolic than ever.
Don't forget, the internet makes it a lot harder to lie and a lot easier to fact check.
The days of politiicans lying to their constituents is almost at an end.
And I for one say good riddance.
Our regular conservative posters are quiet when they get fact checked. I'm sure they saw the headline and stayed away. Even they know fact checkers are Republican cryptonite.
stormerF
Do not know Jen,seems Hillary was OK with an open marriage to Bill.
Stormey:
You are evading the point. Newt criss-crossed the country during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, condemning President Clinton for the very acts he was committing AT THAT TIME. I would be very interested to see what your posts would've (or did) look like back then, as I am sure you were absolutely up in arms about the then President's private life and how he should've been impeached for it. Typical hate-mongering hypocrisy.
Oh, and blaming the media for all of Newt's skeletons? Classic. Seems that shooting the messenger is what you guys do best.
You are so right MSNBC. Unemployment was only 7.8% under Carter. The rise from 7.8% to 10.6% is ALLLLL Reagan's fault. So how does that not apply to what we have right now? The rise in unemployment that has happened under Obama's watch was ALLLLLL Bush's fault? Really? Not Obama's fault at all but ALL Bush's fault. Man that is classic.
It is clear to anyone looking and paying attention that the point he was making is unemployment went to 10.6% because of Carter. I don't see how anyone on here can say no, that is not true while saying Obama is not responsible for any rises in unemployment on his watch.
I'm a liberal Democrat and I hold no ill will toward Romney's wealth, how he paid his taxes or his choice in being a businessman.
Also I'm glad I live in a country where if your smart enough to realize your true potential you can become rich.
I do however think the fact that just because he was successful doingwhat many would consider preying on weaker companies for the assets and running up the credit to bankrupt said companies is a moral issue because quite frankly it is legal to do this.
I do not want a President that "preys" on weaker entities...be them People, organizations, companies and or countries.
Not a trait of a true statesmen nor presidential in its behavior.
This is a non story
Did we really think they would deal in facts or not stretch the truth to fit their narritive?
And yes it is totally the media's fault for daring to report what his wife of 18 years said about Newts 6yr
adultery...after all he was the champion of Family and morale values at the time this happened.
This being Friday and all...Time to lighten things up.
Poor Ole' Newt broke the "Guy" code by exposing Clinton for getting a ....well you know.
What a jerk.
Man Law
Clinton a few months...Newt 6yrs and he was viewed as the Family Values Morale leader to attack Clinton
And Obama has "Flubbed" his Presidency and we're all the worse for wear. Unless you know all those people who are better off than they were before Obama? Few, very few.
Wait till the general election when these ass-clowns need to appeal to the general electorate. They couldn't even win a PTA election. Newt's baggage will be red meat for the Democrats. At the least they will portray him as a liar and hypocrite for the way he attacked Clinton while doing even worse. They will expect Romney to show his 15% tax returns, explain his off shore Cayman Island investments, and especialy have him verify his 100,000 job creation statement. Right now the Democrats are enjoying the clown show. Just wait till the real electioneering starts.
The GOP is the party of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do. They think they should be able to screw everyone under the Sun but nobody is permitted in their warped worldview to question them or even speak of it whatsoever. They all have no problem telling everyone else how to live righteously yet they all have more skeletons in their closets than everybody else combined. Gonerich leads an attack of unprecedented proportions against a sitting President for having an affair yet nobody is permitted to ask him about his numerous affairs. Typical hypocrite. This guy should be tarred and feathered for being such a scumbag. Then he should be ridden out of town on a rail. Keep ask Gonerich about his affairs and don't ask him anything else. Gingrich attacks Romney all week then blames the elite media for attacking Romney. Let's look at those Gonerich tax returns because I didn't realize he was employed by the elite media. I didn't think the elite media was low enough to higher such a sleaze. Hey GOP: caused any Great Depressions recently? The GOP is the only party in our Nation's long history to cause a Great Depression and they have caused both of the Great Depressions. They should sit down and shut up. We'll ask for your opinion on economic matters if we need it until then, shut it!!!
We need to keep President Obama and vote out the due nothing Republicans
No, we need to kick out all domestic enemies of the USA, all Oath breakers, that includes Obama ("preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution"), and the rest in the legislative branch and judicial branch who have not done as we and OUR US Constitution requires of them.
Then prosecute those who actively went against the US Constitution, our country, our way of life.
Republicans stop attacking the poor and middle class and seniors and think about the salary & benefits you have. maybe there is were you should start to cut.
can you say its fair to pay less than 15% went you make $365000.00 in speaking fee
53% supports 100%, and that's fair? $54,750 in paid Fed. Income taxes is more than most Americans pay in there entire life!
Dahly, not working americans. But you did say most americans, which means people that you know.
Yes, working Americans. Only 53% pay federal income tax after filing.
Romney is the perfect Mr. 1%
The Republicans could not pick a more perfect personfication of their party to represent who they really are.
Joe,
If you referring to Romney's building a successful business from the ground up, I would say you are right. Republicans want to expand opportunities for everyone so that many, many more people can become successful.
Are you against success?
No I'm against the rigging of the game so Republicans can collect Trickle Up economics and become richer, while teachers and hard working Americans lose their homes.
It's called a level playing field, here's a brain buster for you?
If the Top 10 % of earners Own 90 % of the money, they should pay what percent?
A) 70 % of the taxes
B) 15 % in taxes (which is what MR. Romney pays, less than me I might add)
C) No taxes he rich shouldn't have to pay taxes
D) 90 % (If they own 90 percent of the money they should pay 90% of the taxes)
Okay, now that you have bashed the republican canidates on their misquotes, and supposed lies, lets see how fair you are on your editorials. We want you to write an article on obamas misquotes and lies. We don't see any of that in print. WHY? Is that fair ? Don't people have a right to know the rights and wrongs of both sides? Is obama off limits to the press? Are you not telling the people all the facts? Do you not want them to know? Doesn't seem like the press believes in true democracy, where both sides of a story are told! Unless you view obama as a god, then get off your one sided horse, and print the WHOLE TRUTH!!! Thank you!
These are not 'FLUBS'
The repugnicrites would rather lie than tell the truth because their sheeple repugnobots will believe any lie fed to them by the 'message machine' put in place to do so. .
well, given that obama has already locked up the dem nomination, he isn't news like the GOP candidates are, so expecting "equal coverage" is silly at this point.
Now, if obama misquotes in a debate during the general election and the press ignores it, then post here again
I do find it amusing that newt, the self-proclaimed "history consultant", completely screwed up, in a partisan way, the stats about unemployment under carter and reagan. lol.
and by the way, msnbc does cover flubs by obama, for example: "
FACT CHECK: Obama claims miss some evidence"
There are TONS of reports on Obama's misquotes, campaign miscues, unkept promises, associations, myths, ministers, heritage and citizenship. Have you missed all that reporting by the press?
It's interesting how the right claims unfairness when they have much more vicious and personal attacks about Obama than most liberal or non-biased news sources have about the entire Republican field combined.
....To be fair, that's with Bachman out of the race. She would be only person attacked as much as Obama.
Veteran44 --- Doesn't it strike you as dishonorable when Paul & the others lie about the President of the United States slashing the VA when all the time it's been conservatives?
http://www.disabledveterans.org/2011/07/18/obama-republicans-seek-23-billion-disability-pay-cut/