General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFACT CHECK: Gingrich flubs history in GOP debate
WASHINGTON (AP) Newt Gingrich called rival Mitt Romney a "terrible historian" but flubbed his own history in Congress on Monday night when he claimed the nation ran four consecutive budget surpluses during his time as House speaker. Romney attacked Gingrich's financial links to Freddie Mac while ignoring his own.
The accusations were fast out of the gate in the latest Republican presidential debate, and reality got tromped in the process.
A look at some of claims and how they compare with the facts:
___
GINGRICH: "When I was speaker, we had four consecutive balanced budgets."
THE FACTS: Actually, two.
The four straight years of budget surpluses were 1998 through 2001. Gingrich left Congress in 1999, so he only had a hand in surpluses for his last two years. The budget ran deficits for his first two years as speaker.
The highest surplus of that four-year string came in budget year 2000, after Gingrich was out of office.
Overall, the national debt went up during the four years Gingrich was speaker. In January 1995, when he assumed the leadership
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-gingrich-flubs-history-gop-debate-030803027.htmlposition, the gross national debt was $4.8 trillion. When he left four years later, it was $5.6 trillion, an increase of $800 billion.
MADem
(135,425 posts)He tried to claim that his "I report to a lobbyist" job was "historical" in nature.
Oh, Speaker, please! We were not born last night!
I'd love to have a job that pays three hundred grand a year for doing "historical research." I'll bet someone who is an actual HISTORIAN would love such a job, too!
bulloney
(4,113 posts)and his knuckle-dragging base thinks he's some kind of a genius.
If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit, right Newt?
CTyankee
(63,900 posts)I was THERE when those surpluses emerged. I remember the fight with Clinton. The pukes were proved wrong!
Historical revisionism, pure and simple...I wish more people would call them on it...