i think it's hilarious. that's the new groove for all the kids at the club. >> it's like that cat that plays the piano. you know that song? >> that's a cat playing a piano? >> yeah, that's another video. tonight, what do abortion, gay dating and sarah pap lynn have to do with the biggest sporting event of the year. why critics are crying foul over super bowl ads that tackle two of the most controversial subjects ever. plus the fate of ten americans accused of child trafficking in haiti. were they trying to rescue or kidnap youngsters? then, michael jackson's

children, the private prince and paris step into the grammys spotlight, next on "larry king live." good evening. the super bowl isn't just about football anymore. it's about the ads. two of them submitted for air generated a lot of controversy. one for a gay dating website was rejected by cbs. you will not see it during the game on sunday. you will see it right here. in fact, you'll see it right now. watch it. >> touchdown! >> come on. >> that's what i'm talking about, baby. you suck! that's right. ♪ i want to kiss this guy i really really really want to kiss this guy ♪

>> larry: funny. okay. we're going to meet in a couple of minutes dominic freeson and best-selling author and critic of it. first to donnie deutsch, chairman of deutsch, inc, multibillion dollar marketing company. what do you make of the mancrunch.com ad? >> they've already won. the bottom line is there's a whole strategy. there was a lot of talk to not have the money to afford to run it in the super bowl. the owner will talk about this afterwards. they've already gotten tens and tens of millions of dollars of publicity for this brand. they've won whether this runs or not. the big issue we get into right now, is the super bowl a place for advocacy messages? you have the tim tebow ad, which is a pro-life ad. they're tippy toeing around it, they're not saying anti-abortion in the ad. his mother comes on and says doctors told me i shouldn't have this baby. >> larry: we're going to have that. >> so i think you get into this issue, is this the platform where somebody has to turn to their 6-year-old and either

explain why two men are kissing or explain why a woman could or couldn't have a baby or explain what a four-hour erection is in a levitra ad. so, you know, it's a slippery slope no matter where you come out on the issues. >> larry: if mancrunch.com were your account, would you have bought that ad for the super bowl? >> it's probably not the most effective way to use the dollars. having said that, it was a brilliant strategy. this guy is getting untold publicity because of it. it's not going to run but you won. he spent zero and is getting dollars. from a media point of view, pretty smart move. >> larry: donny, you hang with us. let's meet dominic, co-creator for mancrunch.com, bills itself an an internet service connecting men with other men and dennis fraeger, nationally syndicated host and author. cbs issued a statement about its

rejection and said after reviewing the ad, which is entirely commercial in nature, our standards and practices department decided not to accept this particular spot. as always, we are open to working with the client on alternative submissions. did you expect them to accept it, dennis -- i'm sorry, dominic? >> in all honesty, larry, when we came up with the idea for the ad, we produced it very conservatively. we honestly expected to get it on the air. >> larry: you did? >> we did not think -- the ad is fairly harmless when you look at it. yes -- well -- >> larry: is it clear that it represents a dating service for gays? >> yes. >> larry: it does? >> yes. >> larry: you object to it, dennis? >> the truth of the matter is that i don't think advocacy ads do belong on the super bowl, whether i agree or don't agree. >> larry: to the right-to-life you would object to? >> that's right, even though i believe deeply that there is a human being in a woman's womb, yeah.

i think that there ought to be a place in society, like sports, where you can actually just watch the game and not be confronted with the great issues of the day. there needs to be a respite from this stuff. >> larry: how about first amendment? >> first amendment doesn't apply because it's not government censorship. they have the perfect right to take whatever ads they want. having said that, there are secondary objections specifically to the gay ad as presented. i don't want either side. there are two issues. >> dennis, are we getting into -- this is an area i'm usually black and white on stuff. this is gray for me. we get into a slippery slope and say i don't want my kid seeing paris hilton in a bikini eating a hamburger, dripping all over her in what seems to be a semi-pornographic way. who is to say what's right or wrong? that's the tough thing here. you and i probably wouldn't agree on a lot. part of me wants to say just sports, leave it alone also, but yet we get into a slippery slope here. who is to draw the line and say

what's appropriate and what's not? it's a tough one. >> larry: why did you pick the super bowl, dominick? >> timing for us. >> larry: $2 million it costs you. >> well, it cost $100,000 to produce the ad and $2.6 to put it on the air and we provided full financial records. >> larry: you had the money. >> you have the money? >> funds to pay for the ad. >> why the super bowl? >> we launched a few weeks ago and timing wise, it fit into our marketing plan and we are trying to reach a male audience and that's 90 million viewers are primarily male. >> dennis, let me ask you something. >> go ahead, dominic -- donnie, dominic and dennis, i'm going nuts. >> i'm sorry. dominic, from a media point of view -- once again i preface this by saying it was a brilliant move. you got the press. but it's hard to argue it makes sense to reach a very targeted audience, gay males in america by advertising to this mass audience. you can't say with a straight face that was a smart media buy, can you? >> actually, it was. we're not going to buy into your stereotypes either.

>> i'm talking about target marketing, it's nothing to do with stereotypes. >> we felt it was very wise. the return for investment was actually very wise, we felt, when we looked at it overall. >> larry: large -- part of a large audience? dennis, you found the ad objectionable? >> that's the second issue. i don't want any advocacy ads and specifically to this one. i would not like to have an ad with a woman jumping on to a guy and having such an intimate embrace like that. i would hold it for both heterosexual and homosexual ads. having said that, i want to be intellectually honest. there's the additional factor of parents then would have to talk to their kids about homosexuality and may not want to talk to their 8-year-old who is watching the game about homosexuality, whatever their view. there has to be a safe place for kids in america. if the super bowl isn't, it's a shame.

>> larry: did mancrunch kind of hit the pr jackpot, though? they're getting more attention than if they had run it. we'll be right back. ( clicking ) ( laughs, click ) when you hear a click, ( clicking ) you know it's closed and secure. that's why hefty food bags click closed. hefty! hefty! hefty! so you know you've helped lock in freshness and lock out air... to help prevent freezer burn. be sure it's secure with hefty food bags. just one click and you know it's closed. hefty! hefty! hefty! ( click, click, click ) eggland's best eggs. the best in nutrition... just got better. even better nutrition -- high in vitamins d, e, and b12. a good source of vitamin a and b2. plus omega 3's. and, 25% less saturated fat than ordinary eggs. but there's one important ingredient that hasn't changed:

better taste. better taste. better taste. yum! [ female announcer ] eggland's best. better taste -- and now even better nutrition -- make the better egg.

by the way, there might be a double standard here, but maybe not because a girl on girl kiss was rejected by a network for the 2003 super bowl. it was a miller lite ad that ended with two girls kissing each other. relating to gays and you agree they have the right to have the standards? >> yes.

>> larry: is donnie right, though, that this commercial, they get more attention not being accepted? >> look, as i was saying to dominic off the air, whether or not it was intended, it was a stroke of genius. i recited to dominic the motto of his gay dating service. that's how effective that ad is. >> is there an announcement you would like to make here? is that what you're getting at? >> larry: you will admit, dominic, you're getting a lot of play. >> we are, and we are generating a lot of traffic. but, you know, the real issue is we were faced with discrimination by the network, they lied to us about the availability about ads based for sale, told us for two weeks it was not available when it was. they refused to provide feedback on the actual commercial spot submitted and just not returning phone calls. friday after getting the rejection we asked for the recommendations to make it meet network standards to actually broadcast this weekend and

they're not providing them. >> larry: also, dennis, rejected in 2004, an advocacy ad from the united church of christ which highlighted the church's welcoming stance toward gays and others who might feel rejected by more conservative churches. a pretty thin line, seemed like a modest ad. >> the question was raised where do they draw the line? there's no perfect answer to this. as i said, i think if they get enough ads, they should stick to the usual beer commercials and the usual whatever other commercials they have. again, i just hate repeating myself. there's got to be a safe place. if football isn't safe for having the whole family and little kids watch, then it's a real loss to this society. >> larry: donnie, there are people that resent beer commercials. >> what's interesting, dennis, i -- once again this is such a gray area. we look at that and say, yes, it's safe and i don't necessarily want to have to explain it to my kids. let's say you've got two guys in

a same-sex marriage watching with their kid. to them, that is safe. so, it still is a slippery slope. i hear what you're saying. as a parent i don't want to get into any of these issues with my kids but this is a rubik's cube. there's no way to draw a hard line and in theory go, let's make this a safe place. everybody's definition of safe is different. and therein lies the problem. >> not everybody's. if you took a measurement of the audience of super bowl, i think that most people, vast majority would agree that this is not a safe ad. >> let me ask you a question. >> well, this is free market. that really has to determine. >> let me ask you a question. interracial couple talking about having a baby and having fertility issues? is that okay? that's a very real, everyday problem. >> i welcome it. >> that's you. maybe somebody else wouldn't, though. >> you're right. it doesn't matter. >> that's the issue here. >> you're right. >> who draws that box? >> cbs.

cbs does, because that's what the free market allows. >> you're right. but it's a tough one. it's a tough one. >> larry: you could go nuts, right, reject cereal ads on the basis of sugar, it's bad for kids. you could go nuts. >> you can. >> larry: and have no ads. >> but that will be true for anything. you'll have no ads. you're right. the beer ads probably offend teetotale teetotalers. you're right. >> larry: obviously well financed for a start-up organization to have gays meet gays. >> absolutely. we do have our investors, we're very smart. we have a very strategic marketing plan and it has been very successful. >> larry: cbs said they would discuss with you changing the ad. have you discussed the possibility of a different ad? >> they came out and made several statements in the media that they would work with us collectively to -- >> larry: have they? >> absolutely not. >> larry: have you submitted another ad? >> we have not. we offered to reproduce it per their recommendations and they have failed to provide them. we wanted to put an ad on the air. >> larry: do you think they would have accepted it if it was

just holding hands, if the two met and just held hands? >> we were very conservative. there is no kissing. we knew that they would be objectionable if you saw them kiss on the lips. >> lip kissing, but there is kissing. >> we took a very conservative approach. >> what was the nonconservative approach? >> that's right. >> what was the extra -- >> to the extent that you can say on cnn, what was the nonconservative ad exactly going to be? >> larry: if you ran cbs' -- whatever division decides this, would you have taken it? >> i probably would not have. i think they made the right call as a business, capitalistic enterprise. they're going to offend a small majority of the audience. they had a fiduciary responsibility. i think it would have taken up too much attention. it's a discussion for a bigger day but they made the right call. >> larry: are you getting a lot of calls now? are a lot of men wanting to meet men just based on this controversy?

>> we generate a lot of traffic, 50,000 new subscribers in the past week. >> larry: in one week, 50,000? >> we're getting support from all people. >> larry: what fee do you charge? >> right now it's free for anyone to sign up because we just launched we're building this base, it's free right now. >> larry: donnie, good seeing you again. >> great seeing you. >> larry: good luck. brilliant move, dominic, whatever -- and dennis, you acknowledged that. >> yep. >> larry: what's a pro-life ad doing on the super bowl? we'll ask the group paying for it. that's in 60 seconds. national car rental knows i'm a guy who...

doesn't like to be held back. they let me break past the counter... and choose any car in the aisle. unreal! oh yeah! whoaaa-- ( alarm sounding ) i'm sorry. you okay? my bad, mr. sapp. oh yeah. go national. go like a pro.

>> larry: another controversial super bowl ad will see the light of day on sunday, pro-life spot featuring florida garret star quarterback tim tebow and his mother, pam, discusses her risky pregnancy 23 years ago. she carried tim to term against medical advice. we have not yet -- they've not yet released the ad to show it before sunday. we're joined by jim daley, president and ceo of focus on the family. focus on the family is sponsoring the ad. terry o'neill is here, president of now, the national organization for women. jim, how did you come up with the idea to do this and to pay all that money to put it on the super bowl? >> well, larry, it started in early november. one of the gentlemen that works at focus in the film department suggested an idea for the ad on the pam tebow story. when he told me, i said that sounds good enough to be on the super bowl. that was really the genesis of it. it was paid for just a handful of friends who are supporters of focus on family. they said that is such a good

idea we'll cover it. it didn't come out of the general fund here at focus. it's going to be a great ad. >>. >> larry: it does not attack roe vs. wade? >> not at all. it's not even political. it's an upbeat, inspirational ad that celebrates family and celebrates life. we've just not said anything about it. a lot of others have made this more political than it needs to be. >> larry: terry, i know n.o.w. is against it. sarah palin suggests your opposition is due -- is at odds with your organization's desire to empower women. what do you say to that? >> that's just not the case, larry. that ad -- i was really surprised to hear that cbs was going to put an ad that actually advocates against women having abortion rights on air.

it's a controversial ad, focus on the family has an agenda of overturning roe versus wade and that, alone, makes the ad controversial. it's absolutely wonderful we can all celebrate that pam tebow was able to make the decision for herself about her own health and about her own future and her own family. but another woman in the very same situation focus on the family would not be celebrating another woman making a different choice. and the national organization for women wants the law to continue to respect women's ability to make those decisions for themselves. >> larry: cbs issued a statement last week regarding its acceptance of the focus on the family ad. it says we have, for some time, moderated our approach to advocacy submissions after it became apparent that our stance did not reflect public sentiment or industry norms on the issue. in fact, most media outlets have accepted advocacy ads for some time. at cbs, our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a process that ensures all ads on all sides of an issue are appropriate for air. jim, did you think maybe they wouldn't take it?

>> well, we thought there could be that chance, but when we worked with them -- cbs has been good but they've been tough. we didn't get all the language we wanted. and i think i can understand the previous segment why they didn't pass that ad. we simply wanted to say -- i'll give you an example. we wanted to say two things that both pam and tim's life were at risk. they said no, we don't want you to say that. so we're down to very simple, 30-second comment. and, again, i understand terry's concern. what we want to do is lift up the other side of the equation. there is an awful lot of energy that's given to the abortion side of this debate. very rarely do we say, hey, let's celebrate a woman who has chosen life for her child. that's what we're trying to do here. >> larry: terry, you feel abortion -- pro-choice doesn't need an ad, since it is the law? >> well, the truth is, if i had $2.5 million, i wouldn't give it

to cbs. i would be using it to advocate equality for women. it's just not the case that the anti-abortion rights side doesn't get enough air time. in fact, roe vs. wade is under attack actually right now, larry, more than it has been in decades. we are very concerned about it. we're concerned about continuing efforts, particularly on organizations like focus on the family. it is quite extreme in its desire to -- i think the quote was make abortion illegal and unthinkable. for focus on the family to be claiming they're making this nonpolitical ad, i think, is really not believable. >> larry: let jim pick up on that. by the way, jim has written a blog exclusive for us. go to cnn.com/larryking. tell us what you think about it. when we come back, we'll ask him if the ad is worth all the money. don't go away. and i was wondering if i could say hi to the doctor. is he in? he's in copenhagen. oh, well, that's nice. but you can still see him! you just said he was in... copenhagen. come on! that's pretty far. doc, look who's in town.

ellen! copenhagen? cool, right? vacation. but still seeing patients. oh. [ whispering ] workaholic. i heard that. she said it. i... [ female announcer ] the new office. see it. live it. share it. on the human network. cisco. only $100. but am i wearing them now? hello. i'm wearing my older sister's jeans that she ruined with bbq sauce... or so i thought. see, my mom washed them with this tide stain release in-wash booster stuff. she's all, "you use it with your detergent to help get stains out the first time." are you kidding me? so now the stains are magically gone. and my sister passes on her jeans to me. what a life. [ female announcer ] get your three dollar coupon at tidestainrelease.com today.

( sneeze ) transform drinks you want, into cold medicine you need. introducing fast crystal packs. a new way from alka-seltzer plus to... get cold and flu relief in a taste-free, fizz-free powder. alka-seltzer plus.

>> larry: jim daly, the purpose of ads are to create a desire for a product or something or create an interest in something. my guess would be 99% of americans know where they stand on pro-choice. what do you hope this commercial to do? >> i think primarily give a little oxygen to the decision for life. you know, it's an inspirational, pro-family message. that's what we're trying to do here, just provide women another thought that often they don't hear much about. and that is give your child life. and i think that's a good thing. i would hope that terry and others would say what pam tebow did was very courageous.

now as the national organization of women, stand with pam tebow saying, wow, that was brave? >> larry: terry, why not? >> that's exactly what we do. we also say women who affirm their lives by choosing to terminate a pregnancy are also being brave and that is something that it's a shame, jim, you can't see that women around the country are making these decisions every single day and it's their decision. you know, one-third of women have abortions in this country. those women deserve to be treated with exactly the same amount of respect as we give to women who choose not to terminate a pregnancy. i just don't understand why we would, on super bowl sunday, during a game -- i mean, if i -- if my daughter were 16, i would not want to have that ad during the super bowl and have to have that conversation with her at a time we're supposed to be coming together and watching a football game. we can have these conversations later. and i think the super bowl is

not the time to do it. you know, larry, you said earlier that cbs is definitely going to run this ad. i am still hopeful they'll pull the ad. it's the right thing to do. >> hey, terry -- >> larry: jim, have they taken the money? >> oh, yeah. that's all done. cbs has reaffirmed all through the week they're going with it. terry, i'll make you this offer. when you see the ad in the super bowl, if you don't like it, i'll buy you lunch. if you like it, you can buy me lunch. i think people are going to like this ad. it's not controversial. your 8-year-old or your 9-year-old, you can sit there and watch this ad with her. and it's not going to raise that kind of issue. >> jim, if i don't like the ad how about you change your agenda to making abortion illegal and start working with me to make things better for all women in the country? >> larry: terry, do you fear that pro-choice people are going to watch this ad and suddenly be right-to-lifers? do you fear that? >> no. do you know what i really think? i think a lot of people will watch this and say, boy, that's -- there's an undertone here of

that anyone who makes a choice different from the decision that pam tebow made, the undertone there is that woman should feel ashamed or that she is not as good as pam, who made her decision. i think it's a shame to impose that on women around the country. >> larry, you know what? can i just say, i'm the only one here that has seen the ad. and i'll just say that i think everyone will appreciate the ad. we respect every woman. that's not the point. and i think so often this debate is just boiled down to arguments. when president barack obama and hillary clinton and others say how do we make abortion rare, i would like to meet with terry at the table and say let's start the discussion. focus is a pro-life group. we are a christian organization. we're not ashamed of that. let's talk about the million children that are killed every year. can we do better as a nation? that's my point. planned parenthood, of course,

they're going to -- >> larry: jim, maybe -- >> they're making money off of this. planned parenthood are making money off abortion. >> come on, jim. >> aren't they? >> focus on the family is one of the most extreme anti-abortion groups around there and you fund these crisis pregnancy centers that have been shown. there's a report out of congress, henry waxman's committee issued a report on crisis pregnancy centers using false and deceptive practices in their efforts simply to convince women no matter what was good for the woman, to continue a pregnancy because focus on the family thinks that's the right thing to do. >> larry: jim, do you know where the ad is going to be placed? >> i do. first quarter, very early. so, be watching. >> larry: first quarter early, that's good to know. they did tell you? >> can i respond, larry? >> larry: yeah, but quickly. do you know when in the first quarter? >> no. >> larry: you don't. go ahead. >> on this issue of false sonograms and working with pregnancy resource centers,

focus on family, we placed 400 ultrasound machines and saved an estimated 73,000 babies through that effort. that's a good thing. let's celebrate that. these clinics are not mischief makers. what we're finding is that women who get counseling and get an ultrasound, actually 70% of abortion-minded women change their mind. that's a good thing not a bad thing. >> well, you know now -- >> larry: we're out of time. thanks, terry. >> thank you, larry. >> larry: terry o'neill and jim daly we'll do more on this because it's an important topic. mother controversy on the tax can you teuts, deficits, unt issues. that directly affects all of us. we're just getting started. stay around. as is something else. a shipment of natural sea salt from cargill, essential for preserving the catch. we deliver the salt on precise schedules

and ship it efficiently all along the alaskan coast. saving the fishermen money and their catch. this is how cargill works with customers. for strong bones, i take calcium. but my doctor told me that most calcium supplements... aren't absorbed properly unless taken with food. he recommended citracal. it's different -- it's calcium citrate, so it can be absorbed with or without food. citracal.

two very talented, smart people are going to go at it now. andrea tantaros, conservative editor and columnist and james carver, democratic strategist. before we get into more urgent or topical political matters, what were your thoughts on what we were just talking about? andrea, what do you make of that ad and the refusal of the ad before it? >> look, i think this is a free country and focus on the family has a right, thank god, to air

an ad like this. i think we heard from focus on the family firsthand, the only one who has seen the ad, that this is a positive story about life and to the women's groups, the national organization for women is a misnomer. it's a national organization for abortion, and this woman, mrs. tebow, made a choice. it's just this national organization for women didn't like her choice. so, i think we should celebrate life. i think this is a great ad and we should all watch it and see it and be happy that in this country we still have a choice. and this one was life. >> larry: james? >> the national organization of women in a free country, would you afford them the chance to buy an ad on cbs also? >> sure, why not? it's a free country. you advocate for free speech, don't you? >> yeah, again, i don't -- again. >> they don't have the money to do it. >> if they pay the money, tim tebow, i don't really have a problem with running the ad either.

but once cbs -- that's fine. once cbs opened its door, there will be advocacy groups paying for ads. that's fine. >> larry: andrea, what do you make about the gay internet dating service being denied an ad? >> if there's one thing we can all agree on, on this panel, is free speech. james, i've heard you argue for it many times and i think that we have that right in this country. focus on the family just happens to have the money to do it and i'm glad that they can do it. >> larry: so did the gay internet dating service. why couldn't they get their free speech on? >> that's cbs' issue, private industry where businesses and networks can make their own decisions. hopefully, that doesn't change either. >> i don't quite understand. you're saying that focus on the family, it's a free country, they ought to be able to have the ad. but that the gay dating service shouldn't. >> i never said the gay dating service shouldn't.

i never said the gay dating service shouldn't. >> we're in agreement then. vigorous agreement here. >> if they want to buy an ad on network tv, great. but, listen, james, the issue here is that cbs is a private company that can make that decision and that plays -- >> so a network -- >> free enterprise, free business. >> so, if another network wanted to put a n.o.w. ad on but didn't want to put a focus on the family ad, you would be fine, saying that's a network, they can do what they want? >> the only entity the obama administration hasn't taken over yet. i guess it's their choice. >> i'm vexed. if the network said -- you're perfectly comfortable if nbc said we'll run an ad for n.o.w. but not for focus on the family? >> as much as my personal beliefs wouldn't advocate for that, i am in favor of a network being able to make that decision. >> good. >> larry: that's pretty clear. let's move to other things.

obama unveiled a $3.8 trillion budget plan today. here is what he had to say about tax cuts. >> i proposed a fee on big banks to pay back taxpayers for the bailout. we're reforming the way contracts are awarded to save taxpayers billions of dollars and while we extend middle class tax cuts in this budget we won't continue tax cuts for oil companies, investment funds managers and nothose making ove $250,000 a year. we just can't afford it. >> larry: james, what do you make of the idea of middle class tax cuts but $250,000 and up, you don't get a break? >> well, i think it makes a lot of sense. we had the most prosperous years we ever had as a country when president clinton introduced his fiscally responsible plan in 1993. middle class people, when they get a tax cut, they'll go out and spend it.

that's what we need because there's a lack of demand in this economy. to me, it makes all the sense in the world. >> larry: andrea? >> are you telling me clinton would have run deficits like this? >> no, no, bush caused these deficits. this man is trying to deal with a recession. i think you don't understand, see. >> no, i understand. >> he took office in 2008. >> andrea, let him finish. >> i'm just saying it wasn't -- clinton cleaned up another republican president's deficit. obama is trying to get started to clean up the last republican deficit. that's what happens. he took office in 2008. >> so he wouldn't? bill clinton, to my point, would not run deficits like barack obama is running? >> of course he would have to run deficits right now. you're not saying he should cut spending in the middle of a recession, are you? >> because under this budget, james, barack obama is tripling the debt under george w. bush, barack obama campaigned against balancing the budget. no, no, no, no. let me finish. he campaigned against balancing

the budget, did he or did he not? and what barack obama is doing, even by repealing the bush tax cuts he can only bring the deficit down to $700 billion with all this unsustainable spending and growth. barack obama talks about how he cannot sustain on the bush deficits. he has tripled the debt and increased the deficit. that makes no sense. >> according to the cbo, 84% of the nonrecession debt is attributable to bush. 16 to obama. he is having to spend money to try to get us out of a recession that started in december 2007, 14 months before he took office. i mean, that's just what the facts are. most of -- a good part of it is just caused by the bush recession. >> larry: let me get a break. i got to get a break. >> obviously, middle class people need a tax cut more than rich people. >> larry: we'll be right back. hold it. by the way, director james

cameron and his team that created "avatar" will be here wednesday, answering your questions. submit them now at cnn.com/larryking or tweet me at king's things, anything you want to know about the most successful financial movie ever made, just let us know. if i had to sit on a bench during the middle of a game due to diabetes it would frustrate me. in a basketball game a couple minutes could mean a big momentum shift. my bayer meter is very important. (announcer) only bayer's contour meter has programmable personal high low settings. it allows me to be able to look at my highs and lows to make sure that my diabetes is being controlled as tightly as possible. with my bayer meter i don't miss valuable game time. i'm alana burns and staying in the game is my simple win. (announcer) the contour meter, only from bayer.

>> larry: we're back with andrea tantaros and james carville. is he going to get that unemployment rate down, james? is this going to work? >> well, you know, who knows? they'll project something like

9.2% unemployment in 2011, but the first step is they had to get the growth rate up and that seems to be doing a little better. one hopes so, i certainly hope so. >> larry: andrea, what about the jobs plan? >> well, let's see. the jobs plan plays into this budget, which is just more spending. the hope is that we can get that unemployment number down. when james talks about the growth is a little bit up, and we're when you're talking about gdf, these are just onefers. the gdp is often artificially inflated. we go back to this budget that obama is talking about. i want to address something that james said before the break, how the cbo projected he was going to be able to bring these numbers down. that might be true temporarily. when you look at these numbers, even by repealing the bush tax cuts and imposing $2 trillion of new taxes on individuals and these high earners, you still can only get that number to $700 billion and in 2019 it will go back up to $1 trillion. and that is the fact.

i don't see how, if we continue on this course of unsustainable spending we are going to have a run on the dollar, we're going to have record high interest rates. we're going to have inflation. these are all things that we have to get under control and the president is not doing it. >> larry: let james get a word in. >> yeah. certainly, i agree. and that's why he's trying to get a health care bill, cbo said would save like $600 $700 billion and not one single republican voted for it. if they don't do something about these health care costs, i completely agree with this. they're certainly going to have to start addressing a lot of these problems. i think in a long-range sense, this administration is doing it. clearly right now, nobody says we ought to cut back now because this is actually starting to create some action in this economy now, which has been pretty lethargic here of late. they need to do something about this. >> one i would argue that -- >> larry: hold it.

let's talk about another subject in the time allotted. the new senator from massachusetts, scott brown, about to be sworn in around the 19th, subject of a little fun on "saturday night live." watch. don't panic. it's coming. >> i was looking for the bathroom. >> down the hall on right. >> thanks, speaker pelosi. and, let me just say, i'm looking forward to working closely with you. >> closely? >> okay. let's talk economy. with this new spending freeze, job creation is going to be harder than ever. >> nancy, you're the speaker of the house. k knz. >> larry: can he make a big effect, james? one senator have a big effect? >> i think the election had an effect. it kind of woke people up and i think the president actually had his best week in a long time. but, i never denied the fact this election was significant and i think there was a message in there.

and it seems like maybe the white house had a pretty good week this week. once he gets to washington, how much affect can one senator in the minority party have, i don't know. >> larry: put down the tea party angle today, andrea. did that surprise you? >> no, not really. i disagree with james. i think that one senator, especially when the numbers are so close in the senate, can make a difference. larry, in particularly, scott brown, where he can really benefit the gop, is if the gop uses him and mcdonald like they smartly did to give the rebuttal new, fresh faces. the temperature out there is against washington. it's against incumbents. that's why i think brown largely was voted in. so he can make a difference within the party, hopefully, and also can make a difference in the senate because of that very crucial one vote.

>> i think she makes a good point. i think they need to -- i think that's right, to put a fresh face out. this guy seems to have done a pretty good job so far. i don't disagree with -- i think the election was significant, you're right. how much influence a junior senator has in the caucus, she could be right, he may have a lot. that's something i don't know. >> i think james and i would agree -- >> larry: andrea tantaros and james carville. >> good luck to your saints, james. >> larry: americans detained for trying to take haitian children out of the country, children who may have parents. why did they do that? that's whys come with blueprint. free and only for chase customers. with finish it, you can take your balance and decide your monthly payment... or how many months you want to take to pay it off. the faster you pay it off, the more you'll save... and the more progress you'll see every month on your plan. chase what matters. i have my blueprint. do you? start your plan today. chase.com/blueprint.

[ birds screech ] [ loud rumbling ] [ rifle fires ] [ announcer ] if you think about it, this is what makes theladders different... from other job search sites. we only want the big jobs. join theladders.com. a premium job site for only $100k+ jobs... and only $100k+ talent.

wolf blitzer returns from afternoon duties to take overnight duties, sitting in for anderson cooper tonight. what's up tonight, wolf? >> thanks, larry. a lot coming up at the top of the hour. we'll have more on that gripping story. i know you're working on it. stretching from haiti to idaho, a group of american missionaries from idaho currently sitting in jail, but were they trying to help haitian children or trying to steal them? we'll have the latest. plus, president obama right now caught between trying to keep the economy churning to create jobs and adding trillions to an already ballooning national debt. the raw politics are coming up as well. later, he's rich and famous but is sean combs a role model. a revealing interview on "360." larry. >> larry: that's 10:00 eastern and 7:00 pacific with wolf

blitzer tonight. karl penhaul is in port-au-prince, haiti. the 33 children caught up in what haitian authorities allege was a trafficking scheme. the latest on the ten citizens being detained in haiti that took a busload of undocumented haitian children the out of haiti. what's the latest on those ten, karl? >> reporter: well, they're still sitting in jail cells near the airport in port-au-prince. when i talked to them twice over the weekend, they said the conditions were okay but they were treated well by their jailers. they said they didn't have too much to eat nor too much water, but they were trying to keep their spirits up high by reading passages from the bible and singing. they were due to have before a judge today. that didn't happen we understand. they may come before a judge tomorrow, and there's always a possibility the haitian prime minister has left the door open to the fact that these ten american baptists could be sent to the u.s. to face trial,

larry. >> larry: george, first, how are the children doing? there were 33 of them, right? how are they doing, george? >> yes. there are 33 of these children right now close to port-au-prince. they're doing quite well. two days ago when they came to our village, the situation was quite different, but we tried to give them a safe space, a safe haven so they could feel well and that they get their care and their attention to needs. some of them even do get psychological treatment. >> larry: is it true, george, that some of them are not orphans? >> yes, that's absolutely true. i would say around about 20 of them at least are not orphans. they lived with their parents at their parents' home. they were not given from parents to orphanages like sometimes happens in haiti. they lived and stayed together with their parents, and they were taken away from the parents with the hope of going to a

boarding school or summer camp in the dominican republic. >> larry: were you surprised that those people took them, george? were you surprised? >> i do not know anything about the intention of these people, of these ten americans. what i do know is i know about -- we're working all over the world for 60 years, and we know about the needs of children and we do know what it's in the best interest of a child. in the best interest of a child is to stay with his parents and not to be separated from them. this was a clear separation at least of some of the kids from their existing parents and from their homes. >> larry: karl, is it the believe that they acted in haste here? >> well, i think there are a number of elements we have to look at here. yes, from what they described to me, their mission was a very poorly planned mission. they quite clearly in no experience in dealing with orphans nor in handling orphans once they've got them in their grasp, so to speak.

and, in fact, they say that they didn't know where they would get these orphans from until they get a devinely appointed meeting with the haitian pastor at the border point. they said the pastor directed them to where they were going. of course, there's another element to this story. today we were up in a mountain village about an hour's drive out of port-au-prince and there we met the parents of 21 of the 33 children. as george was saying, most of these children do have parents, and the parents that we talked to said that they willingly gave away their children. they said that their families were simply too poor to sustain the children, especially after the quake. they said they gave away their children to the americans. they personally put their kids on the bus because they believed they were going to a brighter future where the kids would have school, where the kids would have a swimming pool and would be able to go to church services

as well, larry. >> larry: karl, these are not like classic traffickers, right? >> it's difficult to see that they are -- that they would fit the profile of classic traffickers. that, of course, is something that the authorities are working on, because it would suggest that no trafficker really fits the profile we might have in our imaginations. overall, all the haitian authorities and ngos say the danger here is that you can't let these kids go out of the country without passports and permission to leave. they could be cash for adoption scandals, but even worse child pornography, child abuse scandals. you can run that risk. >> thanks, karl penhaul and george. prince michael and paris jackson stole the show at the grammys last night. that's next. so i was the guy who was never going to have the heart attack.

i watched what i ate. i worked out. personally, i thought i was invincible. once it happened, i realized it's a different story. i'm on an aspirin regimen now

because i never want to feel that helplessness again. [ male announcer ] aspirin is not appropriate for everyone. so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. i was the guy who was doing everything right. i was wrong. talk to your doctor, and take care of what you have to take care of. [ male announcer ] learn more about protecting your heart at iamproheart.com.

>> larry: the grammys were handed out last night. prince michael and paris accepted a lifetime achievement award on behalf of their late father. here's how it happened. >> thank you. thank you. we are proud to be here to accept this award on behalf of

our father michael jackson. first of all, we'd like to thank god for watching over us for these past seven months and our grandma and grandpa for their love and support. we would also -- we'd also like to thank the fans. our father loved you so much because you were always there for him. our father was always concerned about the planet and humanity, through all his hard work and dedication, he has helped the many charities and donated to all of them. we'd also -- through all his songs, his message was simple. love. we will continue to spread his message and help the world. thank you. we love you, daddy. >> daddy was supposed to be here, daddy was going to perform this year, but he couldn't perform last year. thank you. we love you, daddy.