you buy it here after the market, they're going to close it and then it's going to be down in europe and you're going to get hurt. wait until it opens monday in america. and we get the european price. i'd like to say there's a bull market somewhere, i promise to try to find it for you here on president obama today reminded me of an investment banker selling a deal he doesn't really believe in. the president was hesitant, uncertain and uncomfortable. he was vague about what the scope of an attack on syria would be. will we hear more of this indecisiveness on tuesday night when he's going to address the nation? if the president loses the syrian vote, will it cripple his entire domestic agenda? that includes budgets, debt ceilings, taxes and immigration and obama care. and today's underwhelming jobs report suggests there will be no change in fed policy,

especially in the midst of the syrian situation. the fed can wait and they should wait all those stories and more coming up on "the kudlow report" beginning right now. good evening, everyone. i'm larry kudlow. this is "the kudlow report." first up tonight, president obama wrapped up the g-20 economic summit today where he spent the past two days lobbying for support from european allies to help make his case for military strikes on syria. but the president faces an even tougher diplomatic sell on syria when he returns to washington. steve cedric joins us now from st. petersburg with all the latest. good evening. >> reporter: larry, this was supposed to be a meeting about jobs. it was supposed to be a meeting about growth and economics but we all came here and one issue was dominating. that was syria. right to the last, this was a

contentious issue by president putin on one side and president obama on the other side. the host president putin right to the end of this meeting denied that bashar al assad could be responsible for any sort of chemical attack in a damascus suburb. and in the end, president putin and president obama were pretty vociferous in their stances both claiming they had the majority of delegates backing their view. on the economics front, we saw some form of agreement on tax going forward, on trade and hope for longer-term infrastructure projects to create more jobs. there was also a nod to the federal reserve saying that monetary policy changes need to be carefully calibrated and clearly communicated. that was for the emerging markets who are very concerned with the volatility in their own markets caused by concerns that

the fed may taper very aggressively without communicating fully to the world, let alone the u.s. markets. larry, back to you. >> many thanks, cnbc's steve cedr cedr cedric. appreciate it. one big question that president obama did not answer is whether or not he would bomb syria even if he loses congressional authorization. take a listen. >> in terms of the votes and the process in congress, i knew this was going to be a heavy lift. i said that on saturday when i said we're going to take it to congress. our polling operations are pretty good. i tend to have a pretty good sense of what current popular opinion. >> let's get right to our distinguished guests. former u.s. ambassador to syria ted katuf and mark kimmitt, former secretary of state. ambassador, let me go to you.

i thought as i said in my opening that i thought the president was very hesitant and very indecisive like a banker selling a deal he didn't really believe in. here's what i don't get. he's trying to sell his decisiveness. he says he's not itching for military action. he's not itching for military action. this whole thing is about military action. this whole g-20 meeting, the congressional vote is about military action. i couldn't imagine ronald reagan making a statement like that. would you tell me what good that would do? >> look, larry, i think most objective observers would say this administration has fumbled this issue badly. if they want to bomb syria, they've certainly given a lot of mixed signals. and it's not been good. on the other hand, i think the president would be a fool to say what he's going to do if congress doesn't vote for this because he would be giving a

pass to a lot of congressmen who want to vote for this. plus, he would be telling the syrians that they could rest easy if we didn't go in there. >> okay. i appreciate the ambassador's ambassadorial approach. but general kimmitt, as a distinguished alumni off the defense department, i want to ask you in some sense, shouldn't obama put the fear of god into syria? shouldn't he make it very plain -- and by the way, the same to vladimir putin, who is playing games, saying he's going to come to the aid of syria, whatever that means? maybe you can tell us what that means. what is putin trying to accomplish and was obama way too soft? >> well, i agree with your first point. he needs to put the fear of god into bashar al assad. the fact remains that he's violated the international

sanctions against conventional use. in terms of the military operation, it's got to be very clear to any other potential despot that wants to use chemical weapons that there will be repercussions and penalties for doing that. if we don't send that signal, we might as well accept that chemical weapons are going to be part of the battlefield. >> let me follow up on that spot. putting the fear of god into it saying the united states cannot stand by and let rogue dictators use weapons of mass destruction, in this case, chemical weapons. doesn't he have to say that the penalties and sanctions will be quite substantial? he's never really said that and i think that's hurting him at home and i think it hurt him in st. petersburg and i think it's going to hurt him in congress unless he changes his tune this coming week. >> i think that's right. but what's most important is not what he says but what he does. and as you said, whether or not he's going to go ahead with the

military operations with or without congressional endorsement. when those military operations go into place, are they going to be strong enough, decisive enough to achieve the goals he set out, to punish bashar al assad, to deter future use of chemical weapons and to degrade the syrian military. i certainly hope the u.s. military has a potent plan that they're going to be executing on the president's orders. >> i want to come back to that very important point here. but i want to get mr. kattouf back into this. this is a political question, sir. i understand that. do you think it's possible, seriously, that the president would go it alone, he loses the vote in congress and still goes ahead with a bombing mission. maybe it's a semi bombing mission but do you think the president could actually do that. go to congress, get a no and go out and do what you want anyway? >> i would hope he wouldn't do that. and i don't know why he went to congress if he was planning to do it anyway.

makes no sense whatsoever. he could end up with the senate going along and the house rejecting it. that would be an interesting scenario. but, no, we don't know what he'll do at this point. but i certainly think would be a mistake on his part going ahead having gone to congress on this. >> the mere fact that a week ago everybody thought we were going to start bombing. it was really friday night on this show and then saturday morning on the radio, they were talking about the president's statement at 1:15. it's hard to believe that that whole week has gone by with nothing specific accept congressional authorization that nobody believes, including himself, that he really needs. mr. kattouf, as a former ambassador to syria, what kind of signal does that send to the ordinary syrian person on the street? what does that tell them? >> look, i think right now it may be true that this president is viewed in the middle east as weak by a lot of people.

that perception could change very quickly if, as general kimmitt said, he would act with real force and inflict some substantial damage on the syrian military, particularly those elements -- whether it be equipment or communication nodes that had anything thoo do or cod have anything to do with delivering chemical weapons. if he get the go-ahead at this point, he better make a general statement. >> i don't expect him to lay out the game plan. i don't expect the joint chiefs to tell everybody what's going to happen. but jim cramer has basically done this, okay? the president has not done this. we're going to take out your air force, we're going to take out your airfields, cripple your command and control centers, take down some of your military buildings, things of that sort. in other words, put enough fear into them so they say the

seriousness of this because this business about a shot across the bow, nobody knows what that means. >> i think that's right. but i don't necessarily think that the president ought to be out there announcing the target list to his potential adversary. i like the way the president's handled the specific targeting of this. there have been enough people on television to know the target lists. we don't necessarily need the president doing that. it will be as important as you said earlier what he says next tuesday, what he tells the american people and what he tells the people of syria and even as important as that will be the actual targets taken out as part of that attack. >> it troubled me -- i'm sure you're right, sir. it just troubled me that at the very beginning of this process, he said that he would not cripple the military, this would not be about regime change. i think personally those were very bad signals, those were mistakes. 9 he should never have gone there and i think it's hurt him and his credibility in the

congress as a commander in chief that a lot of republican congressmen are going to vote against this. ambassador, let me ask you this, iran, iran made a lot of noise the last 24 hours about something called retaliation, if we go into syria. and if you take iran, they're going to go into iraq as a possibility and of course if you take iran, they may have it out with israel. how do you read that situation? >> i don't think iran is going to do anything of great import. terrorist operations some time down the road are always possible, whether it's iran and hezbollah which work closelying to, et cetera. but i think there's a lot of bluster out there. bashar al assad is certainly full of bluster. he never did anything to the israelis after four separate attacks on syria by israeli missiles and the like. and he's probably not going to

do anything no matter what the u.s. does unless we come directly after some of his senior people because he doesn't need that right now. he's in the fight of his life with the opposition and he doesn't want to provoke us further. >> all right. we'll leave it there. thank you, gentlemen. i appreciate your views. now, folks, stocks are getting rocked by everything from syria to interest rates to an anemic jobs report. how do you defense your portfolio? how do you possibly guard against all this? and did you know that america is beginning to produce more babies again? how about that? this is a great story for moms and dads and the economy. and don't forget, more babies equal more growth. "the kudlow report" begins right now.

nascar is ab.out excitement but tracking all the action and hearing everything from our marketing partners, the media and millions of fans on social media can be a challenge. that's why we partnered with hp to build the new nascar fan and media engagement center. hp's technology helps us turn millions of tweets, posts and stories into real-time business insights that help nascar win with our fans.

because what you dont know can hurt you.urance, what if you didn't know that it's smart to replace washing-machine hoses every five years? what if you didn't know that you might need extra coverage for more expensive items? and what if you didn't know that teen drivers are four times more likely to get into an accident? 'sup the more you know, the better you can plan for what's ahead. talk to farmers and get smarter about your insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum - pa - dum, bum - bum - bum -bum ♪

investors getting a dose of whiplash in today's trading session. august jobs data disappointed big-time and markets soared as they prayed for easy money. then, however, syria worries crept in and stocks plunged as vladimir putin vowed to help bashar al assad. how can an investor play this?

that's the question. let's bring in phil orlando and stifel nicolaus market strategist, kevin. kevin, the leadership of the houses are going to hold the votes because they don't have the votes. may be here or two weeks, maybe three weeks. what is an investor to do? serious question? >> what you have to do is think about where you are in the cycle. one of the things is the market is up 15% for the year with earnings underneath up only 3%. we come into this situation where you have syria and other issues that create uncertainty, go through the portfolio and make sure you have things in there that are going to hold up. >> defense? >> yeah, play a little defense. >> do you go to cash, too? >> in the portfolios we manage at stifel, we have some.

>> give me a defense play? >> a defense would be something able to hold up that is tied to consumer trend. consumer staples have underperformed for a while. look there. some of the better-quality utilities, some dividend-paying stocks that are going to be able to continue to pay dividends if they come under pressure. the question at the end of the day is if the stock comes under pressure for a superfluous reason, short-term reason not tied to their business, you want to know that other market participants want to own that stock and will buy it from you. >> phil, i want to see if you agree with that. vladimir putin may be extraneous and may have nothing to do with interest rates and nothing to do with profits and nothing to do with the federal reserve. but he is vladimir putin and he scared the daylights out of the stock market today which had originally rallied. this guy putin is going to be around for a while as the syrian conversation is around for a while.

do you agree with what kevin said? do you go defense or do something else? >> kevin made some great points and putin put the fear of god into the markets today. we shared some similar concerns as kevin. back in july with the s&p 500 pushing up to that 1,700 level, we pulled back our equity allocation from about 85% to 75% in our balanced funds for the same reason. we were concerned about the middle east, concerned about monetary policy and fiscal policy issues in washington over the next couple of months and we felt the prospect of a pullback in the market from, let's say, 1,700 to 1,600 over the course of a three-month period was a very real possibility. >> let me ask you, i'm your customer. i want some good advice. i believe as your customer that somehow obama's going to get a positive vote and smoup he's going to bomb syria and somehow that bombing of syria is going

to be much tougher than armchair analysts like myself think, and that it's going to go on for a while. and what happens after usa bombs syria and takes out all these things and then they retaliate? we don't know that syria won't retaliate. we don't know russia won't retaliate. we don't know the crazies in iran won't retaliate. and we don't know how israel is going to react. they must protect itself. in other words, we just don't know, phil orlando. and we just may not know for months and months. what happens? what do you say? >> that's a perfectly valid point, larry. there are known and there are known unknowns. right now, we're in a murky area where we don't know what the congressional vote is going to be and we don't know what our adversaries are going to do in response. at this point, we've lightened things up, we're waiting for a pullback. probably midway through that. and we'll evaluate where we are

when we get there based upon the best information we have over the course of the next couple of months. >> kevin, i don't think the federal reserve is going to take any action on the 17th and 18th. they're going to cease and desist for a lot of reasons, some of which are syria. but, fundamentally, i want to ask you one fundamental question, we do have profits but the profits have slowed substantially across the board. and we have had much higher interest rates in the medium and long end and it is likely in the next year or two that those interest rates go higher. so, higher rates and slow profits, what does that tell you about the market strategy? >> what it tells you is that you need some growth. in particular, you need growth in profits. so where does it come from? at this point in time, you've had profit margins go to a fairly full level compared to historic levels. you've had global growth slow pretty dramatically. and where you've got the lift in the stock market has really been

investors more willing to take on risk despite the fed moving towards a tapering, despite what's happening in syria. >> isn't this a moment to take on less risk? >> that's what i've been talking about. >> rates rising, earnings okay but your multiples are pretty full -- >> you want to take on less risk. but i don't want to oversell that point because there are some good things going on. when i look at what could come next, you have had investment spending, which is ultimately driving profits, which has been the mother's milk of the stock market. you have had investment spending as a percent of gdp fall from 20% to 10% and it's now climbing back. it's maybe around 14% and continuing. if that continues to move, you could have some decent profit growth, maybe up to 6% profit growth, tack on a dividend on top of that. >> we thank you very much. take a good look at this. this is what you really need to grow your economy, babies. yeah.

a growing population is a must. and there must be some good news on that score for america. right now, this story coming up next, it's a very interesting one. [ male announcer ] this store knows how to handle a saturday crowd. ♪ [ male announcer ] the parking lot helps by letting us know who's coming. the carts keep everyone on the right track. the power tools introduce themselves. all the bits and bulbs keep themselves stocked. and the doors even handle the checkout

so we can work on that thing that's stuck in the thing. [ female announcer ] today, cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everyone goes home happy.

what's the one thing an economy really needs to grow? babies, who will grow up and produce and innovate and generator growth. babies.

a new report shows that our so-called baby bust may finally be over. but are we getting back to healthy levels or are we just slowing the decline? here now is ken johnson. mr. johnson, welcome back. are we bottoming? is the baby dearth or the fertility rate decline -- is it over? >> i think it probably is. i think we've seen a stabilization of the rate over the last couple of years. we've lost about 3.5 million babies over the last five years. one of the big questions is, what's going to happen there? are we going to see a recovery in the birth rates? are we going to see women who have delayed having children begin to have them? or have we lost those babies for good? >> let's expound on that, have we lost them for good? what do you mean by that? >> well, during the great depression of the 1930s, the

women who started their childbearing careers early in the 1930s never had as many babies as the women older or younger than them would. those babies probably would have never came. we've had a five-year recession now. the birthrate declines were not as great as they were during the great depression. but still we haven't had about 1.3 million babies that would have been born had the economic boom continued during the middle part of the decade. >> i see. >> the question is what's going to happen with those babies. >> if the fertility rate goes from 1.9% back up to 2.1%, you tell me if the numbers are right, will that give up a catch-up? >> the fertility rate that you're talking about, which is the total fertility rate, measures instantaneously how many babies are being born.

if it goes up to 2.1%, then the fertility patterns would be such that we would over the long run have enough children to replace the population. >> we'd be one of the few countries that do. europe is shrinking. russia is shrinking. japan is shrinking. we'd be one of the few countries that maintained our population. and as your article says, if we add some immigrants to the mix, we might just have an expanding population, which would be good for the economy as well as moms and dads. >> right. and you can see in the situation as it stands right now, the place where the fertility levels have dropped the most is among young women. traditionally young women in their early 20s would be a big producer of children in the united states. but during the great recession, we saw a fairly significant decline in the fertility numbers among young women whereas women in their 30s didn't have as much of a fertility decline. so one of the big questions is, were those women in their early

20s what didn't have children, are they just delaying those children and now with the recession beginning to wane they're likely to have them again? or will those babies not be born at all? the likelihood is there will be an uptick in births because of those delayed births. >> one of the things you mention in this is the access to contraception. i wanted to ask you about that. what do you mean? >> as fertility levels change, access to contraception is an important factor in that change. if it's easier for people to have access to contraceptives, the potential that levels would stay low would be higher. easier access to contraception and in this report, that finding was with reference to teenagers not having children, not so much with the women in their 20s and 30s who are going to be the

producers of most of the children for the population. >> final one, if you want a higher birthrate and fertility rate and you want to grow and you want babies and you want to keep the population up there, maybe giving the contraception out to the younger women -- maybe that's not such a good idea, the younger women and the younger men, maybe that's not such a good idea, sir. >> it depends. do you want children from young parents who aren't fully established in their careers and can't nurture their children and encourage a good education and do well for the economy or do you want births to come to people later in their lives when they're more settled, more comfortable and able to support children and encourage them to do well in school? i think part of the focus is on delaying that fertility until people are in a better position to provide a good support for those children. >> it's another segment, a good segment, good conversation. thai thank you very much, ken johnson. the jobs report, just plain

big disappointment. we're going to talk about that and the entire economic picture with elaine chow next up on "the kudlow report." ♪ ♪ never loved ♪ [ sighs ] ♪ ♪ have you ever, think ♪ ooohhhh, oh, oohh ♪ ♪ perfect work of art ♪ i knew right from the start ♪ i was sent here for you ♪ we were made to love [ male announcer ] the all-new 2014 chevrolet impala. made to love. [ male announcer ] staying warm and dry has never been our priority. our priority is, was and always will be serving you, the american people.

so we improved priority mail flat rate to give you a more reliable way to ship. now with tracking up to eleven scans, specified delivery dates, and free insurance up to $50 all for the same low rate. [ woman ] we are the united states postal service. [ man ] we are the united states postal service. [ male announcer ] and our priority is you. go to usps.com® and try it today.

employers added just 169,000 jobs in august. the labor force participation rate dropped to a 35-year low and previous month payroll gains were revised sharply lower. all that, signs of slower momentum for an already sluggish economic recovery and it may complicate the federal reserve's own taper policy. joining us now exclusively, former labor secretary elaine chao, old friend. 9 good to see you. right now, let's see, tom perez is the labor secretary. here's what he said today. he said, this is solid and steady jobs report, quote, unquote. do you agree with him? >> i hate to disappoint him, but this is really not a very good report. every month it seems that all of america holds their breath hoping for better labor and employer reports. by their own report, they claim this is not a good report in that they say the unemployment rate is still essentially unchanged.

even though last month it went from 7.4% to 7.3%, this drop is due entirely to the loss of workers who have become discouraged and have left the workforce. this is very, very bad because for people who are starting their new jobs -- if they start out at a reduced level of employment with reduced wages, they will never catch up during the duration of their working life. this is very significant for young people and also for other people as well, for all workers. >> let's cover some more ground. the participation rate continues to fall. that's very important, you're absolutely right. i've got a chart, i hope we can get it up on the full screen, that choses actually the job creation rate is slowing down. we're not speeding up. >> yes, it is. >> if you take a look at the three-month average -- that's the income proxy. that actually is bad also. i was going to get to that. that's after inflation wage income has been flat the last

couple of months. the three-month average of nonfarm payrolls, you can see it peaked in february of 2012. it had kind of a second peak in february 2013. and it's coming down. it's coming down quite substantially from about 230,000 a month to 150,000 a month. we're doing worse, not better. >> we're seeing a persistently high unemployment rate and that's very troublesome. and the low labor participation rate is due to the fact that more workers are leaving the workforce and either going back to school or they're going on disability. and disability is different from unemployment insurance because once you go on unemployment insurance, if the economy improves, the workers come back. but with the disability, that's a long-term benefit that an unemployed person can stay on for the rest of their lives. there are lots of dynamics to

these statistics that are very damaging for the overall health of the labor workforce in our economy. >> benefits paying people not to work. where do you come out on this big debate that obama care and maybe other policies are creating an avalanche of part-time workers rather than full-time workers? what's your take? >> i think we're going to see that more plainly as the months go on because clearly under obama care, the affordable health care act, 30 hours per week is deemed to be full time. and that's the threshold upon which employers would be taxed. and so what a lot of employers are doing, out of necessity, not because they're horrible employers but because out of necessity, they have to cut back the hours given to their workers. so we are seeing actually a swelling of workers who are now being cut back and they're seeking two jobs instead of one because their hours are being cut back. and we'll see that more and more in these labor statistics as the

amongst go on. >> what would you do if you were labor secretary? how would you advise the president to speed things up? this has been a very poor jobs recovery, by anybody's estimation. and the numbers for the last two months, if anything, are worse. actually the numbers for the last three months. august, july and june, things are getting worse. what should we do to change that? >> first of all, we need about 200,000 net new jobs to be created every month just to keep even with population growth. and the drop in the unemployment rate from over 10% to the current 7.3% is totally to the loss of these workers who have left the workforce because they're discouraged. >> let me just ask you, do you give obama any credit at all for getting the unemployment rate down from 10% to 7.3%? does he get any credit in your book? >> yes, but that is primarily because of the departure of

discouraged workers who have left the workforce and therefore the unemployment rate drops because they're no longer counted as being in the workforce. what's clearly happening is that government regulations, increased taxations are selling a pall on job creation. we're seeing a decline in layoffs but not a full recovery in job creation and that's what we need. the job creation has to be more robust. the economy has to be more vibrant to provide more of our people the jobs they need. a lot of people are actually in part-time jobs who want full-time jobs and if they had the opportunity, they would get a full-time job. but there are no jobs for them. if you count those people, the actual unemployment rate is about 14%. >> it is indeed. 20 million-plus people if we count all those. thank you, elaine chao. let's talk some politics. what happens to president obama's efforts to get

congressional approval for an attack on syria is going to have a profound effect on everything else he tries to accomplish for the rest of his presidency. the free market friday panel, about to tackle that and much more, next up on "kudlow." [ male announcer ] ok, here's the way the system works.

let's say you pay your guy around 2% to manage your money. that's not much you think. except it's 2% every year. does that make a difference? search "cost of financial advisors" ouch. over time it really adds up. then go to e-trade and find out how much our advice costs. spoiler alert: it's low. really? yes, really. e-trade offers investment advice and guidance from dedicated, professional financial consultants. it's guidance on your terms, not ours. that's how our system works. e-trade. less for us. more for you.

is that true? says here that cheerios has whole grain oats that can help remove some cholesterol, and that's heart healthy. ♪ [ dad ] jan? ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions... in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above. we're not simply saluting history... we're making it.

in the coming days, i'll continue to consult with my fellow leaders around the world and i will continue to consult with congress. and i will make the best case that i can to the american people as well as to the international community for taking necessary and appropriate action. and i intend to address the american people from the white house on tuesday. >> that, of course, was president obama earlier today making a plea to congress and the american people for a u.s. military strike in syria. will he be able to win over the public in his tuesday address or is his administration going to fall apart if he loses the vote in congress? here we have blake zeff, a former obama campaign aide, politico reporter robert costa and kelly ann conway, president and ceo of the polling company.

robert costa, if the vote were today or if the vote were monday, what would happen? >> larry, i just walked over here from the capitol. there was a two-hour classified briefing on syria for all members of congress. let me tell you, larry, it's a very difficult situation right now for the white house. i'm not sure this syria resolution passes the senate. and i'm pretty sure it's not going to pass the house. that leaves obama in a difficult situation. the president has to come up with the votes. i'm not sure how he's going to do it. >> you're saying you're not sure it's going to pass the senate and that it won't pass the house. the senate part of your analysis is somewhat counterconventional. you may be right. but that would be a heck of a thing if he loses both houses, if he loses both houses, i don't think he'll ever recover from that. but if he loses both houses, how is he ever going to recover from that? >> your column nailed it. obama has to spin a lot of

political capital to get his resolution to pass the senate. if he does, he will have spent so much capital, his entire domestic agenda could fail this fall. >> blake, honest question. do you think he has -- i don't know what to call it -- the backbone or the hoodspa or whatever -- >> chops. >> chops. if he loses both houses, do you think he has the chops to just turn around and go on a bombing mission in syria? do you think that's possible? >> i don't know if the word is chops or guts or testicular fortitude. i think we're actually talking about intelligence not to do it. if you get a huge defeat from both houses of congress, it's very hard to disregard and disrespect that and try to launch a bombing in syria. i'm not sure if i'd call it a lack of guts. but i think he's probably not likely to do that. >> the answer is no, he's not likely to do that. i never understood why he wanted

to do it in the first place. he says wherever he goes he doesn't have to do it. now he's doing it. if his speech on tuesday was anything like the press conference he gave today, he's just going to be a dead duck because today, as i said earlier, he's like an investment banker selling a deal he doesn't believe in. >> he was a little glib about his meeting at the g-20. i'm not sure he can pull back. 9 he may say congressional vote and let that be the answer. you see democratic congressmen -- congressman welch saying he's going to have to respect what the congress does. i believe that's more coordinated than we respect. if congress says no confidence, you let that be the decision and you don't go any further. if we were in a parliament, it would be a no confidence vote. look what david cameron did last

week after that went down. i also don't understand why the president, who lost the congress in 2010 -- republicans have a hard time running against obama the man but they have a pretty decent shot of running against the obama agenda. in 2014, i don't see how a lot of these democratic house members are going to continue to support and go for immigration reform. when they return on monday, they have seven days to figure out how to -- >> that's the thing. i want to spend a little bit of time on that. robert, walk me back. i'm told by various house members and staff that i've talked to that the big problem here is the grassroots in the republican party does not want this action. and one of the reasons they don't want this action is they do not trust the president to be an effective commander in chief. whether that's right are wrong, i'm not making a judgment call. but i hear congressmen telling

me by 100 to 1 phone calls are coming in saying that. do you hear the same thing? >> i'm hearing the same thing. what's going to happen in the house is interesting. speaker boehner is going to allow a conscious vote. he's not going to whip the vote in the house. that means it's important for the president to make a tough case for war. right after speaker john boehner came out of that white house meeting in support of the president, the next day, the president had a blurry statement about the red line. he hasn't made a convincing case not only to democrats in congress but the republicans. that leaves the president looking for vote es and the clock is ticking. >> blake, one of the things i've never understood about this and frankly i don't think i understand anything about it. every time jim cramer -- i kns k he's down a hell of a job selling the military benefits and the credibility of the united states regarding chemical weapons of mass destruction to go after assad.

i give kerry tremendous kretd. but every time kerry gets up there, seems like the next hour or the next day, the president walks it back, blake, and they're back left with nothing. and i don't know what the hell is going on. are they in there fighting with each other? is there not coordination? is kerry going to have to resign over this? you tell me. >> here's the deal, larry. to piggyback off what robert just said, not only a republican house member is getting calls from their constituents 100 to 1, but it's just as bad for democrats. think about tea party voters when they go to the town halls and they're furious about obama care, that's what it's like with war on the democratic side. none of their constituents want to go to war. they hear military intervention, it is not popular. this is not just going to be a tough sell with republicans, it's just as bad with democrats. that's why they have a confused and difficult message ahead of

them. >> when history is written or when bob woodward writes his next book or whatever, i want to know the relationship between kerry and obama in the past couple of weeks because i've never seen anything like it. hillary clinton as secretary of state just went along to get along. that was the story on benghazi and so forth and they all had the same -- kerry is out there with his own policy, which is something i happen to admire. if we did the bombing right, we could really get something good done. and obama walks it back. i don't know how kerry deals with that. stick around, everybody, please. much more to cover, including this issue -- if mr. obama loses on this vote, as robert costa, is predicting, both the senate and the house, does his entire second-term domestic agenda fall apart because of this massive foreign policy mistake? our free market friday panel returns next up on "the kudlow report." chances are,

you're not made of money, so don't overpay for boat insurance. geico, see how much you could save. (announcer) at scottrade, our cexactly how they want.t with scottrade's online banking, i get one view of my bank and brokerage accounts with one login... to easily move my money when i need to. plus, when i call my local scottrade office, i can talk to someone who knows how i trade. because i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade. awarded five-stars from smartmoney magazine.

we're here with our free market panel friday. kellyanne, question, if he loses one house -- costa has him losing both houses -- does this cripple his entire administration and its policies for, what, the last 40 months of his administration? does it cripple it? >> it does. the clock was already against his agenda. and now this comes on the heels of the sequestration.

the fact is americans are onto the news that we don't have the money for the military, let alone an engagement that most americans strongly oppose. the thing is -- i'm surprised somebody as politically savvy as president obama doesn't understand how he got there in the first place. he got there because of hillary clinton because he was the anti-iraq war candidate. she was the 3:00 a.m. candidate -- >> he keeps telling everybody that this is not iraq. >> i do think it unravels the rest of the agenda. here's why. your message is only has powerful as your messenger is legitimate. and he's delegitimizing himself for the implementation of obama care. focus groups across this country, people are starting to see and feel the effects of these reduced hours. >> and they're very unhappy

campers. robert, i did write about it today, thank you for talking about it. if he loses, you're talking about two houses. i just thought he'd lose the house of representatives. if he loses, you know what you have coming up here, you know what the calendar looks like? you have a federal reserve meeting in two weeks. they're probably going to have to change their policy. two weeks after that, the debt ceiling runs out. and all during this period, republicans are going to agitate to delay the individual mandate for obama care if not more so. here's my question, a big defeat on syria. what does that do? does it cripple all of these domestic agenda items? >> it does, larry. here's why. the coalitions, especially in the democratic party and the house and senate were already fragile. now the president is going to majority leader harry reid and democratic leader in the house nancy pelosi and saying, i need

votes at the 11th hour on syria. everything is crowded to the side as the president tries to get votes on syria. those other items may fall apart. >> the vietnam war destroyed the lbg presidency. the irony is that obama probably doesn't even want to do this. but he is doing it and he's going to go before the american people on tuesday and lobby on week to keep on doing it. does his party eventually walk away from him? that's what i'm asking. the leadership, not just the left liberals but everybody. they just walk away from him because he's just been embarrassed by this vote? >> if he loses the vote? >> yeah. >> i don't think so. i think i disagree slightly with my esteemed colleagues on the panel which is to say that, yeah, these are fragile

coalitions that he has on the democratic side. and some of these agenda items are going to be difficult. but it doesn't have much to do with what happens with syria. irrespective of what happens with syria, these were going to be tough fights. for example, pat toomey is with the president on gun control. he's with him on that issue because he has his own political considerations and his district to think about and his own conscience. i think these members of congress are -- many of them are sophisticated enough to take these things on an issue-by-issue basis based on what's good for them because of their districts -- >> what if he wins the vote? what if he wins the vote? >> that's still naivety attached that we think we can do controlled strikes. there's none of that when you go onto assad's territory. after that, iran may get involved.

this is a powder keg that we can't control. >> if he wins the vote, he gets a major new political shelf life? >> he'll never get it in the house. and he won't be allowed to blame the republicans the way he does over obama care. >> terrific stuff. thank you all. that's it for "the kudlow report." we'll be back on monday. thanks for watching, everybody. this is going to be very interesting. syria playing it out. woman: everyone in the nicu -- all the nurses wanted to watch him when he was there 118 days.

everything that you thought was important to you changes in light of having a child that needs you every moment. i wouldn't trade him for the world. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. if you're caring for a child with special needs, our innovative special care program offers strategies that can help. folks have suffered from frequent heartburn. but getting heartburn and then treating day after day is a thing of the past. block the acid with prilosec otc, and don't get heartburn in the first place. [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn. [ male announcer ] you know that family?

the one whose eye for design is apparent in every detail? ♪ whose refined taste is best characterized by the company they keep? ♪ well...say hello to the newest member of the family. the cadillac srx. awarded best interior design of any luxury brand. ♪ [ male announcer ] staying warm and dry has never been our priority. our priority is, was and always will be serving you, the american people. so we improved priority mail flat rate to give you a more reliable way to ship. now with tracking up to eleven scans, specified delivery dates, and free insurance up to $50 all for the same low rate. [ woman ] we are the united states postal service. [ man ] we are the united states postal service. [ male announcer ] and our priority is you. go to usps.com® and try it today.

>> tonight... >> what a [bleep] train wreck! >> training dogs to attack, sniff out bombs and drugs, and sink their teeth into a wealth of business opportunities. and... >> this was my very first product. >> ...a woman who bet a lot to help you find your diamond in the rough. plus... >> both: welcome to firehouse. >> ...two former firemen take on the sandwich and wind up with a winning combination. it's all straight ahead on an all-new edition of "how i made my millions." >> good evening. i'm tyler mathisen. have you ever looked at a product or service and thought, "i could do beer