melissa: i'm melissa francis and here's what's "money" tonight. will the u.s. be the next saudi arabia of oil production? a new report says we could be the world's top producer by the end of the decade. we'll tell you how. plus a devastaaing cyberattack hits one of the world's largest oil companies. iran is reportedly behind it. could our electric grids or water supplies, our water supplies be next? we get insight exclusively from a former member of the joint chiefs of staff. crime in chicago is out of control. some officials want to pull the trigger on the bullet tax to rein it in. i think they're a bit off the mark. my favorite chicago alderman is here to disagree with me.

even when they say it's not it is always about money. melissa: first let's take a look at the day's market headlines. stocks adding losses to yesterday's big selloff. new home sales rose to the highest level in two years. but economic concerns voiced by the fed helped send stocks to the downside. the dow fell 25 points. the justice department filing a one billion dollar civil lawsuit against bank of america. its countrywide financial unit of quote, brazen mortgage fraud while selling home loans to fannie mae and freddie mac between 2007 and 2009. facebook shares skyrocketed nearly 20% for their biggest single day gain since the may ipo. facebook beat third quarter earnings estimates and investors were especially encouraged by facebook's $153 million in mobile ad sales. to our top story.

a new report says that the u.s. could surpass saudi arabia in oil production by 2020. and on top of that, shale energy could create 1.3 million jobs. boy, do we need that. will shale save the u.s. economy? to drill down on it, we have the president and ceo of u.s. chamber's institute for 21st century energy which cosponsored the report. karen, thanks so much for coming on the show. were you surprised by the outcome at all or this pretty much you put the study together because you suspected this is what was going on? >> we have suspected it. we know it was huge but we didn't know it was so big and now we have the numbers to rove it. the american economy has been looking for good news, the way to get off the huge deficits we have, fall off the fiscal cliff. it is right here underneath our feet, vast oil reserves, vast gas reserves and we need to put it to the work for the economy. melissa: i want to put it in perspective to viewers.

i've been to saudi arabia. the oil there is basically sitting in the sand. oil here is harder and more expensive to get to. great that we have technology but it is more expensive, right? >> it is more expensive and get a lot more out of it because it is the most advanced technology. no surprise where a lot of it is happening north dakota, north dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the whole united states. that is because they're able to put their economy to work based on oil. so, yes, it is a little bit more expensive. because of technology, you get a lot more molecules out for the money you put in. melissa: if it is more expensive, saudi arabia can flood the oil market with cheaper oil and take away that business. >> it is not rig or apples it apples. while the technology might be more expensive we're getting out more for every dollar that we're putting in. melissa: i don't understand. how is that the case? >> because the way you use this technology, when you put it in the ground you're able to get a lot more

product out rather than conventional drilling which is what they're doing in saudi arabia. melissa: hmmm. i'm not sure about that. we might have to examine that at another time. >> sure. this is unconventional, rather than conventional. in saudi arabia they're doing it the way we've done it for hundreds of years. this technology we're being able to use it in a way to get a whole lot more out now. melissa: okay. but, i mean they're able to pump oil very quickly that is very cheap and close to the surface. i don't understand why that is not, easier to bring to market than the more expensive oil? you're using shale. you're fracking. it is more expensive to get it out. so at end of the day it is more expensive to produce it. >> but not on a molecule to molecule basis. we look at that and not to get too technical because we're able to get more for every dollar we put in it ends up being very good economical investment. that being said, oil prices are still very, very high. so it is, you know, more affordable i guess for saudi arabia to put and flood more on the market. melissa: yeah. >> but reality is demand is

going up. so they're flooding asian market. we need to look out for ourselves here in north america. melissa: either way, i don't understand why consumers at the pump have not seen more benefit to all of this production? no doubt it is definitely up and technology is helping but prices at the pump are double what they were in 2009. >> well, let's not forget energy demand is going up every day. while we might be the biggest energy producer we're no longer the biggest energy consumer. asia is. so we really have to be looking at the global market. the more we can produce here at home the more money stays at home, more jobs are created at home and more manufacturing happens at home. that's good foo the economy. that will help the american consumer. not just the price at the pump. melissa: what do you think would bring undo the price at the pump? >> well, we have to look at global supply and demand of the as we look at it going out the next decade it will be very, have he tight. every molecule we bring on the market, that money stays here and that is what will improve our economy, help us

not fall off this fiscal cliff, and quite frankly, create the jobs that we need. that is the type of economic growth we really need to be focusing on. we'll hugely impact the price gasoline at pump just by producing oil here at home but we will be able to weather those inevitable volatility that we see if iran closes the straights of hormuz it will be much better for america producing more oil at home. melissa: what do you do to stem the environmental backlash against this type of drilling? >> i think the truth matters here. according to our own environmental protection agency, the head of it, sheila jackson said, you know what? never has there ever been a case of groundwater contamination because of this. i take the government at its word. we've been regulating at state level and it worked pretty well. that being said industry does need to be held to very high standards. that will happen and that should happen. technology will continue to improve. our ability to use this resource but let's not be led undo the path of

hollywood mythology and movies trying to sell us not the truth. melissa: karen, thanks so much for coming on. >> great. thank you. melissa: staying with oil here. the question is, should big oil keep getting tax breaks they currently have? the industry got $2.6 million billion in tax incentives in 2010. lots of lawmakers are crying foul even some republicans. energy department says ending ensign testifies could bring in $40 billion in revenue for 10 years but i wonder at what ccst. we have the advisor for the american petroleum institute. thanks for joining us. one thing that drives me crazy when we have these discussions, companies doesn't raase taxes people do. if you raise the taxes on oil companies. they pass it onto the consumers, we'll see it a the pump, every consumer that drives. do you think average american gets that? >> i think the average american does have a

understanding of these issues the fact remains the oil and gas industry pays the national government $87 million, rents, leases royalties and income tax payments. we're a huge part of the economy and we are investing in american infrastructure. we are paying our fair share. we have effective tax rate of over 40% even. that is more than many other industry. melissa: what do you think ending these deductions would do for the price of gas at the pump? >> i assume you're talking about the context of tax reform. any examination of these deductions i'm glad you said that they are not credits, they are not subsidies, they're business deduction. >> right. >> any examination of those outside tax reform is simply a tax increase. that would result in jobs barrels of oil per production per day lost et cetera. in the context of tax reform, the industry is supportive and sees value of a lower tax rate. however we are concerned about the base broadeners getting there. there are bays broadeners that domestically could hurt

our cash flow. that impact could result in less production, less jobs. we're certainly willing to have that discussion with lawmakers. melissa:ville nicing big oil is easy. likeville nicing private equity or the top 1%. mitt romney battled back against that during the first debate. let me play that sound bite for you and ask you about it on the other side. >> the department of energy has said that the tax break for oil companies is $2.8 billion a year. and it's actually an accounting treatment as you know that has been in place for 100 years. >> time to end it. >> and in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. now, i like green energy as well, but that is about 50 years worth of what oil and gas receives. melissa: so on a proportional basis, that is 2.6 billion versus 90 billion. our brain room crunched numbed members. they got to the number lumping in the money given to green energy through the stimulus. it is not apples to apples

comparisons. it is apples to oranges but at the same time it is all my money. all tax dollars and revenue taken from the government being sent out. do you disagree with that. >> not with our industry at all. our industry has not received credits grants or checks. we benefit from deductions that lowers our taxable burden. there is no transfer of money. if we talk about the stimulus package look at a number. in 2009 the oil and natural gas industry invested $470 billion in the economy. that is half the stimulus package without involving the government. we're industry bringing new technology and shale development we saw earlier. would you rather our industry invest that money in the economy, or the people that brought you the dmv, post office and things of that nature. we pay on average every year, $32 billion to the federal government. if you believe, if you believe some of the rhetoric about 2.8 billion, et cetera, i don't know how they get those numbers. it is some government math. but 32 billion a year going

in versus 2.8 going out if you believe in that, that is great return on investment that is bet you would make in vegas any day. melissa: what do you change the view around america that green energy good, big oil bad? that is the myth, how you ever want to describe it that is being perpetuated time after time. how do you change that? >> good, bad, i don't think we should think of those things in those terms. american oil and gas industries supports green energy and renewables. we invest more in alternative energy in these projects than the private sector and government provided. we're on cutting-edge. we're for all of the above energy solution which doesn't mean picking good or bad or winners and losers. melissa: buy on a thanks for coming on the show. >> no problem, thank you. melissa: time to check the fuel gain. first up, oil prices fell for the fifth straight session. unexpectedly large drop in u.s. supplies helped send

crude down 1% settling at $85.73 a barrel. marathon oil is reportedly looking to sell part of its stake in a canadian oil sand project. marathon has sold $1.1 billion in assets this year part of an effort to expand its presence in the u.s. shale industry. we were just talking about that. south africa accusing local units of chevron, bp and other oil giants of price fixing. they said companies exchanged sales and customer data for nearly two decades to repress competition. they want a final of 10% of their revenue for the last fiscal year. ikea will invest $2 billion in solar and wind energy by the year 2015. the furniture giant is aiming to produce as much renewable energy as it consumes by the year 2020. we'll check back with them on that one, you can bet on that. next on "money", iran allegedly behind a devastating cyberattack on a

global oil giant. how long until our electric grids and water supplies get hit? we have a former member of the joint chiefs of staff. the fed says it will keep the stimulus juices flowing but how much longer until the well runs dry? more "money" coming up. ♪ bob...

oh, hey alex. just picking up some, brochures, posters

copies of my acceptance speech. great! it's always good o have a backup plan, in case i get hit by a meteor. wow, your hair looks great. didn't realize they did photoshop here. hey,ood call on those mugs. can't let 'em see what you're drinking. you know, i'm glad we're both running a nice, clean race. no need to genasty. here's your "honk if you had an affair with taylor" rd sign. looks good. [ male announcer ] fedex office. now save 50% on banners.

melissa: forget about horses. we've been telling but the growing threat of cyberterrorism. new intelligence shows iran was behind the most destructive cyberattack on a company ever. the target was saudi aramco. that was last august. that could have been in retaliation for computer virus that attack iranian oil companies last may. it all boils down to what is coming next. this is what is important. an attack on u.s. electric grids, water supplies and even chemical plants. here with the potential impact on this type of warfare a former member of joint chiefs of staff and a cybersecurity analyst. colonel, welcome back to the show. >> my pleasure, melissa.

thanks for having me. melissa: they blame iran for the debilitating attack on saudi aramco. it took over large percentage of computers showing a burning american flag. does this surprise you? >> not really and the reason i say that is because you have the entire environment with viruses like stuxnet and flame being attributed to the united states. those viruses attacks iranian infrastructure, particularly infrastructure relate the to nuclear proliferation aspect that the iranians have. when you have that you're having tit-for-tat between the iranians and us. in that sense it did not surprise me. the escalation of this though is something everybody should take into account and prepare accordingly. melissa: without question. this sort of crosses the line where we see government attacks on, saudi aramco isn't a private company. obviously it is government owned. now we're worried about retaliation against u.s. companies even if they're utilities. the white house is planning on implementing an executive

order that would direct u.s. spy agencies to share the information they have with companies. i wonder, you know, who operate on the electric grid and other things, definitely impact the public welfare but still, i don't know, does that make you nervous at all. are there negative externalities to that? >> there are some negative externalitis. i think it is a good thing the intelligence community will be asked to share information with private companies, particularly those private companies that are protecting the infrastructure but, there's a piece of this where, for example, companies will not have, just an executive order and not legislation, they will not have liability protection. so that is one big negative piece the other part of it is, civil liberty abouts are also part of this. and the executive order may not assuage the concerns of people like the aclu when it comes to protecting data and making sure that the private details such as pick names of individuals and things like that are kept out of

the government processes as they work with private companies. but there are ways to safeguard against that the question is, will the executive order cover those processes and make those process mandatory both for government and for the civilian sector. melissa: i hope so. this is a business show and it puts companies in really precarious situation. on the one hand they're asked to look out for national security and public welfare which makes a lot of sense if you're in the business of being a electric utility and you have the water grid. at the same time they're number one holden to their shareholders. that is who they're supposed to think of at first. they're opening their shareholders to this liability. this is a very hard decision for the government to make. can the government make it easier for that? >> government should make it easier for them. the one way to really champion comprehensive cyber kurt legislation in the congress. two measures basically made it past the first hurdles in congress. one in the senate and the other one in the house.

both those measures failed but that shows that there is a lot of congressional interest in this and there has to be a way to make it work in terms of the legislative process and to insure there is liability protection. the executive order can only go so far. melissa: yeah. >> because of that we have a situation where the executive order is not going to be a complete answer. it will be a partial answer but it will be one of those situations where the companies are going to be reluctant pause they don't -- because they don't have liability protection and they will be very, like you said, very beholden to their shareholders because they're making money for them or trying to at least, and they have to protect the shareholders equities but they also have to make sure their businesses are viable and continually viable entity and --. melissa: the really the danger we're talking about here because we all know how dangerous a big blackout can be for sure. but how, what's the potential do you think that terrorists could taint the water supply or, even, you know, take control of the

chemical plant? how dangerous do you think this really is? >> it is very dangerous. the reason i say that is because we have had instances in past, for example in australia there was an instance in brisbane that involved a sewage plant worker who got angry at his bosses and decided to introduce a virus into the system that governed the sewage, the rate of sewage flow into clean water. melissa: oh. >> that caused a major major fallout in that eastern australian city. you have these situations that it is very possible for it to happen. and that is why it becomes important for the government and the private sector to really work together to clean this up. melissa: yeah. scary stuff, colonel. thank you so much for coming on. >> my pleasure, melissa. thanks for having me. melissa: coming up the fed keeps the stimulus spigot open to try to keep the economy propped up but how long can it go on? plus crime is running rampant in chicago. now some officials want a

bullet tax to help fight it? i don't know, i think this idea is off target. chicago alderman joe marino is here to disagree with me. i can't wait. coming up, do you have ever have too much money or disagreements it's a new day. if you're a n with low testosterone, you should know that axiron is here. the only underarm treatment for low t. that's right, the one you apply to the underarm.

axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18. axiron can transfer to others through direct ntact. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant, d children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acnen women may occucur. report these signs and symptom to your doctor if they occur. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. do not use if you have prostate or breast cancer. seris side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet, or body swelling; enlarged or painl brbreasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increase red blood cell count, adache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. see your doctor, and for a 30-day free trial, go to axiron.com.

? ♪ . melissa: the federal reserve has vowed to keep at it, announcing a short time ago it will keep interest rates between zero and .25% and continue the aggressive bond buying program. what is the price of all this easy money? steve moore is the "wall street journal" editorial board member and senior economics writer. he is author of new book, i love this title, who is the tearest of them all? the truth about taxes and wealth in america. i love the title of your

book because that word fairest is so loaded. who decides what is fair? it's crazy. >> it is. melissa: anyway, back to the topic on hand here. you know when i look at what ben bernanke is doing, is it remind me of alan greenspan keeping rates really low before the real estate bubble blew up and burst. at the time, i was buying a house like a lot of people out there, i loved it. down the road as we look back, you think this really contributed to where we are now. with ben bernanke what will we look back and say was the negative externality of all this easy money, do you think? >> first of all, let me, i just finished reading a lot of that report that came out today, from the fed. melissa: yeah. >> i just wanted to highlight, i think this is really important in terms of people understanding where the economy is headed. it was a pretty gloomy report by the fed. they described, for example, melissa, the housing market as quote depressed. still they said the pace of employment and, hiring is still quote, slow.

and then, most importantly they said, unemployment remains elevated. these are not the kind of numbers that you would want to see two weeks before an election. i thought it was pretty gloomy. i think it is something the romney people might want to glom on to when president obama says the economy is moving forward. melissa: you think they really believe that or you think they're saying those things to justify their own actions? >> good question. i think a little bit of both, melissa. i think the way they're describing the economy is the way most americans feel about it. most americans do feel that the unemployment rate is way too elevated and hiring is slow. this doesn't look like a very robust recovery whatsoever. but i never really anticipatesed your question which is what the is endgame here. you were quite correct in saying that the bubble in the housing market was really facilitated by all this easy money. don't forget go back to 1999 and 2000 when the high-tech bubble burst. i believe that also was built up, that balloon was built up by easy money. now it looks like all this

easy money is going into bonds. which is why you have a 1.7% interest rate on 10-year treasurys. my suspicion that might be the next bubble to burst. melissa: what does that mean for people? >> well, what it means, i think you will start to see higher inflation rates. fed doesn't see any hints of inflation. they have to get out and go to the grocery store and go to a gas pumpp because americans feel effect of inflation. they take out core inflation which is energy and food but those are the places where inflation is really rising right now. my point we've tried easy money solution almost exactly four years since the fed started pumping money into the economy and we've got en1.3, 1.5% growth. >> pushback i always get at this point in the conversation the other fed to do? if they stop doing it right now it will stall an economy already anemic.

what do you say to that? >> i say, first of all this solution of stimulating the economy with very easy money and low interest rates hasn't really worked at all. second of all the long-term consequences of pumping money into the economy than any kind of short term burst you get. i said this on your show last month when we talked about it, and this is our crack cocaine habit. all this easy money. that, story doesn't have a happy ending. melissa: absolutely. what do you think would turn the economy around right now? >> let's's see what happens in two weeks. this election is huge. melissa, these two candidates stand for completely opposite economic programs. melissa: that's the truth. >> to deal with the economy. i do think doing across the board tax rate reduction and maybe getting serious about the deficit with entitlements, i think those are exactly the kind of ton nick this economy needs the i think we could have pretty strong 201 if you get rid of fear and anxiety that is

hanging over this economy right now. melissa: always segatious steve moore, thanks for joining us. >> thank you, melissa. melissa: the windy city looking at a proposed bullet tax to cut down on crime. i think it is a bit of a misfire but my next guest is here to disagree with me. i love it. one jeweler gives grooms big enough reward for buying a big engage mane ring. you want to see. "piles of money" coming up. ♪ . are we there yet?

are wthere yet? are we there yet? [ male announcer ] it's the question we ask ourselves every day. is ithe safest, the most effient? the kind of vehicle to move not just people... but an industry forward? are we there yet? are we really? [ male announcer ] are we there yet? we are, for now. iroducing the all-new seven passenger gl. motor trend's 2013 sport utility of the year. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.

motor trend's 2013 sport utility of the year. i'i invest in what i know.r. i turned 65 last week. i'm getting married. planning a life. there are risks, sure. but, there's no reward without it. i want to be prepared for the long haul. i see a world bursting with opportunities india, china, brazil, ishares, small-caps, large-caps, ishares. industrials. low cost. every dollar counts. ishares. income. dividends. bonds. i like bonds. ishares. commodities. diversification. choices. my own ideas. ishares. i want to use the same stuff the big guys use. ishares. 8 out of 10 large, professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. introducing the ishares core,

etfs for the heart of your portfolio. tax efficient and low cost building blocks to help you keep more of what you earn. call your advir. visit ishares.com. ishares. ishares. yeah, ishares. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. >> kbul let's cost $5,000. $5,000 for a bullet. you know why? because if a bullet costs $5,000 there will be no more innocent bystanders. melissa: one chicago official agrees with that. she wants to tax the sale of every bullet to cut down on crime. we're talling about extra five cents for bullet sold

and extra $25 for every gun. not really $5,000 a bullet but you get the idea. i want to shoot down this idea. my favorite chicago alderman joe marino is for the tax. he is here to disagree with me. >> great to be with made favorite right-wing talking head. good to be here. >> it is what it is. small government. that is all that i care about. >> all right. all right. melissa: make your best argument. >> well, so actually, i sent that link to your producers. melissa: you get credit for that. you have a good sense of humor. >> thanks. melissa: you pointed that out to us and you're a good guy. go ahead. make your best hearingment. >> first of all i'm on the city coins sill. this a county wide tax. i don't have a vote on it. i do support it. this is not a panacea, melissa, if we do that it will solve every issue with crime and violence in chicago, absolutely not. i would submit we have issue with straw buyers, straw

purchasers buying thousands and thousands of bullets and guns that end up on the streets in the wrong hands. maybe if we hit the pocketbook and we'll see less of them out on the street. the legislation, dollars raised will kept help county pay for victims of violence in chicago. melissa: you know. i like the basic idea of it because you tax things you want to discourage. makes a lot of sense with smokesing for example. if you raise price of something you create a black market especially people in these casings, talking about violent crimes they're already dealing in something illegal to add a black market for bullets doesn't seem like that big of a stretch. >> we already have a black market unfortunately bullets an guns unfortunately in this city but in the country. i don't think we're creating any kind of a new market. we're going to the root of the problem, these machines of death and destruction that are on our streets get there illegally and people

illegally purchase them. something like 68% of the guns and bullets roo he treeved in the city of chicago are purchased legally and then resold on the black market. so again, if we could rise dollars from that and discourage that, that's why, i think it is a good idea and i support the president in her attempt to do this. melissa: go to chris rock's example? what is five cents going to do? he is advocating $5,000 a bullet. five cents, that will not plug a budget hole and not discourage anyone from buying it. it is a nickel. >> glad i support a higher one. melissa: i didn't say that i said -- >> i thought that is what you proposed. >> i said this wouldn't make a difference. >> concept and philosophy of it is good. whether five cents a dime or a quarter or 50 cents, i'm open to that. but again i think it is a good start, a good conversation to have. i'm glad the president

pushwinkle is pushing this. melissa: if you want to reallyly do this you have to do something really significant? >> i don't disagree with you. it has never been done. other municipalities in other countries have additional taxes on firearms, but not on bullets. this would be definitely paving the path and first place to do this. but, again, we'll see. we'll see if this gets through. we'll see if five cents happens. maybe we raise it to a dime, a quarter. future will tell us. melissa: what do you think the answer is cutting down on crime in chicago, totally serious note away from the fun we're having? >> sure. we have a lot of efforts that have been made. i don't know if you know this, in the '90s homicide rate was in the 900s. it is reduce dramatically but still needs to go down further with bumps recently. melissa, some conversations we have before, constant, we need to continually increase our funding for after school and education programs that work. the police are adamantly

supportive of that they say the more dollars that are put into early childhood, the more dollars that it saves us later and in a person's life. as a libertarian as you say i think you would support this. we'll reduce dollars if we continue to support early childhood development and after-school programs is that our kids are educated and have a different option than going to gangs and going to the streets. melissa: i hear you. i just never like to give the government more money for anything. i think i'm still on the fence for this one. alderman, you're fantastic. thank you for sending us the clip. thanks for coming on. it is always lively debate. >> look forward to it. things, melissa. melissa: here is the question of the day, do you think a tax on bullets would really reduce crime? a facebook said a new tax on bullets would only serve the amount of business conducted and reduce jobs. you can like us on facebook at facebook.com/melissa francis fox or follow neon

twitter at melissa. a francis. listen up men. engagement ring shopping is hard but a owner is trying to make it easier. at the end of the day it is always about money.

>> i say, what do you want to me to do, give it away or so? so that's, initially how it started, then, after that, we came up with a plan and then we went to the gun shop and made a deal with the gun shop. and, yeah, this is, what is

happening. we thought it was like a local thing. but it turned like worldwide. melissa: yeah. i mean people were into it. this started out as a way for you to get rid of a gun hanging around the house you weren't using and expanded from there. is there any restrictions who can get a gun? >> well, everybody, you know, it's with iowa law. since everything went nationwide, we now currently work with other licensed gun shows through our gun shop. and they take care of all the paperwork. so everybody can participate in this offer. melissa: it sounds like it has been pretty successful sales gone up on a percentage basis since you started this offer? >> yeah, well we started, actually, the press release was last monday. and then it got viral. and actually, promotions started on thursday. and since thursday, you know, our sales have gone up with over 1,000%. just fantastic.

melissa: you know, i appreciate the humor of the sentiment. people talk about a shotgun wedding. you're giving away a shotgun with purchase of a ring that is worth $2,000 or more, but do you worry about the message that you send at all, on a more serious side? or have you received any criticism for this? >> well, you know the thing is, we're in iowa here. and in iowa, hunting is big. we have a huge deer population. hunting season is coming up. i'm from the netherlands. i never heard of the term shotgun he had withing. just after my first radio interview someone made a link, shotgun wedding and they explained to me what it was. melissa: it had nothing to do with the phrase? so the idea was just that you had a shotgun lying around? what made you think people buying a ring would want a gun? >> right. but, you know, we have a lot of hunters here. basically the fun. and unexpected thing and, yeah, you know, sometimes you have to do crazy things or shocking things. when i was in the netherlands, in the

netherlands is flat as a pancake i organized the dutch open mountain climbing championships and everybody thought, yeah, what is this going to mean. we built a big climbing wall in front of our store. we had championship chirps. doesn't matter what you do. you have to be creative and inventivv and that will bring you eventually success. melissa: obviously you're an expert marketer. i know this is about to come to an end but it has been wildly successful. do you have any thoughts on extending it. >> well, not shotgun deal. melissa: yeah. >> we always like to do, weird things and, you know, in the near future, we'll do other events because this is for the hunters, but there are also people they are against the guns. that's what i figured out. and so we are going to do something with nature and we're going to help everyone that wants to, engage with someone and with the ring and event of getting on your knees and asking here.

melissa: obviously you're a master marketer. maybe you give away a kitten with each ring. let us know what you come up with next time. harold, thanks for coming on. >> thank you very much. melissa: it is a critical "money" update. remember the strip club owner we had on that want lap dances to be tax-exempt? the new york high court is coming down on the ruling for the case. you can never have too much money or too many lap dances. ♪

this bible changed the world. i'm kirk cameron. four hundred years ago our forefathers risked their lives to bring this bible to the shores of america. because it contained the principals for economic liberty, political liberty and religious freedom. the 1599 geneva bible. it was the first complete english translation, complete with chapters, numbered verses and 300,000 utterly unique study notes. it actually came out fore the king james version and because the government didn't thorize it, it was outlawed. but it was a bible by the people, for the people, the book that built america. and now for the first time in 400 years it's available again in a beautiful leather edition. i have one, i want you to have yours too. please visit genevabible.com and get your copy of this rare and historic version of god's word today.

versi4g lte is the fastest.. so, which supeast 4g l service would yochoose, based on this chart ? don't rush into it, i'm not looking for the fastest answer. obviously verizon. okay, i have a different chart. going that way, does thamake a difference ? look at verizon. it's so much more than the other ones. so what if we just changed the format altogether ? isn't that the exact same thing ? it's pretty clear. still sticking with verizon. verizon. more 4g e coverage than a other networks combined.

melissa: of rights. i'm joined by fox news contributor and our very own tennis new ski, thank you for joining us. all right. that's discarded. no surprise that people are searching all kinds of things, but get this, the phrase paul ryan shirtless is searched nine times more than paul ryan budget. 5,000 people a month ask about mitt romney's underwear. >> for all you people never say anything nice about republicans, he smoking. i don't know if i've with google that. i have seen pictures. melissa: i might after the show.

>> who is doing the searches, men or women? women are far more comfortable with it. when you search melissa francis shirtless you come up with 30 million hits. compared with only 2 million hits per paul -- melissa: you don't come up with any photos. okay. there are no spiking up. can we move on quickly. an update on the story that we brought you last month. new york times made its ruling. lap dances are not tax exempt. apparently they don't promote culture in any way, shape, or form. >> i have to disagree. this is an outrage. inflation is a problem in this country. the cost of a lab that's going up, i don't care either presidential candid speaking about that. an active part. melissa: really? >> some men find god and they're getting a good dance.

>> the expo on this. >> apparently. >> i'm going to yield because i don't know what i'm talking about and using to have expert opinion on it. >> i've read a lot. melissa: i think everything should be tax exempt. no reason to tax lap dances. i mean, how much of that income is reported in the way? >> it's a cash game. >> i did talk to a lawyer for topless bars in new york. the case goes no farther unfortunately because it's a state case and there is no first amendment federal angle there. of 4-3 vote. very close. when these guys go investigate in person. melissa: i do have to say ballet is tax exempt because it is cultural. why lap dance is? it is an art. it is an art. >> i really do think somewhere. >> i'm glad you guys are so opinionated because it is obviously an important issue of our time. looking for a new kind of facial

treatment, look no further than that new massage parlor in san francisco. it is bringing in the ancient thai art form of flapping, face slapping. a mere $350 firm of plenty faces with the plastic surgery or injection. and. >> for an extra $50 a call your worthless pieces line. the tenderloin district of san francisco. melissa: it's on a dreary streets. i was looking at that in the article. >> kind of weird. melissa: it does sort of have that feel to it. >> is it an art? melissa: at think it is a cash business. >> a story worth reading. the writer did a great job. i could not even figure out where it came from. it was very funny, and there were talking about in all seriousness the art of but punching as well, and they tried to say that with a straight

face. >> a massage therapist. i did not get slapped. is anybody ever done that? they just gave me a normal awesome size. melissa: how quiet he is. >> a lot of time in thailand. >> of face slapped is a very humiliating thing. i cannot see paying for that. [laughter] melissa: okay. they slapped before. you know. here is one. this could be the end of male domination in the car industry. hundred -- honda is embracing women. not sure about tte title. the only japanese car on the market exclusively geared toward women. it looks like a previous. i'm insulted that is a woman's car. how you feel? that is what you think of women? that is would you give me? [laughter] >> it looks like a lady bug. melissa: it is, you know, a neutered previous. >> i drive a stake. and this -- there would always

say women don't like standard cars. i -- >> every marketer, it could be used by either sex. its own peril when they say let's do it just for business. they rejected. i am a business person. what are you doing? a rejection factor. melissa: a new marketing campaign based upon the new movie the of it. tom sullivan knew menu items like share psocids and red velvet puppies. i am not a big hug eight gal. i did not necessarily say that properly. >> enough with all the words. >> stunned teenager's. i think this is across marketing. >> okay.