>> announcer: you never know when, but thieves can steal your identity and turn your life upside down. >> hi. >> hi. you know, i can save you 15% today if you open up a charge card account with us. >> you just read my mind. >> announcer: just one little piece of information and they can open bogus accounts, stealing your credit, your money and ruining your reputation. that's why you need lifelock to relentlessly protect what matters most... [beeping...] helping stop crookbefore your identity is attacked. and now you can have the most protection available today... lifelock ultimate. so for protection you just can't get anywhere else, get lifelock ultimate. >> i didn't know how serious identity theft was until i lost my credit and eventually i lost my home. >> announcer: credit monitoring is not enough, because it tells you after the fact, sometimes as much as 30 days later. with lifelock, as soon as our network spots a threat to your

identity, you'll get a proactive risk alert, protecting you before you become a victim. >> identity theft was a huge, huge problem for me and it's gone away because of lifelock. >> announcer: while no one can stop all identity theft, if criminals do steal your information, lifelock will help fix it, with our $1 million service guarantee. don't wait until you become the next victim. you have so much to protect and nothing to lose when you call lifelock now to get two full months of identity theft protection risk free. that's right, 60 days risk-free. use promo code: gethelp. if you're not completely satisfied, notify lifelock and you won't pay a nt. order now and also get this shredder to keep your documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 dollar value, free. get protected now. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com to try lifelock protection risk free for a full 60 days. use promo code: gethelp. plus get this document shredder free-- but only if you act right now.

call the number on your screen now! neil: a dark night in the big apple because new yorkers got a kick in the butt. bade through the nose, walmart's given up oncoming here, and the last hope for consumers in the overpriced city saving money died here. they are delighted because they won, and, tonight, find out why new yorkers are not because they just lost. welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto. at fox on top of an insult that's over the top, walmart giving up because unions refuse. they are backing off plans into new york city, tired of the constant run-ins with politicians loyal to unions who didn't want the nonunion walmart near the city.

give walmart credit for trying. for years, looking to open a store in what is perhaps the priciest real estate in the world and the most burdened shoppers in the world and offered to make its stores smaller, any size, any burrough, any time, any way to get into a market whose residents are paying through the nose and desperate for a break, any break, only stopped by politicians equally desperate not to let walmart give them a break. walmart just croaked, said good buy. it's gone. it's done. it's over. will you union loving cow politicians, you won. are you proud? are you happy? explain to me how you go back to the constituents and brag about how you saved them from $4 prescription drug, cheaper milk, butter, bread, tides, and cereals that are not the price of your kids' tuition. my intuition? nay will not be happy to hear

protecting your union buddies, you screwed them to the walmart. how walmart giving up who would sooner protect their own sorry butts than never help the average folks who continue and now will continue for years to come to pay through the nose. charles, very, very sad. >> it is so, so sad. you know, it's interesting too because unions fight so hard with the companies that get maximum pay, but in a city with almost 9% unemployment, there's so many people who cannot afford to live. the highest cost of living in the country and if you make 60,000 in new york, it's equivalent to 66,000 anywhere else. how can you fight this? these views, the butlers, limousines not think about the consequences of this?

it's amazing. it really is amazing. >> it's sad for consumers. you know, neil, it's a glove, a letter glove. i talked to the grandfather some years ago and asked what was it like during the depression before and after the great depression in the new york city? he said before, we were a very wealthy family. he said, quote, i could afford to give my kids leather gloves. imagine. the -- during the great depression or before, a leather glove was a sign of luxury. now because of walmart, because walmart drove down costs of everything, nearly everyone in america can afford leather gloves, scarf, and a winter coat. when we were kids, families saved up to buy their school child a coat to last the winter season. now the walmart revolution drove down prices and made it affordable for americans. the fact that unions can't appreciate that just demonstrates where their hearts are. >> you know, it was done

incensebly in the idea that, look, walmart comes in, small mom and pop shop leaves, but the city has no problem binging in a costco where presumely could happen. what's the difference? wait a minute. costco is a larger unionized operation so that's okay there, but not okay in the case of walmart? >> it's a disinjen ewous argument. what's found is smart ma and pop establishes do well. you don't want to wait in line? walk in a store where people know your name? there's advantages. neil: there's jobs. >> i went to a walmart, visited mother in alabama, and first of all, the lines for the job were amazing. it's a god send. neil, a god send. you're right. flat screen tvs and all of these things that have -- real wages have gone down in the country. >> i keep trying to persuade my mom to be a greeter in walmart. neil: at the rate we're going,

you'll be one. >> i'm holding out for the fries in mcdonald's, but the greeter is number two. there's a study of walmart's impacts on communities. the counties with the communities grow strongly and create more jobs than those counties that lack walmart so we'll see what happens to new york without walmart. neil: it is interesting in some of the most expensive cities in the country, you know, walmart can't get access. it's not allowed in, even for beleaguered residents, it's like a breath of fresh air. >> would be a god send. neil: they are not going to get cheaper drugs or anything, but pay through the nose. there's a place around the corner here, leaving the name out, but they charge, like, $400 for a gallon a milk. not really, it's 300. that's what they get used to. people outside the city, they

see this as stupid. >> it is. >> it's not just the unions. you got to wrap it up into the whole occupy movement. it's the yiewns. it's the hyperenvironmentallists. it's those who dislike the idea of buying and selling and earning a profit and making an income. it's the occupy condemned capitalism movement, and walmart is just the poster. neil: if walmart unionizes tomorrow, this problem goes away and would be in every burrough of manhattan, next door to us right now, but i find it odd it's not, and the bigger box store brother are here doing quite nice. >> how come nobody applause walmart for giving health care to over a million employees? i thought health care was the number one priority of this country? apparently, it's -- neil: defends who is benefits and who is not. >> absolutely right. we know one thing who is not benefiting, and that's regular, ordinary people in the large

cities that have latest on the one hand who, you know, had a vision that to todd's point, all of the cities have the same thing in common, extraordinarily high unemployment, hopelessness, crime, violence, and welfare and food stamps. it's the same model. maybe there's an uproar one day and people at the bottom realize these are not your friends. they are not helping you. they are crushing you. neil: a politician once said, we are doing this for your own good. [laughter] >> i heard that before. neil: any time a politician says that, game over. >> game over. neil: chalk it up for union and another for environmentalists? new york's double whammy. the state on a role. the beleaguered residents asking what the frack is going on? those that frack, there's drones everywhere. if they are not tracking your every move, google cameras now are. the privacy scare that is maddenly everywhere.ar denturey

♪ uth is under attack, from food particles and bacteria. try fixodent. it helps create a food seal defense for a clean mouth and kills bacteria for fresh breath. ♪ fixodent, and forget it. ♪ have given way to sleeping. tossing and turning where sleepless nights yield to restful sleep. and lunesta®(eszopiclone) can help you get there. like it has for so many people before. when taking lunesta, don't drive or operate machinery until you feel fully awake.

walking, eating, driving, or engaging in other activities while asleep, without remembering it the next day, have been reported. lunesta should not be taken together with alcohol. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. alcohol may increase these risks. allergic reactions such as tongue or throat swelling occur rarely and may be fatal. side effects may include unpleasant taste, headache, dizziness, and morning drowsiness. ask your doctor if lunesta is right for you. then find out how to get lunesta for as low as fifteen dollars at lunesta.com. there's a land of restful sleep. we can help you go there on the wings of lunesta.

neil: andrew cuomo confirmed he's running for president of the united states. he didn't exactly say that, but something he just did, at least to me, assured that. putting off a key decision on fracking in the state of new york for at least a couple more years by which time i suspect he could be in the throws of a presidential run avoiding ticking off anyone, not environmentalists who want to keep the state's fracking moratorium in effect and hopefully to the governor, at least, not unions, desperate for the jobs who want to lit the moratorium soon. the governor strings them along rather than risk alien ated either now. not leadership, but to here rudy tell it in this opportunity. mayor, good to have you back. what do you think of this? when someonements to form a commission or get a blue ribbon pam together to invest gait, me thinks they are dodging. >> yeah, kicking the can down the road. neil: right, right.

>> the reality is new york really needs fracking. it's helping south dakota and pennsylvania -- neil: what do you tell people in the southern tier? >> it's a paren yell problem. upstate new york has unemployment for 20-25 years, syracuse to binaton in particular, industries left, many, never replaced. this is a perfect replacement. this is heavy laiden with jobs, tremendous infrastructure repairs go on, tremendous expansion of the state, this is something that's been done for 15-20 years all over the country including in texas, full disclosure. my law firm represents several of the companies that are the major fracking companies in the country, representing texas for many, many years. of course, there's problems. every form of energy extraction including windmills and solar have problems. neil: isn't the governor say let's examine the problems? >> we had the problems for

years. neil: right? then why -- obama's another two years do? >> it's getting good reports on how it's done. neil: what's he up to? >> best practices mean you do it with a minimum amount of possible effect on the environment. also, it'll help us in terms of pollution because these natural gas is used, it's significantly less impact on the environment. neil: the governor could have said, look, i'm going to rise above the interest of the environmentalists who cap job growth in my state and make a statement -- should he choose to run for president -- that he's above this. this could have been his clinton, you know, moment. >> you know, i had favorable things to say about andrew and the way he's governed in a fairly moderate way. it's a missed opportunity for the good of the state and ultimately the good of the country first. fracking is important to the country from the point of view

of making us a knelt exporting country. fracking is important to the country to make us this really a chance, no fooling now, that we could be energy independent. not just with natural gas, but you extract oil from the hydraulic fracking process. there's reports, goldman sacks and others who say if we do it right by 20 # 16, 2020, we can become close to energy independent, particularly if you do the pipeline with canada if you consider canada part of the orbit. neil: read the political machinations if you don't mind. >> i'm so annoyed about the impact on the economy -- neil: i think so, but let me ask you this. what if he were to tick off environmentalists, as much as the risk the president would tick off environmentalists with the pipeline. what's the risk? >> the worry if you go now is a

democratic primary, somebody in the primary goes to the left, does the complete, you know -- neil: this could stave it off? >> environmental extreme movement, rely on wind, solar, and nothing else -- neil: right, right. buying time from that? >> yeah, but the damage is does tonight american economy is significant. the damage to the new york economy is worse. america can be energy independent today. neil: this thing with fracking, new york seems to be telling people not open for business, not open for helping you. >> i fought the battle to open new york to the big box stores -- neil: like home depot. >> home depot, fareway and costco. fareway stupe market was the real one. why were prices more expensive for food, groceries, all clothes in harlem, but not sometimes in

the midtown, manhattan. they said it was racism or discrimination. the stores were so darn small, the stores had very small inventory, they had a charge of a high price, they were not turning over the inventory. we allowed fareway to come in, deliberately allowed them in harlem, and prices came down to the same level of the rest of the city. here, here you are putting the interest of a small, special interest group way ahead of the interest of the ordinary consumer, and the person that gets hurt the most here is the poor person, the middle class person, limited income. they get killed when costs are so high so for a party like the democratic party, not to be enormously in favor of these big box stores makes the most sense. neil: coi understandincidental s particular big -- coincidental that it's nonunion?

>> the world's ending because it's nonunion? neil: if they unionize tomorrow, this would go away. >> that's true now, not 15 years ago. neil: i understand. what signal do you think the politicians send to constituents when they sooner reward their friends than their constituents. >> much more worried about campaign donations and who sends out workers to help them get elected. neil: why aren't voters furious? >> democratic party is supposed to be the party of the poor. come on. this is the party of the special interest if you do something like that because poor people are hurt the most by the failure to have big box stores in the communities because not only do the big box store prices make it accessible to buy things, but it brings down prices in all the stores, gets it at a sensible level. neil: creates jobs in the end. net, net, you have an increase in jobs. >> the reason i was an advocate

of the big box stores when i was mayor, unemployment in new york city was 10.5%. i looked at everything i could to grow jobs, and up like president obama, when i went, had four years in office, i cut that rate, not quite in half, but almost in half because i did everything i could to bring jobs in. i didn't think of political ideology. i thought about what are the practical things to do to put people back to work? neil: don't you think in retrospect it was a better job? [laughter] rudy, just remembered by new york who is the favorite mayor, best mayor of all the great mayors this fine city had, that guy, number one. not too shabby. a record number of the late loans, a record number of high college tuition price. don't think they are connected? wait until you hear what we discovered. ♪ ♪

why do more emergency workers everywhere trust duracell? duralock power preserve. locks in power for up to 10 years in storage.

now...guaranteed. duracell with duralock. trusted everywhere.

neil: this just in, we may be looking at washington's next bubble to burst. the college public tuition shot up more than 8% last year, the same week we learned a third of college loans are delink went this year after washington upped the federal loan guarantees to college students to help them, well, with these soaring college prices. is one beseeding the other because the bottom line is the more aide we offer, the more those college tuitions go up. if washington's putting more of the bill that kids can't pay, what's to stop washington from producing even bigger bulls that no one can pay? are they setting their own doom and about to prick their own bubble? dede, rich, and lindsey. what do you think? >> you know, this is a growing problem. the fastest growing component of the household balance sheet is

student debt, expectedded to top $21 trillion for the first time in dlsh $1 trillion. default rates are 22% in the fast two years to 15%. you talk about $200 billion in loan defaults without collateral. because tuition prices are on the rise, the average loan per student is on the rise. in 2005, the average loan was just 17,000. now it's up over 60% in the past seven years to 27,000 per student. it's clearly unsustainable at this point, especially given the labor market conditions, minimal job growth, tepid wage creation. it's impossible not to have further rise in default. neil: what worries me, is the more college loan help we try to provide or boost the amount of loans we give folks, i think that it gives ammunition to the colleges to keep raising tuitions. >> of course. that's what happens.

you know, any time the government is involved in something, and this is a business, the government should get out of this. we need another organization or something in the free market because every time the government gets a hold of government motors, now we have government universities which are failing. it's not working the universities will try to get the free money so they can use it to build their stadiums or air-conditioned dorms or whatever they are doing so it's not working well at all. neil: richard, leaving the government out for now, why is it that colleges then feel the need to keep hiking tuitions to the degree they do, dwarfing inflation, sometimes a factor of three to four. the only other conclusion to draw is because this, you know, college loan money is coming in. >> no, neil. public universities keep jacking up costs because state governments keep decreasing their investment in state education, and what dede says is sacrilege that they should be out of education. education is a public good. neil: you can clearly see the

dilemma; right? a third of the kids are deeling went -- >> living in their parents' basement. >> not because they buy high-tech devices. neil: not saying they are, but that -- >> it's not wrecklessness. neil: way we created is beyond beastly. >> and what we need to do is reinvest with the state governments so that we can stop shifting the costs, to consumers in public education and so i don't think it's a vicious cycle because you boost -- neil: the percentage of state aid and federal aid state education gets is roughly what it was when i was in school, but the college loans that we're now getting are exponentially larger than i was getting in school, and the tuitions are exponentially larger. one is chasing the other. >> that might be federal government, but we see california, ohio, michigan -- neil: just stick it not parents? >> not to the parents, but it's the choices we make. invest here or deinvest in

public education? neil: lindsey, here's the problem with that, and i notice this if you go to the doctor, they ask you, well, do you have insurance? if you say, no, well, today's visit is $10. if you have insurance, today's visit is $1100. joking to make a point. it's one of the many professions that will have a separate price if you have insurance just like when you try to get a car repair, you covered, okay, there's this price. you're not covered? okay, there's this price. what's to stop from thinking we have the same standard when it comes to college education and tuition if you got a loan and coverage, you're going to get jacked up all the more. >> right. sure. essentially, the federal funding supplements 20% to 30% of college students, but that shifts the costs then to the remaining 70%. you're talking about an 8% tuition increase over the past year on average, but many states like california have increased tuition more than 50%, so, again, you're increasing the burden on a smaller percentage

of the students making it much more difficult to continue to finance going to school. it's a balance between the haves and have-notes and government funding is supposed to send students to college to make it affordable, but it's making it less affordable for the vast majority of students. >> the money goes to the bureaucracies of the universities. the kids are not getting it. neil: record number of administrators. >> definitely. why is that? why is it different now than 20 years ago and tuitions are jacked up? the money goes to the administrators. >> what else is jacked up is the interest rates that private banks are charging students taking out legitimate loan, and i agree with the other guest that california has jacked up tuition rates, but at the same time, they have cut their state budgets towards tuition, and i think that's wrong, that if they didn't -- neil: aren't you wagging the tail constantly trying to increase the loan that only increases the the tuition?

>> which is higher, if you invested in the first place, you wouldn't provide loans. >> in an economy so bad that student graduates live in their parents' basement -- kneel nemo -- neil: sometimes they live upstairs. will i see you later? i might. whether i like it or not. we always like it. all right. you're okay with drones if they track down the bad guys; right? what if they snoop on you guys? what if the planes are not looking at some stake house, but they spy on your house? ♪

[ male announcer ] eligible for medicare? that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans,

you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead,

look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. >> give rand a hand, nearly 24 hours after his 13-hour filibuster marathon, ultimately failed, republican kentucky senator rand paul got a nation's pent up rage over drones on u.s. soil into sharp focus, and wyden joined and it got the comedian commending the effort. it startedded when we heard they looked at drones in the skies presumably spying on bad guys, but we learned from eric holder that those drones can kill those guys, not on foreign soil, on

our soil. then we learned that these were not just a few drones r more like thousands of them everywhere. well, nearly half of those american polled support authority using drones to assist in police work, and more than a third oppose it. katherine says this is why we have a constitution and retired navy captain wonders how that 44% supposedly would feel about drones if they were the target or they were the ones spied on. katherine, do you first. what do you make of this? this is something that blew up in our face. >> you know, i think this is -- there's a really big distinction between what government might do with drones over u.s. soil and what private or commercial folks might do with drones over u.s. soil. i don't know if you heard, but there's not one, but two companies that have talked about delivering mexican food using a drone and gps and your phone. that kind of thing sounds awesome.

less awesome, death raining from the skies just because the president thinks he might be a bad guy. neil: by the way, how did they deliver the food? drop it? >> it's super cool. they drop it, there's a parachute, and you order from the app on your phone. neil: that would be good. if there's a drone over my home, if they could drop sausage and peppers, that mitigates it. >> you want a burrito, not a missile. [laughter] what rand paul has done a highlight the fact that although this is a very unlikely scenario, it is something that we should talk about, and, you know, that when we want to talk about, you know, having due process and sort of immediate threats, leather legitimate constitutional questions here, and it's not a case to trust the administration to do the right thing. neil: you know, this is what worried me, and i was one of those idiots not followiig closely in the beginning. we talk about a few drens, the focus on al-qaeda or taliban

elements in the midst of the country. i was okay with that. now there's implications, but then i heard it could run into the thousands, then i heard they could spy on americans who might not be coming from the middle east. average americans could be up to no good and other americans look good, but suspects they are not up to any good. then i started to say, wait a minute, this is harry. how did it get to the point? >> i think, neil, it was started in that -- the -- the vie knack cue lar, the words used when we started the war on terror, and we were going to bring people to justice, and so you bring criminals to justice, you kill or capture enemies in wartime, so that got muddled. then we went -- the current administration, there is no more war on terror. this is overseas contingency operation, and then you start using the same tools that you used in war, and now you turn it

to tools to prosecute criminals, and then all the sudden, you domesticate the lions. they are weapons of war, and the defense -- the dhs, department of homeland security, has been purchasing vast amounts of wartime tools, and the question is why if you don't buy stuff unless you use it, what's the intent here because these are weapons of war. neil: what i'm worried about, captain, you touched on it, are the private companies that have their own, you know drks google's just upgrading the map system, but maybe something else is going op. what is it? >> you know, i'm actually less worried about the private companies. i think people overrate how much privacy they have already. we got, you know, tv cameras everywhere -- neil: you're right about that. >> you can track where people are based on easy pass, their

credit card, their extra rewards card. neil: do they have to make it so obvious now? where we just shrug, okay, these are the times we live in. >> i think that's what the debate is about, the drones feel intrusivement i don't know that they are. neil: drones shoot weapons, katherine. >> well, the weapons thing is a very, very different question than this -- neil: yeah! >> it's different to say, let's make rules about when government gets hands on the data that the private drones collect. i'm not worried about google seeing my backyard. i don't want the state to have it. neil: chuck, the worry is that the government moved past debating the finer points of this. drones are up there, they are clicking away. a lot of the drones are armed. something can go wrong. i don't want to sound like an alarmist, but i don't like the way it's going. >> well, look at the accident rates of unmanned vehicles, they are very high.

well over manned aircraft accident rates so you've got that, whatever goes up comes down. the other thing is if you look at the specifications that the department of homeland security put on their drone purchases, they want -- they demand two things. one, that the platform shall have the capability to identify if a person is carrying a weapon, a gun at night, and the second thing is that it has to be able to monitor and track cell phones. you start to get into these things, and the question is not just does the government have the technology, but who in the government has the technology? does the military have it? i can tell you the military mind set is completely different than the law enforcement mind set, and as i said earlier, a lot of this stuff now is starting to get blurry, and we can't allow that blurriness inside the united states. neil: all right, guys, thank you, both, very, very much. by the way, the drones and similar systems we showed, those are the ones shot today over my

house. i'm sure there's others that you have. anyway, dennis rodman met with north korea kim jung un who is now vowing to drop bombs on us? coincidence? why this guy goes nuclear, it's all so much on rodman. ♪

>> he's an awesome kid. he's an awesome guy. he's awesome, the one thing about the relationship, no one man can do anything, not one man. neil: all right. all i'm going to say here is so much for hoop diplomacy. he called kim jung g un a pal.

especially after promising to nuke the united states after wining and dining perhaps the most bizarre celebrity from the united states which proves to our own steven crowder that one celebrity chaping herself to a white house fence is one thing, two's a crowd, or a crowder. i don't know. steven, what do you make of this whole thing? >> well, first off, i appreciate the play on words you did that with two's a crowder. neil: that's who i am. you are worth the extra effort, but go ahead. >> thank you, neil. you make me feel loved and welcome. first, talk about north korea threatening to nuke the united states. you know, of course, it's laughable. that's namely, i think, because north korean seems to be the worst actors on the planet. remember when the freaky kid who wondered too far off the cabbage patch, assuming room temperature, and the entire country was mourning, how fake that looked? this man who put them in abject poverty, who --

neil: that was fake? >> yeah, yeah, i think it was fake. i think the entire country deserved a razi for that one. [laughter] you know, the same country now, they try to act -- do we believe the threat? no. i'm more of a libertarian. that's what people call me. i don't use it because it's a cop out when you have glenn beck and bill mar claiming to be one thing, the waters are muddy, but that's what people say i am. this is where i get off the libertarian boat. say we have intelligence saying north korea's a threat and continuing threaten to bomb the united states and they prove to be useless as always, well, to me, that's time to put north korea on the crap list and no longer play nice. neil: i'm not worried, as are you with all the sudden heaving a missile to san fransisco, but i'm worried, nutty as they are because they have some of the technology selling it underground because they need the money, and those folks doing something bad to us, and, yet,

there's no effort to try to stop that, prevent that, even slow that. >> right. well i don't know who they sell it to right now, even their buddies in china think they went around the bend. no, i think that's a legitimate threat. base decisions on knowledge at hand. right now, they are not a threat. to use an analogy hear, and liberals hate it because judges and attorneys accuse people who defended themselves when being mugged of using excessive force. if they mug you, put a gun to your head, give me your stuff, i can't assume -- comparing the analogy if we thought north korea is a a threat, i can't assume he just wants my stuff or that that guy needs extra change, and there's nobody around and there's a tool for the sole purpose of causing death at my head. if there's an opportunity to kill him first, and that's not the case. notice how nicely north korea was playing the last few years

under george w. bush, my president, and now owrpd barack obama, they light off rockets like the 4th of july. that's telling. it would be worth it if they had a successful launch, but they are completely incapable. neil: what do you think of guys like dennis rodman, one of the few americans allowed in the country, nothing to be next to the leader, do we use guys like that who might have some in to get the word out that this guy has got to cool it? >> i don't know what kind of in -- rodman is a fake. he's a phony like 90% of the people on the basketball court. as a canadian, a hockey fan, mixed marshall arts, i hate fakery of basketball. what i would do to you in a second slapped on the wrist, foul, foul, foul, but a hockey player in russia is missing all teeth because they want to be tough. put in a retired hockey player. rodman is a fake, a phony, no place in the realm of depot ticks.

>> that's a maybe on rodman as a diplomat. steven, always a pleasure, thank you. >> thank you, sir. neil: all right. meanwhile, did you wonder where the thousands of detained illegals went? what if i told you they don't know? next, the sheriff who feared this, saw this, and now wants answers from janet napiltano all rout this.capital on ♪ u 1% cash back on all purchases, plus a 50% annual bonus. and everyone but her likes 50% more cash, but i have an idea. do you want a princess dress? yes. cupcakes? yes. do you want an etch-a-sketch? yes! do you want 50% more cash? no. you got talent. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card gives you 1% cash back on every purchase plus a 50% annual bonus on the cash you earn. it's the card for people who like more cash. what's in your wallet? i usually say that.

neil: all right. this just in. a lot of illegals locked up and released, they might not ever be found, i mean, ever. that's the fear after reports of up to 5,000 illegal immigrants detained for questioning on various offenses and let go because of pending sequester cuts. two quick things, why released

in the first place of ahead of cuts that were not in effect, and, presumely wouldn't have covered detainees once they had taken effect, and, two, where are the illegals now? ayers county sheriff wants to know, and you're not getting answers. what's the fear? >> well, these are legitimate questions to ask as hundreds of criminal illegals were released just in my county. later we find out that's it's 2,000 plus. there was an additional 3,000 that were about to be released, and the fear is why are we letting criminals go, and we don't know who nay are, and these are questions i've asked, neil, and have been refused numerous times, and even asked the secretary who -- what their names are, what charges are they held on, and what is their criminal history, and, by the way, what towns did you release them in? as a sheriff and all the local police chiefs in the country affected and charged with protecting families, we should know this information.

neil: what's weerld too, sheriff, and you know the math better than i do, but when i heard it explained by one i.c.e. official that it's cheaper for taxpayers having them out of the facilities and being monitored by, i guess, i.c.e. agents, i think to myself, how could that possibly be cheaper? you're talking about thousands of released detainees who would have to be monitored by presumably quite a few monitors. there is no way in heck that would be cheaper. just the math part doesn't add up. >> not only does the math not add up, this is insanity. the fact that we think that somehow that supervisory lease for criminal foreigners in america is going to work, they have no insentive to report in. what are we going to do? deport them? clearly, we have not shown our ability to do that, but all of us who these criminals are, we have 11-plus million illegals in america and we have all

difference of opinions on what to do. give them a path to citizenship, deportation, or some form of any of those items, yet, we all agree until a few weeks ago, including sex tear napitano and president obama that we identify, invairs rate, and deport the 34,000 most violent or serious criminals of this group, and these are the very people that they release. they are not -- neil: we don't know. there could be any violation, a parking violation to something severe. that raises another question. glad you brought it up. part of whatever illegal immigration fix we come up with, whether it's what the white house is espousing or marco rubio or a blend therein, part of the plan for eventually making the illegal tour here eventually legal, i guess, is that we stick to the promise to tighten security at the border and reenforce, you know, our --

our attention to illegalities committed now. if we make short thrifts of that now before it goes into effect, that makes me question the administration's word on keeping to its word. absolutely. >> and here's where many believe this was just an effort to turn up the volume on the doomsday scenario. it looks bad for doomsday scenario, look at the release of thousands of criminals. i hear these are not because we've all said these are the worst of the worst, can't have it both ways and say they are not so bad. i'm told by i.c.e. agents, federal agents, they have convictions, not just charges, of everything from weapons violations to drug smuggling, cartel members to drug trafficking, aggravated assault against police officers, child

molestation, and two criminals released from my county from what another i.c.e. agent told me that had charges for manslaughter. this is simply outrageous. there's no answers from i.c.e.. why are that know answering who the people are. if you ask me who's in the jail, i have to give you the name and what they are held on. neil: wow. sheriff, thanks for trying to get to the bottom of this. i think you have a big task on your hands, but good to see you again. >> yes, sir, good to see you, neil. neil: call it sequester or beneath the planet of sequester. the sequel just as stupid over cuts that are not cuts. get ready, as ronald reagan would say -- >> there you go again. this is america.

we don't let frequent heartburn come betwn us and what we love. so if you're one of them people who gets heartburn and then treats day afr day... block the acid with prilosec otc and don't get heartburn in the first place! block the acid with prilosec otc [ male announc ] e pill eachmorning. 24 hours. zero heartbur lead paint poisoning affects one million children today.

it's also 100% preventable. if your home was built before 1978, visit leadfreekids.org to learn more. you are gonna need a wingman. and with my cash back, you are money. forget him. my airline miles will take your game worldwide. what i'm really looking for is -- i got two words for you -- re-wards. ♪ there's got to be better cards than this. [ male announcer ] there's a better way with creditcards.com. compare hundreds of cards from all the major banks to find thone that's right for you. it's simple. search, compare, and apply at creditcards.com. first round's on me.

>> it's not too much, sounds too late, but health insurers launching a campaign to block a 2.3% cut, 2.3% cut to a portion of the program, just a portion of the program called medicare advantage. 2.3% off a portion of the program, just a portion. now, i like pie, and i like pie charts. this one chose the tiny amount we are talking about so now a small cut to a small cut of one program generally off limits, dede, rich, and lindsey are back. dede, more proof than even when we want to touch the pie, it's thrown back in the face. >> yeah, 2%, give me a break of the that's not a pie. that's the top of the crust. you're not touching it. actually, i think you need to take away the whole pie, need a new one. get rid of medicare, adopt the federal employees' health care

program because that takes over tenure, it's $1 trillion -- well, reduces the deficit by $1 # trillion which is important. it's not working now and will go away all together if we don't do something. medicare's not working, not for the retirement age -- neil: gut it? >> gut it. neil: that should go well. i know what you're saying. rich, i know you've been won over by the argument. kill it. >> blown over by it. neil: okay. >> you know, republican governors, nevada, arizona, florida, michigan support not only leaving medicare, but expanding it and medicaid rather so that's well out of the mainstream. neil: support it because they have a gun to the head and it's a federal government is going to pick up a lot of the costs, who are they to deny that because residents pay a higher bill without it; right? >> they have to represent. kneel -- neil: you're right.

>> medicare advantage allows medicare beneficiaries to receive benefits in a private plan, but in order to e lit sit market participation, there's fees higher than a typical fee-for-service. what that 2010 law does is bring these fees for the advantage programs back down in line with the fee for-service, we talk about two cents for every dollar paid out, advocates argue it's reducing benefits, prevention plans, and puts a burden on the elderly, but this translates into a savings of 11 billion, and just the fiscal year of 2013, so, again, it's a balancing act, continuing the difficult conversation of allowing the elderly to receive these benefits, but, also, reigning in that government balance sheet. neil: i didn't understand a thing you said, but it was said so well that i now agree. that's how smart she is. i now agree with her. [laughter] in all seriousness, you raise