the -- cosof freom continues on the place for business. fox. stick around. next week, a brand new cavu for you and the middle of a budget brouhaha. your money, 're all over it. ♪ ♪ >> david: folks, check a minute and guess who said the following -- "the fact we're here today to debate raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. it is a sign that the u.s. governmnment cannot pay its own bills. i therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase america's debt limit." well, you think it was conservative senator ted cruz? or marco rubio? no. try barack obama. then senor barack obama in 2006. yet, to what he says now. >> i have heard people say well, in the past, there have been negotiations around raising the debt ceiling. it's always a tough vote, because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we are

running up our debt. >> you have never seen in the history of the united states the debt ceiling or the threat of not raising the debt ceiling being used to extort a president. >> david: extortion? is the president right or wrong? hi, everybody. i'm david asman. welcome to "forbes on fox." in focus with steve forbes, rick unger, morgan brennan, mike osanian and sabrina schaefer. steve, if this is extortion? isn't the president guilty of doing this a couple of years ago? >> sure. guilty of the anti-democracy and arrogance. there is negotiation around raising the debt limit, and budget issue. he rammed through congress healthcare bill that no one likes. it's more up on popular today than three years ago wh it was passed. becoming unworkable. the american people say enough. he says that is arrogance. i think there is another word for it. >> morgan, speaking of it.

extortion is a loaded word. is the president right to use it? >> it's a loaded word. i see why he uses it when you look at the deaf six. this is poor politics and this is worse f business. you have the republican leaning chamber of commerce saying quit tieing this together and get legislation through. in the last couple of years when you look at the economic fiscal policy face-off,he economy, the american economy has been a thing that tas a hit. that is without throwing a hot topic issue like obamacare in the mix. look at 2011hen the last debt ceiling face-off happened. we saw the stock markets plunge. >> david: we did. >> rating downgrade. >> david: true. then shortly afterwards the stock market came back up and they ignor the debt rating t. but extortion? the word "extortion' a strong word. the president seems to forget what he said, which would be called extortion by his definiti as well. >> extortion is criminal.

this president is grasping for straws because he knows that 53% of americans realize obamacare will drive their healthcare costs up. republicans are doing the right thing. this is risky business. they realize obamacare is not ready for the big but. it wll drive up st and cut jobs. we have a lot of work that has to be done to implement this properly. >> david: but rick, on this debt issue. by the way, president obama i not the only one t commit hypocrisy. harry reid and nancy pelosi voted to raise the debt ceiling. >> i'm shocked. who knew the president was a politician? be care waffle you say in the senate. you may be in the white house some day. but david, i am suggling to see where you draw a comparison to what he said when he was a senator to what he is talking about now? obamacare didn't exist when he was a senator. by the way, i would love one of our panelists, any one of

them, to tell the audience when in our history a piece of legislation, major piece of legislation, a signature piece of legislation for any president was held like this and he was -- if he didn't do away with his own signature legislation, they were going to close the government? >> david: signature legislation, by the way, that was carried through with the nuclr option, somethg that affected one-sixth of the economy. didn't have a singl republican vote. >> by the way, the country doesn't want them to defund. >> david: john tandy, look at what has happened the debt. it's exploded in the past four years. it has grown from $10 trillion to about $17 trillion. in just four years. we cannot continue on this course. >> yeah, thiis why republicans should be obstructionists. obamacare is bad for our health. big government is bad for the economy. my view is if the republicans aren't defunding one and shutting down the other, what is the point of electing

republicans? we keep hearing about the bad potics of the republicans acting obstructionists this way. much worse policy for republans is get to 102014 and say obamacare is in full flower and the government is larger. why did we put them in power in 2010 to begin with? >> david: a great point. look at what has happened since 2010. the republicans called obstructionist and the process might look ugly. but let's take a look at what has happened. federal spending as a percent of gdp topped out in 2010. right before the election. at 26.5%. of gdp. it has come down since the republicans were elected dramatically. to 23.5%. >> the person that is got of extortion is president obama. if you look at the last three years. if you look at his record level of spending, the record vel of borrowing coupled with the bond buying by the fed. that destabilize the value of

the u.s. dollar. it's a form of extortion that has been particularly cruel to the poor, and the elderly who rely on fixed income. so the psident committed extortion here. he has hurt the poor and elderly the most. >> david: hold on, steve. this is important. we have cut federal spending dramatically since the republicans came to power. obstructionism doesn't look good on the nightly news. buthe fact is, it has helped lower the cost of the government dramatically. >> yeah. david, the only good thing that has happened in recent years for economy. less reurces are being drawn out. the sequester, the president agreed to it because he never thought the republicans would follow through on it. especily with regard to militariment the way e sequester is handled is an atrocity, but e result for the economy is good. that's why we are getting the growth we get this year. more resources in the private sector less than the government. >> morgan, go ahead. >> if we want to d something about the spending, why stop at obamacare, why not start

tying things to tax reforms and entitlements. you don't see that happening. >> republicans are advocating -- y, but the idea of wrapping obamacare in to this debate is just going to prolong the inevitable. i will say that quantitative easing is continuing in part according to the federal chairman ben bernanke this week, in part because of the fiscal standoff. >> david: that is a whole other argument. sabrina, is there going to be some kind of compromise beeen the parties? >> i think there probably will be. but look, right now, the president is on the defensive. we see him starting to go out on a tour to defend big government. and at the same time, stron majority of americans are saying they want to reign in government. i think that the president actually looks bad here. pointing fingers, using words like extortion. going to kansas saying big gornment is good. >> david: rick, the american people don't like obamacare. they don't like details of it.

they want to put off and they want to change. can the president continue to go against their wishs? >> let's be clear what the wishes. are while the american people, the majority do not like obamacare at this point, absolutely true. the overwhelming majority do not want it happen the way the republics in congress are tryi. they do not want it defunded or revoked. they do see things they think they want -- >> david: hold on, hold on. why doou say these things? >> wait, wait, wait, wait, please. >> david: we can't let you hit and run like tha >> fox news is saying it today. >> david: do they want it defunded or not? steve? >> fox news. >> american people oppose the way getting rid of obamacare by defunding. they want direct assault. repealed or changed. >> do they? >> since the president won't do that, defunding is the only tool. >> may i add some data, please >> david: five seconds, quickly. >> every pool, look at the poll of independents. >> no, give you the data. >> david: five seconds.

>> i got it on fox news. excuse me. i want my five seconds. i got it on fox news today where they pointed out the pew poll. % of the country still favors obamacare match. jurorty does. 26% of those who are against it do not want it defded. go to the pew poll folks. on google. >> david: the battle will have to happen some other time. thanks, guys. >> that's why i think we fell in love with it. that's why we are all attracted to it. >> it's saucy. >> david: that's right. you know what she says is really saucy? neil cavuto going to d.c., mixing it up as the spending debate heats up with the decision-makers. first on fox news at 4:00 p.m. eastern. then on fbn a 8:00 p.m. be there. up next here, the new i.r.s. alert that the tax agency now said to have checked if the conservative groups included anti- 'bama language on the literature. more proof that tea party targeting was all about

politics. @a

i'm julie banderas. see you back here at 1:00. now have back to the "forbes on fox." >> david: well, this one may raise doubt about the i.r.s. scandal supposedly just being about money. the tax agency looking for groups looking for a tax exemption had anti-obama rhetoric on the litature and website and kept monitoring some groups even after they

got an ception. wonder who the groups were? steve you say this i proof that the i.r.s. scand is about politics, not money. >> in terms of money this is chump change. this is all about politics. the proof is when scandal revealed itself, the i.r.s. agents lied about it. they said it was a few rogue agents. if it wasn't a crime, why did they lie about it? >> david: rick, more than 80% of the organization of the new target were conservative. is that coincident? >> it's hard to say. >> david: , please. [ laughter ] >> guys, there probably weren't many websites that are liberal with the anti-obama rhetoric. it should shock nobody that the i.r.s. would look at the websites to see if they are violating the 501c4s. if they unfairly target one side, that is wrong. what you have to show it seems to me that they are not looking at both sides of this to see where the violations are of 501((c)4s.

if they get improper tax exemption that hurts you me. >> david: emac, we had the investigative report of the inspector general for the irsay, russell george, that said we did not find evidence that the criteria you identify, progressives, were used to select potentia political cases. it's all art targeting one group, that was conservatives. >> lisn, there is an ugly history here. yes, i do think that the tea party was unfairly targeted based on the evidence as it's been presented. the problem is the i.r. is abiding by a circus mirror of a tax code is a subjective. it doesn't have bright lines. the groups are doing social welfare, trying to educate the people. what they were doing is at the i.r.s., they were using media reports for their leads. "washington post" column against the tea party.

that is really bad. but having said such a subjective tax code, david, here is a problem. this is like asking the i.r.s. to behave like cats, herding themselves in to a group. they can't do it without the bright lines. >> david: mike, it is also about who at the i.r.s. was doing it. at first, they were blaming, i.r.s. cenal was blaming the local folks in cincinnati. now there is a clear line to washington. the washington folks were using the i.r.s. to go after a political movement, thtea party that threatened the democrats' re-election. >> whad the lowest learner e-mail that was discovered from 2-1/2 years ago. after, long before the statements were ever made about cincinnati where learner was clearly concerned and nted this to go up the higher levels of the i.r.s. which is what steve touched on earlier. but look, perhaps maybe you could givehe obama administration the benefit of the doubt. if you hadn't had the fast and furious for the guns for money down in mexico. if you didn't have the a.p. situation. if you didn't have the lies about benghazi. but this is a pattern with

them, david. theyie about everything. >> sabrina, using the power of governme to punish a polical opponent is an impeachable offense. it's one of the impeachable offenses against richard nixon. >> right. i'm glad that report came out. add it to the pile of evidence. don't you remember last ju when the treasury department inspector said look, if they were investing progressive groups it was far less common, less instrustive and less obstrucktive. this is political and it has somethg to do with the complications of the tax code. this is a government that wants to muse the political opponents. not a conservative issue. this is about liberty. >>avid: john, is that all just coincident that 80%0% of the groups were conservative? in this case, in other cases over 90% or it just happened before important re-election campaign? >> no, it's not coincidental. it's always going to be the case that entities like this are politicized. but to me the bigger scand is th we live i a country we

have to prove our income to the federal government. probably the bigger scandal of that is we're guilty until proven innocent in eyes the i.r.s. reform is naive. only way to fix this is apolish this in favor of national sal tax where we don't prove what we earn. >> david: a great point. there is something about the i.r.s., guilty until proven innocent that is anti-american. i think erybody could agree with that. the navy red shooter set up red flags before the ra rampage. now they want them to start snooping on folks like this instead. that's in "cashin' in." but first, helped make him a billionaire and now green energy projects pulled him down to the lowly millions. did t. boone pickens show us that greennvestments are a bad bet? we'll debate that next.

thank you orville and wilbur... ...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.

>> david: well, this week, foes releasing the new richest people i america list. energy tycoon t. boone pickens no longer on the list. the oil guy fortune falling below $1 billion after seeing investments in wind energy go up in smoke. emac, taxpayers on the hook for a lot of the green investmes. you saw it's a proof it's a waste. >> john duer runs kleiner perkins and says green invement doesn't depend on government investing. it's supply and demand.

so we see the venture capitalists bringing back the invest in the the green tech, back to 2009 levels. the resent survey said two-third are saying that they are going to invest less this year versus 2012. because they are seeing that the moy, returns on the vinnestment are notoming in. >> david: so why does president obama want to double down on the wind energy that is a bad bet? >> you know how i feel about wind energy. i'm not surprised that t. boone pickens would lose money off of wind energy because i don't think it's financially viable like otr technoloes but it is important to remember for every bankrupt fisker you have a tesla which is a success story. that electric car company, and the forbes billionaire, that company paid back the half-billion dollar government loan this year. nine years early. we have seen that stock surge more than 400% in the last 12 months. >> david: john, even accepting that math figure that we got from morgan, that means 50% of our investments

have gone bad. >> this is a beautiful story. this is a reminder when you get in bed with government, it comes back to haunt you. the airline government and now in this concept called green energy. when you pair up with the government on a horrifying idea that could never be funded in the private sector, u are going to lose. hopefully other investors figure it ou >> rick, are you a 12th censure rekind of guy? >> i'm trying to deal with the logic ofhat you are saying. lehman broths went broke five years ago this week and thgovernment gave money to investment banks tt means we should never invest in invest banks because an energy company didn't do well. >> david: the government shouldn't invest in investment banks. that's for sure. >> wai nohifting off the point. look at what you are saying in your argument. like the government, don't like it. guess what? everybody is, everybodys

investment bank investments are up right now. >> i don't think the government should invest in investment banks. what about us investing in things like nd mills, when it's a bad investment? his butt in the wind business. it loo like the taxpayers will, too. >> yeah, david, the government shouldn't investment capital business because it doesn't have the talent for it. let the private investor cease what works or doesn't work. why is the government in the venture capital business anyway? green or housing. let people make the decision not the bureaucrats taking money from them and give it to political friends. >> i wish i couldnvest in green energy and lose my butt. >> david: informers say name on the list show how to get on a future billionaire's list. the nas coming next.

>> david: we are back. time for the name to help you get on future forbes richest american list. >> vanguard dividend appreciation. etf that tracks the stock investment made by berkshire hathaway warren buffett. >> david: smart guy. morgan? >> yeah, i love this etf. just don't expect to make your own billion dollars off of it. low-risk, low-reward. >> david: so kay. lifestyle stock. equity lifestyle property. >> this is tiedo the cover figures. i pays nice 3% dividend. recently upped t guidance.

>> david: emac? >> price for lifestyles of the rich and famous right now. 33 types earnings. buy itn the down swing. >> david: that's it for "forbes on fox. have a great weekend. eric bolling and "cashin' in" starting now. ♪ ♪ >> eric: you better not be packing heat if you want that mocchachino. >> customers should not bring them inside the starbucks store. >> eric: the ceo asking customers to lve their guns at home and now a lot of americans, pro-gun americans are mad as hell. is he right or stepping on your rights? plus -- >> obviously, there were a lot of red flags. >> officials admitting there were warning signing about the navy yard shooter before he went on his ram pain. we heard this before about mass killers. so is the government missing all the red flags because it's too busy snooping on innocent americans? and then, call them the lost generation, young people who help g