us tonight, we thanks for being with us. good night from new york. . neil: welcome, everybody, i'm neil cavuto. kicked in the buns for not selling as many buns. the corporate world can be so cruel and mcdonald's former ceo don thompson knows it leaving because customers weren't coming. fried because he wasn't selling enough fries. happens all the time in the private sector rarely if ever in the public sector. the same folks who bought healthcare.gov are rehired by the irs to work magic there. talk about inbred incompetence rewarding it! a hard charging ceo is out even though his company still made $4.76 billion last year, and

not so hard charging bureaucrats get the score of another day in another place despite losing hundreds of millions of dollars the past few years. the difference of course, is mcdonald's shareholder pay for the executive missteps. we pick up the tab for bureaucrats' missteps. what uncle sam with learn from ronald mcdonald? at least in ronald mcdonald, he kicks himself in the buns. what do you make of this, john? >> well i think if you take the fortune 500 ceo's and executive vice presidents or upper management and think how many of those guys could run something in politics? and you would think nearly all of them or most of all of those guys could do that. but you look at politicians and you ask how many of the guys, the bureaucrats could do the job of the fortune 500 ceo's and think none none or few of them. that's the difference. the private enterprise is a true meritocracy, if you don't do well, people are moving up.

politics is a favor system. it's the isaiah thomas symptom. you can fail all you want function the right people you stay in power. neil: whatever is going on catherine, defies description. the tenure of a ceo is shorter and shorter he or she is likely to be on the job of 24 months. in the case of mr. thompson it was three years but he's out. the bureaucrats who came up with health care and everything else, not only do they live to fight another day but live to fight another decade at a minimum. what's the difference? >> this guy, the entire t was ceo the company was declining, they asked him to go or else they're not going to make as much cash. the irs their decisions aren't tied. they're always going to be around. they could have hired my grandma to do technology services. the amount of cash they make doesn't depend on make the decisions right. why wouldn't they make them on

other reasons. these are clearly political reasons, we don't know why definitely not the best person for the job, and they had to know that. neil: you know what i'm wondering? i tried to give every bit of the doubt to this john not trying to hire more personnel, so what they do is swap a public sector worker from one field, let's say the healthcare.gov to the irs, as if moving pieces on a chess board makes it any more appealing. >> sure, who you know. look at the ambassador who went to argentina who doesn't speak spanish. this administration is not new to this. this is political favors. they have connections, they failed in one area, they simply get the decks of the titanic are reshuffled. they're not being replaced. it's a matter of who you know and if you know the right people, you simply stay in power. neil: i look at this and i hear people who hear the comparisons say the mcdonald's

guy is going to leave with a tidy fortune. you pick on government workers who don't make a fraction of that and hold them to the same standard. what do you say? >> these people are held to a different standard in terms of the fact, they were able to mess up way, way more and be working. it wasn't only hhs, it was vermont, massachusetts audits investigation revealed tens of thousands of coding errors they put in there that led to vulnerabilities in the system. this is directly their fault and tried to blame it on other people saying it was politics, it was management. no. you putting errors in the coding system is your fault. they have accountability problem, you would never be working at all in the private sector with a record like that. neil: great takes on all of this. forget paper performance. what about paying for the food police? is mcdonald's a victim of the dietary correct crowd? ceo kicked out the door after mickey d's went on the health kick and restaurateur says that

is the problem here. zane, what went wrong, do you think? >> i think, neil, it was the perfect storm. look at asia, china, with food chain supply. they had problems with their meat. neil: right. >> russia, the political issues that happened with russia where we started our embargo and russia did the same thing about regard to mcdonald's. neil: putin said don't go mcdonald's, if you do i shoot you. no, he didn't say that. >> he whispered it. they have a large international presence which impacts obviously earnings and here, it was also the perfect storm. they tried to move off of the value message onto the better burger message. neil: i think they were trying -- i read a prompter so i know all about this i think they were under enormous pressure to provide the salads, the healthy wraps and all that stuff nothing wrong with it but i think it flooded the stores that they didn't know which way to go. and it meant longer lines.

>> in fairness neil the way it works in the chain business is you test it. 100 restaurants, 1,000. neil: no one can tell me the salads were going off the charts. >> no, the trend in the country, not as opposed to fat. the fat is here and gone. a trend keeps coming. butch cassidy and the sundance kid. neil: does the healthy stuff sell for you at applebee's and all the chains? >> good question no. neil: really? >> right. having said, that here's what we know, and our research says we've got to touch the millennial. that's the coming up people. neil: what does the millennial want? . >> the millennial wants healthier food. neil: i don't believe that. >> they do. they do. neil: then wendy's is appeal to that crowd. >> wendy's was viewed as a better burger. it was always viewed in that world, if you will. neil: but they're all doing

better than mcdonald's. what do they see that these guys don't? >> mcdonald's is the thousand pound gorilla with 20,000 restaurants and billions and billions of dollars, it's an aircraft carrier that's moving and if they made a wrong decision, you can't reverse, it it's not a cigarette and turn around and go back the other way. neil: you're one of the best restaurateurs i know. >> we're only one, you know. neil: there is that. you are successful and show you're successful you don't gain a pound, which is wild to me. how would you right the mcdonald's ship, how would you address what ails? >> terrific question. i'm glad i'm not ceo of mcdonald's. i am the ceo of comparable kinds of situation in the new york area. neil: make money and do well. >> correct. i would get rid of the marketing campaign that they went to. they moved into trying to be warm and touchy and feely, i have a saying they tell our folks in kansas all the time.

if we're in the food business, we want to show food, and we want our consumer to eat the television set. i want it to look so good when it's on air, they pick the telephone and crunch into the screen. if it's in the media. neil: something scary about that, i see where you are going. >> if it's in the print media it's got to look delicious. they moved to trying to be warm and fuzzy and sing the songs and play off of our veterans, there was no food shown. start there. so i would go back to -- but slowly, again, we can't right this ship by swinging the wheel to the hard left and hard right, i'd start to move back to who the consumer is the value oriented consumer. neil: why don't they just go back to making burgers and fries? . >> because there's that trend. neil: have a couple of salads, don't have 50 salads? >> that's why they went south. they made this move turned

this wheel as fast as it could turn and the aircraft carrier started turning and turning. neil: you think they can come back? >> you can't count them out. they're 20,000 restaurants strong, billions of dollars, research for research people for peach. just making the switch at the top, i don't know what that does. he's got bring a team, in a whole bunch of people, and look at his cmo chief marketing officer. what's the message they want to give? i think the consumer is confused right now where they went from value oriented to health oriented to a better burger? they're not a better burger. you have all the mosquito bites, five guys smashburger. neil: as soon as you kowtow to the food police, you lose your identity. >> no doubt you kowtow to the food police. on one hand, neil. neil: here's a salad. >> no. neil: all right, i was trying. >> i wish it was that easy. i wish it was that easy.

neil: zane thank you very much, he knows what he speaks of. the media is piling on romney for wealth not a word for hillary clinton and hers, after this. your daughter has a brilliant idea for her science project. and you could make it happen. right? wrong. because you're not you you're a cancer hospital and your daughter... she's a team of leading researchers... and that brilliant idea is a breakthrough in patient treatment that could save thousands of lives. which means you need a diverse team of advisors helping you. from research data analytics all the way to transformation of clinical care. so you call pwc. the right people to get the extraordinary done. they challenge us. they take us to worlds full of heroes and titans. for respawn, building the best

teractive entertainment begins with the cloud. this is "titanfall," the first multi-player game built and run on microsoft azure. empowering gamers around the world to interact in ways they never thought possible. this cloud turns data into excitement. this is the microsoft cloud.

friday night, buddy. you are gonna need a wingman. and my cash back keeps the party going. but my airline miles take it worldwide. [ male announcer ] it shouldn't be this hard. with creditcards.com, it's easy to search hundreds of cards and apply online. creditcards.com.

. neil: here's how you know the mainstream media is taking mitt romney flirting with another presidential run seriously. they are seriously dredging up the same old wealth bark stuff. take a look at the headlines in the past week. all highlighting romney real estate spree the "washington post" letting readers compare their square footage to romney's with a button that says humiliate me seriously?

not a word about hillary clinton's wealth or the fact she and hubby bill have built $100 million fortune since leaving the white house. economist steve moore not at all surprised. interesting in the class warfare argument, i want to be fair and balanced. if you want to go after romney and money and parking garages, fine, then you ought to be just as zealous going after the clintons and their wealth after leaving office. and i don't see that. >> yeah, look, and it's not just the clintons by the way. if you look at the past democratic presidents they came from very wealthy families. i mean obviously, the kennedys -- neil: kennedy had a sense of humor about it. my father said he was going to pay for a landslide would and laugh about it. this is over the top. >> that's exactly the problem. why are they doing this? it worked the first time. romney lost the election because voters thought mitt romney cared about rich people

not people like themselves. and that's why they're using this tactic again. if mitt romney is going to be a plausible candidate in 2016 he has to sort of maybe make fun of his wealth or do what bruce rouner in illinois did who is practically a billionaire, he said i'm rich, nobody can buy me off. and i'd like to see mitt romney use those kind of tactics. the double standard. think about this when is anybody recently talked about, the famous cattle futures trades that hillary made. neil: you mentioned about jfk and the democratic presidents who were wealthy, franklin roosevelt comes to mind. if i were mitt romney or a rich republican candidate, how do i compare to those guys? why didn't you bring it up with those guys? if you didn't have a problem with franklin roosevelt's wealth or the kennedis' wealth he's reluctant to go there? >> he is. i think that's one of the

reasons he lost. he never effectively took that argument on. if i were mitt romney, i would say i was a businessman, i created wealth more jobs in one month than barack obama created in six years, use that rhetoric. neil: and i didn't build my fortune off my time in the white house. i built mine brick by brick, you're quite right. >> by the way, i do not think that mitt romney as great an orator as he is i i don't think he's making $200000 to make a speech like hillary clinton is. neil: maybe 50. >> i know you are. neil: steve moore, thank you very much. >> thanks, neil. neil: romney is not taking the rich bashing lying down this time. going on offense, attacking hillary clinton and how out of touch she is especially when it comes to understanding real jobs and real folks. to the fox biz all-stars, veronica dagher and tracy byrnes. tracy, might be a positive

strategy to that, what do you think? >> focus on himself. steve is right. be proud of what you've done face, it admit it yeah i'm rich because i got my knuckles dirty and worked. bashing hillary is not right. he needs a nod from the gop before he goes to the other side and starts bashing anybody. neil: he is trying to jump that procedure. what do you think we're going to make wealth an issue. i say fine if that's what you want to go, you better do it with everybody. all of the republican field is wealthy and one of the democrats is very, very wealthy. >> the wealth issue is here to stay especially among the younger people. they want to hear from a candidate they can relate to the millennials, don't want to hear from a person they perceive as a wealthy businessman. neil: so how did john kennedy get away with it? >> it was a different time. people didn't have student loan debt and go through two financial meltdowns.

i think the rhetoric has changed a lot. neil: now we're suspicious of success of people. >> it's a dichotomy, people want to be rich they also resent the rich. i don't know how you fix that. >> we loved camelot. everything about camelot, jackie o. everything about them was perfect, and aspirational. now it's bad. it's evil and the white house is the ones proclaiming it. neil: people always want to say, you know you get paid what for doing what? there's some bad motives to it. >> again, i think that's what's coming out of the white house, that they're evil. neil: you say go on offense. >> absolutely. be proud of it. stand up. >> i think you have to acknowledge it. i'm not a strategist but in terms of how you present yourself too, i don't know if it's the language or the way you relate or the stories you tell. we're hearing him tell more stories about his mormon background and done service works with the poor.

hearing the stories is more compelling and people relate to that. neil: why doesn't he say i don't begrudge hillary clinton's wealth they got wealthy after they left the white house and capitalized on that. god bless them. here's how i differentiate, go on offense. >> talk about how they lived in a basement and had nothing. they had a billion kids and couldn't feed them. maybe two billion. she had fight. she had a lot of kids. neil: the christmas card opens up. >> it's a nice looking family. >> nice, talk about that. neil: when we come back, i spoke too soon remember last night when i was praising the president for getting budget priorities right? turns out, i was -- wrong.

many people clean their dentures with toothpaste or plain water. and even though their dentures look clean, in reality they're not. if a denture were to be put

under a microscope we can see all the bacteria that still exists on the denture and that bacteria multiplies very rapidly. that's why dentists recommend cleaning with polident everyday. polident's unique micro clean formula works in just 3 minutes, killing 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. for a cleaner, fresher brighter denture everyday. [vet] two yearly physicals down. martha and mildred are good to go. here's your invoice, ladies. a few stops later, and it looks like big ollie is on the mend. it might not seem that glamorous having an old pickup truck for an office... or filling your days looking down the south end of a heifer but...i wouldn't have it any other way. lo ok at that, i had my best month ever. and earned a shiny new office upgrade. i run on quickbooks. that's how i own it.

. neil: i love that graphic, i can't get enough of it. it is time for neil's mail i was wrong, i praised the president last night for appearing to get budget priorities right. i was wrong when i commended him for boosting defense spending by 38 billion dollars. i was wrong when i simply assumed he would get that money from somewhere else so as to avoid blowing the spending caps so vital to at least some spending restraint and i was wrong when i said he would find the savings. now i'm hearing he has no intention of trying to find the savings. true. the white house confirming as much that the president will seek to bust limits on domestic and defense spending that both parties to agree to as part of that ma'am bee pam bee sequestration deal a few years ago. the white house isn't hiding the fact these guys are gloating from it.

quoting from a white house statement -- that's their way of saying cut the cap, the president signed onto the cap to all of the caps, i guess i shouldn't be surprised. maybe last night i was getting ahead of myself maybe i was just hungry convinced that the president meant what he said when he said he was going to stick to budget limits which both parties agreed. you would think i'd learn especially after hearing i could keep my doctor when i couldn't keep my doctor. that lie cost us, this insults us, worse dooms us to david webb who says the president gets his way with this, it's over for us. he's saying that's a manufactured crisis. >> that sounds familiar same thing that syriza won half the seats in parliament said remember the cradle of democracy. communism redone. there was no plan to cut at

all. neil: to say all you're worried about, the debt, of course. >> austerity. you left a letter out of the word cap it's an r, it's an r. neil: what do republicans do in response? they're afraid of looking heartless and what do you do? >> the republicans have to do what pentagon's been doing all along, and i released this a couple weeks ago after high level sources told me ash carter had been told that they should find no work-arounds around sequestration, control the generals essentially, they need to make sure things are in line according to the white house. that was then, this is now. a president who's a progressive, he thinks throwing money at everything, not targeted spending, not proper spending, not spending the right amount of money for forced readiness to make sure we're ready to respond whether to isis to threats, or to typhoon or great disaster. >> i worry when i hear

democrats saying stop with the austerity talk, just like this guy in your greece, to your point. stop with the austerity thing, and when i don't hear republicans responding, this is a crisis. this debt is a ticking bomb, and they're being mamby-pamby about it. >> you and i talked in december about the budget deal. they never put anything in place to give them a chance. neil: what are they afraid of, david? >> i wish i knew. neil: they're reading the american people, responding positive, the president's poll numbers are ticking up because he's not selling them austerity, not selling cuts and republicans are, and they're afraid. >> yeah, they're afraid. politicians are risk averse they won't take the bold step and make the hard decisions that families and businesses do. do i it within my own life and my business life. do you as well. americans are sick of this and the republicans frankly are not bold in their leadership. i'm not talking about ripping

down the federal budget. neil: no. i commended the president last night at this time saying i'm going to reshift priorities within the cap structure and give money to the defense assuming he would take it out of somewhere else naively so. now saying blow the whole thing off. we do that then what? >> we do, that not only send the message to enemies and not only serious about military and infrastructure. neil: he's saying i'm not going to get it out of somewhere else. >> he's not accounting for what he's spending which is what progressives do and that's what he is. he's saying i'm going to throw money at the problem. our allies and our people and professionals in the pentagon and other areas of government that work well they know what needs to be done. not this mamby-pamby throw money at it, it placates and

makes people feel good. the republicans need to be risk averse, we're like a corporation, look at across-the-board cut, deep dives and targeted spending is necessary because you can't destroy the structure. >> we got $3 trillion to play with here. we can do this. >> we're over $18 trillion in debt, and where is the fiscal conservatism out of republicans? this is their moment. if they fail, the people, the country, are going to turn on the republican leadership, i can guarantee it. neil: no time for soft footballs. >> bold moves. we need bold. neil: crude oil hitting a new six year low today. think what's happening at the pump. pump up the prospects for buying a home? sorry. you're about to get kicked in the gas.

. neil: all right, i'm trying to figure this out. drilling in the ocean, that's fine. drilling on land that is not fine. we got moby dick, tree huggers, hug, all because the white house is quite open now to drilling in the atlantic ocean. not so open to drilling on land or specifically keystone. confused? count former interior secretary gale norton confused as well. i don't get this. it's either both or none. wham i missing here? >> well, you're not missing anything. it's an entirely inconsistent message. what we see is some grand gestures that seem like they're all for energy production but when it gets down to the really practical things that make a difference, he's not there. he's not supportive. neil: all right, but by opening up the atlantic for exploration, does that offset what you could have gotten out of keystone? what am i missing?

>> well it's not a proven area, so we don't know what's out there. it hasn't been explored or opened for generations. and so it's a black box. we don't know what's there, and it's very uncertain. there are lots of places that can fall off the track and never happen. so the keystone pipeline is a trillion, trillion barrel oil resource in canada, that is huge, very predictable, could make a significant difference, and that he's not willing to move ahead with. neil: and exploring oil in the ocean, deep down in the ocean is i would imagine, prohibitively more expensive than what we've got set up with keystone now as we speak right? >> certainly keystone is predictable. the infrastructure is in place. neil: why are they so against, it secretary? you follow it much more closely than i did. what do you think is the problem with this?

they're stubborn about it, kowtowing to the environmentalists and not the unions in the party. what is it? >> i think it's a very symbolic issue for the environmentalists. neil: so the environmentalists trump the unions normally they are both friends of the left now the president has to decide who do i love more, and i guess i love environmentalists more? >> i think that's the direction it is likely to go. i'm hoping that the president is more supportive than he appears to be. certainly looks like he's not going to be supportive. and it is the environmentalists that seem to be winning on this, although it's not really going to make much of an environmental difference because the oil is going to go to china or it's going to be brought down to the lower 48 in rail cars. neil: now, the bottom line is this recovery you hear a lot of economists yelling it's long in the tooth. if you follow the standards of typical rebounds after recession, we're past that

stage. it's distinctly possible in 2016 we could be looking at slowdown at best recession at worst, and wouldn't it bite democrats because you could have been doing something that helped us, provided jobs and didn't. they must realize that? >> we always see booms and busts in the energy cycle. whatever happens with the general economy, we know that there are lots of jobs in the energy industry that are at stake and lots of jobs that could be created that will not be created unless the administration is a lot more supportive. neil: do you see them budging on this or holding this out at one less negotiating tact, and then it will accept keystone? >> there is some possibility of that, and we can certainly hope that that's the case. i think the indications have not been positive lately, and he seems to be staking out a perspective to allow him to veto it. and it's a time when oil prices

are low, so it's not going to look at bad. >> you are right about that. that is the cover for them right now. gale norton, a pleasure thank you very much. >> thank you. neil: is there too much of a good thing back to the oil prices? when it comes to tumbling gas prices, most of us say no way. real estate pro rick says layoffs in the energy sector continue and all of the businesses that feed into the sector, that continues then the hope for housing boom? boom! that's pretty much your fear, right? >> it is a fear, neil. the housing market isn't terribly strong propped up by government intervention, and low oil prices become a bigger problem as we go forward, because of the boom markets that it affects. texas has been a white hot real estate market for three or four years. last year's numbers, texas was up 3% while the rest of the

country was down 3%. >> is that right? texas goes the other way, the rest of the country will get on other way. >> the rest of the country will be affected and it's not just texas, north dakota a strong housing market pennsylvania and colorado recovering nicely and states that aren't just the extraction states but the states to do the refinery businesses that do the transportation and the storage. neil: what about the argument that the boom you get from the wind at our back the lower prices, more spending money, improve a lot of folks' balance sheets, give more money to put down as time goes by. you know what i'm talking about. that won't offset what you're talking about? >> won't right now. if oil prices stay low long enough you will have a little economic stimulus. what you're concerned about is low down payment loans and how stabile they are. it would let people work down debt, qualify for a loan they can put more money down on. the short-term there could be really some severe implications for the housing market in 2015.

neil: what do you see happening if this were to be the case? >> right now we're projecting a flat year in terms of home sales, maybe 4.9 to 5.1 million existing home sales. >> what was it at our height? >> we were at about 7.2 million. neil: think we'll ever get back there? >> probably don't get back there. if everything goes well we might get back there by maybe 2020. neil: really? >> well it probably wasn't sustainable. there are numbers out today home ownership rates have dipped below 64%. so household formation is growing, a lot more of those households that are formed are become rental households rather than buying houses. the millennials are having a hard time finding good paying jobs. a lot of the jobs created are service jobs temporary positions, people can't afford to buy houses with those kind of jobs. until we see the development of higher paying full-time jobs housing market is not going to

recover. neil: all comes back to jobs. why oil is a problem. neil: you explained it so i could understand it. rick, thank you very much. something to keep note of. pipe up or pay up? did the nfl tell the seattle star to start talking or they were going to start fineing? who needs deflated balls when can you have these kind of calls?

there's nothing more romantic than a spontaneous moment. so why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache.

to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com they challenge us. they take us to worlds full of heroes and titans. for respawn, building the best teractive entertainment begins with the cloud. this is "titanfall," the first multi-player game built and run on microsoft azure. empowering gamers around the world to interact in ways they never thought possible. this cloud turns data into excitement. this is the microsoft cloud. welcome back to showdown! i'm jerry rice here discussing the upcoming big race between the tortoise and the hare. jerry, the hare always brags about his speed.

fine, but he crossed the line when he told... hey, turtle neck. want a head start, how about a week. yeah, my performance does the talking, ok. jerry, thanks for having me, i have film to study. hey, how about you rice cake wanna race? you don't want none of this. . neil: all right, the godaddy ad pulled after the internet piled on. the website build ser known for racy commercials but the backlash was surprisingly overwhelming and not for the reason you think.

♪. >> look at scottie! i'm so glad you made it home. i sold you on the website i built with go daddy. ship him out! >> folks did not like that. so flaunting half naked women gets you a pass, but messing with puppies you're in peril. robby robi lidwig is why godaddy is in the dog house. >> this is painful to watch. we're used to seeing naked women, desensitized to almost naked women. when you are cruel to animals, this is a mean intended. neil: it wasn't cruel she just sold it. >> here you have an adorable

puppy. neil: the puppy could have gone to half naked women. >> showing unconditional love and loyalty, finds its way back puts itself in harm's way only to find he's abandrespond and unwanted. neil: that's the site that had the dog and i'm going to remember that. >> well i think so, it was very clear that this puppy was being sold on godaddy. so there was a clear connection there. it was just such poor judgment it was emotionless, it makes me wonder if there was some other agenda. it's getting a lot of play. i don't know if it's good play. neil: says something about us as a society that we don't care if we see half naked women? >> we're used to it it's around football time almost like the boy's locker room gone public. we expect to see it. if you see what you expect it's less shocking. neil: this woman got the puppy and you say all is well.

>> what do you mean? neil: that a beautiful woman got the puppy they were linked together and we don't have to worry. >> but we didn't see that. it was an unresolved commercial, no happy ending. the dog was being given away crying. neil: and i agree with you went through focus groups right? one focus group after another, and they obviously had to pull the ad when they realized it was stupid. >> i'm surprised they didn't know it ahead of time with animal rights groups. it was a mean commercial mean to abandon a puppy and say you're sold, good-bye! it was really unempathic. i'm shocked an advertising agency would go along with it. neil: i wouldn't be offended if it were a cat. >> or a snake maybe. something that's a little harmful. neil: no. >> unless they had another agenda that we haven't talked about. neil: doctor, thank you very much, always good seeing you. >> thank you, don't be mean to

the puppy. neil: what are you thinking? seattle seahawks marshawn lynch is being super brief. nfl officials are telling him not to be. if he doesn't talk to the press he is going to get slammed with a fine. in turn, they got this. >> i'm just here so i don't get fined so you all can sit here and ask me all the questions you want to, i'm going answer with the same question, you can shoot if y'all please. neil: i'm beginning to love this guy. but anyway, turns out he could be slapped with $100000 fine. and by the way not for what he said or didn't say for what he wore. the nfl is saying that hat he was wearing, his not sanctioned by the nfl because it's not a brand that is recognized as a league sponsor. this goes too far. randy says rules are rules, and why are rules rules, randy?

>> that separates us from ending up in anarchy. rules are designed to be followed. it creates order. no one is bigger than the nfl, but this isn't even about the nfl. it's about you're playing in a sandbox. if you don't like it go to another sandbox. no different than me being here. if i walk out here in a t-shirt and shorts, odds are i'm not going to be allowed here. neil: that's not true. i find you to be a very handsome man. >> probably not. neil: rules are rules and this is the way the nfl is made to deal with it? >> rules are rules. i think he should be fined and reprimanded for the obnoxious behavior during the media interview. fine him for that. >> i admire the fact he was that rude but he had nothing to say. i am told i have to speak, i don't want to speak, leave me

alone, why don't you all die. he didn't say that. you know what i'm saying? chill pill. >> think of something to say, you're being paid millions and millions of dollars. neil: he doesn't want to speak. he wants to do speaking on the field. that's why i do all my speak here! >> signed a contract, and that was part of his job. but back to the hat issue, okay? i don't think the nfl has a leg to stand on here, because the rule says that players can't wear brands during the game or nfl sponsored events. neil: you're out to lunch on this. rand these, is not a fox tie. it's not a fox sanctioned tie, so i am technically in violation of fox rules. i'm going admit that on the air. >> yes but there is a big difference. what fox's deal is was the beast mode. that's what this is about. mr. lynch's charity. but the issue is okay if it's not uniform, well, beast mode may be a great cherry.

the next guy wearing a hat, maybe it's not a good cherry. remember brian urlacher wearing the vitamin water hat. he may not have known it but the nfl had a huge contract with pepsi and gatorade. neil: they are also saying it confuses folks and sponsors pay a great deal of money to be associated with them they see someone who does a freebie like this they are called on the carpet for that. where do you draw the line? >> i think you're both missing the point quite frankly, neil. the rule says you only can't wear the brand if it conflicts with nfl sponsor. the hat is made by new era. neil: maybe i didn't look closely enough. what kind of hat is that? >> that is an nfl sponsored brand. new era is the company that made that hat. neil: i would call the war on the sunglass place there. [ laughter ] >> yeah, not a nice looking hat. at the end of the day, this is a hat we are talking about. i would venture to say, the nfl

has a lot of bigger issues to deal with domestic violence child abuse. neil: the press loves. that the hat thing would not have been an issue they made that an issue because he was there? >> it's not about mr. lynch's particular hat it's about having a rule the rule is if it's not sanctioned by the nfl, you can't do it. someone got in trouble for wearing a lacoste shirt during an interview. we don't get into the issue of discretion, okay here, not okay here if it's uniform across the board, no problem. neil: got to have guts rupert i thought this was a fox sanctioned tie. all right, when we come back forget the new england patriots and deflated balls. what is going on with bruce jenner? and whether he even has -- anyway, after this.

congratulations. you're down with crestor. yes! when diet and exercise aren't enough, adding crestor lowers bad cholesterol up to 55%. crestor is not for people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant, or may become pregnant. tell your doctor all medicines you take. call your doctor if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired have loss of appetite,

upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of serious side effects. i'm down with crestor! make your move. ask your doctor about crestor.

neil: all right. well, in tonight's biz blitz, the party of the rich focusing on the poor. republican contenders giving a lot more time to antipoverty programs and the like. but now that one in five children are on food stamps, that could be an uphill climb. what do they do? katrina, liberals are painting conservatives as not compassionate. republicans have to balance that with their fiscal austerity. what do they do? >> they need to hold true to their campaign programs. the principles are there. pro growth. pro education. pro economy. we still have things like the export/import bank going forward with the congress.

those are things corporate welfare. democrats and liberals can use those opportunities to say, see, we told you so. >> 22% of washington dc is on food stamps. they need to leave congress and look out their front door. they're the problem with this. they need to promote jobs. get people working again. if you're working, you don't need to be on food stamps. there's so much fraud and abuse in it anyway. neil: republicans are the one telling them, we have a modern day mitt romney 47% thing to deal with. tough love will be a tough sell. >> yeah, a really tough sell. the optics are so bad. because you look traditionally the party of the rich telling the poor no, you can't have the food stamps. how do you fix it? i don't know. not a bunch of republicans will change the perception of the republican party. neil: what do you think they get

out of it when they say expand the base, we have to reach out. we have to go into churches and poor areas. what do you say when you do that? >> well, you have to walk the talk. they have to talk to people and explain their priorities. the problem aren't the priorities or the principles, it's what they do when they're in office. for example, we're looking at an opportunity right now all across the country to discuss education. a good education is the single most effective way to end poverty for many families. but we're not seeing them. they're not seeing them fight for them right now. neil: all right. on to issue two, ladies. samsung. mobile profit plummeting. apple exploding. not too long ago the roles were completely reversed. veronica, another reminder, don't get used to being on top. you have to keep doing it. >> this is such an uber competitive space. smartphone space.

apple is always evolving and innovating. tim cook put it to the forefront. he has a lot of success in his tenure. we'll see more of that. tough competitor because they have so many devoted fans who are willing to devote their entire eco system to them. neil: life is like snapshot. one on the part of, it's gone. whatever you think can change. >> technology in particular. people are filling. theyfickle.they want the new hot whatever is out there. they sold 9 million iphones. that's crazy. neil: samsung is no slouch. they're selling so many devices, apple. any company that sells 35 million is seen as a failure. >> it's the ecosystem. the apples at home. you have a gadget right here. quite frankly. hard to switch over. so gotcha.

neil: that's a jaded view. talk about jaded. this is surreal for me. talk about flaky now. what is the deal with bruce jenner. he has a new look. new show coming out focusing on life changes he's been making. but apparently among those life changes is becoming a woman. that's fine. whatever you're into. katrina, i'm confused. is this a real push on his part to realize his inner feminine side or is this all for ratings? >> you know, it could be all of the above neil. i cannot imagine what is going in the mind of someone mentally and emotionally with this issue. this is tv today. why it's on television, i'll never know. if people didn't want to see it, they wouldn't show it. >> you're right about that. >> this show is speculation. neil: what do you think about him now? he's veering away from what is a traditionally male look. not that there's

anything wrong with it. >> he's maybe making a stand for a lot of people that feel this way. e entertainment is capitalizing on this. people will watch this. neil: you think this may not be anything he wants to do, but that it's a way to keep the thing going. >> i think this is what he wants to do. he's doing it in front of the camera to help civilization. neil: i think that's the end of civilization. >> if he wants to do it, he should do it. maybe make money on it. neil: that's such a liberal understood to say. be comfortable with your inner self. katrina, do you buy that that. >> yeah, i do. neil: oh, for god's sake. >> he's everywhere. he's talking about it. he will capitalize on it. after all we're a free market people here so have it. neil: i don't know how rome looked in its final days. i have a feeling this is exactly, exactly what

was going on. it wasn't just barbarians. >> that might be right too. neil: "strange inheritance" and the strange things people are passing along to their kids. i don't know if it involves sex changes but you never know coming up. >> a letter arrives in the mail with news of a strange and lucrative inheritance. >> if i had a letter like this, i would think it's a scam. >> i was like why are we named? someone is scamming us. >> so is it a scam? >> i said, you know, ray there's a fine line between genius and idiot. i cross that two or three times a day. >> who is this mysterious benefactor? >> he didn't have the family life. he didn't have a friend to talk to. he really truly was a fan. >> but an inheritance? >> that's a strange inheritance. and a stranger story still. ♪