ike to thank all the people who made all the contributions. you guys are the real heroes, as far as i'm concerned. >> the real hero got the money and the car. that's it for us tonight. good night. neil: welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto, who says hillary clinton is a sure thing? i'm not talking about the general election i'm talking about the democratic nomination. to see the new rings of those on the left hillary is still just not right. which could explain the cold shoulder she's getting of all places, boston. it's not just the snow it's the chill from liberal donors who are seeking out a more progressive alternative. which is why elizabeth warren's name keeps popping up. what is it about massachusetts and a party obsessed about finding maybe there what it can't seem to find anywhere else. maybe democrats are forever hoping they can repeat camelot. it's more than 50 years since jfk. more than 50 years since anyone there has gone beyond there. go through the list.

it's an impressive list. ted kennedy. john kerry. mitt romney. and, yeah, michael. with whom we'll be chatting in just a bit. daily caller, alex on the liberal fit all over hillary clinton. why, what's going on here? >> first off there's a huge gap on the left. what's unbelievable is that nobody has stepped up be that elizabeth warren or anybody else, to really take advantage of the fact. listen, it goes back to the fact that, does hillary clinton really line up to what the democratic party is like today? look at her views on wall street and her relationships to wall street. what about the fact she is hawk on some foreign policy? i don't know if a lot of the democratic base is crazy about that. i think that's why liberals like van jones are going out there and saying hey hillary clinton is on the lips of every democratic voter out there. neil: as a host of other

left-leaning democrats, i wonder if they sit back and realize that that might appeal to the party's base in a general election, maybe not so much. >> you know, i think the funny thing is, when you look at someone like bernie sanders the socialist, or jim webb or martin o'malley, those are other names thrown out there. they're running just so they can talk about liberal issues and bring hillary clinton to the left. i think it's more than that right now. i think the base right now, the democratic base, they want a real alternative to stand and up take on hillary. so it will be interesting to see. will someone like elizabeth warren can she actually be persuaded to jump in? right now she's not. she's not making any moves. we'll see on that. neil: to michael decaucus. that was then. he is joining us now. out of los angeles. (?) i'm sure it wasn't to escape all the snow in his home state. good to see you governor. >> neil, good to be with

you. we're out here for our 2020th winter quarter in ucla. neil: i'll buy that one. let me ask you about the -- the -- the chill of hillary clinton gets from the liberal base of your party. do you think that's fair? >> well, look, i consider myself part of that liberal base, and i'm very comfortable with her as a candidate as a nominee, and as a president of the united states. and i think i'm pretty reflective of the so-called democratic base. that doesn't mean she doesn't have to work hard at this. she doesn't have to earn it. and i think she will. but i don't have a problem at all with hillary clinton as our nominee and as our president. and i think i'm fairly representative of the so-called democratic base. neil: you might be right. but we're hearing from a good many in that base who aren't satisfied and maybe for reasons having everything to do with giving hillary clinton a contest as she seeks this party's nomination.

they feel she's not liberal enough. too cozy with wall street. the kind of issues that might moderate with the general public are alienating her with some. clearly not you. but some in the base. what do you think is eating at them? >> well, i think this is always an issue. you know, you always would love to have somebody who is perfect except none of us are perfect. and if you look at hillary's positions on these key economic issues, for example, she's not soft when it comes to dealing with financial reforms or inequality of income or any of those kinds of things. i mean she's been very tough. she's been very specific. she was last time. she will be this time. i don't think these folks have anything to worry about. frankly, i'd feel a lot better if they were out organizing 200,000 precincts in this country and getting ready for a tough contest in 2016. that's where we need to be. and i have no problem

with others running. i'm all for it. but i think hillary will be the nominee, and i'd like to see as many of us as possible get behind that effort now. neil: well, they're not, governor. i wonder if they're delaying a coronation or having second thoughts. let's say they are interested in someone who is a little more liberal. do you worry that that does hurt the party's chances, if they go that route, or if they force her to say things that might not be her view, that it would hurt her and the party in a general election? >> i don't think she will be forced to vary her views dramatically. and, again, if you look at where she's been, where she was as a senator, where she is now, she's a very progressive democrat and one who is not soft on the kinds of financial fooling around that virtually sucks the

country. so i don't think they'll have to worry about that. but look, it's a competitive business and if there are others that want to run, that's fine. she has to earn it. i think she will. and it will make her a better candidate in the final, neil. >> do you think if we have a jeb bush as a republican nominee and a clinton in the democrat nominee, that a country diverse as ours, this is the best we can come up to. returning to dynasties. whatever you think of the bushes and clintons really in a country of 320 million people or so, this is it? >> well, i'm not a big fan of jeb bush. we'll leave that to another time. neil: that's a fox alert there. >> well, i'm not a big fan of jeb bush. i'm not a big fan of his brothers. i'm not a big fan of his. neil: you should hear what they say about you. >> well, i'm sure they did. they did. [laughter] but, you know, hillary will be a very strong candidate. she's after all the

first -- regardless of what her name is, this will be the first serious woman candidate that has a real shot at winning the presidency. i think that itself is exciting and important. it's a changing country. a country that is constantly evolving. i think she will get a lot of support from a lot of the new voters and young voters. so i don't think this is just a repeat of the old stuff. this is going to be a very exciting campaign. neil: it's my fault, governor. i wasn't clear. a lot of this comes down to who the donors and the money guys are drawn to early on? they place their bets. it brings a lot of respective candidates out of the race. regardless of what you think of jeb bush and hillary clinton, that the early bets are on these guys. phil gramm today would be here if that were the case. they do clear the brush for you. and i'm wondering whether that's a good thing. >> i don't think that's an issue on the democratic side. i think it's a big issue

on the republican side because it's a big money party. and these big donors -- >> democrats are hardly -- in this regard. >> wait a second. how many individual donors did barack obama have in 2008/2012, neil? millions millions. most of whom contributed a relatively modest amount to his campaign and he never had a money problem. that was his base financially. and that will be her base. believe me. neil: how do you know that will be her base? >> because i have no doubt that the six or 7 million people that contributed to his campaign will not be campaigning to her campaign. neil: you don't think they're part of that crowd that's turned off to hillary clinton and they're seeking out alternatives? >> some of them are. but they'll be on board, believe me, when the time comes. i have no doubt about it. neil: it comes at a time when democrats could be facing a sputtering economy.

this recovery is getting long in the tooth. it's not much of a number. i look at the numbers. it's been a clear recovery. going on for a while. the clear among economists, it's due for, you know a breather. if that's the case, it will happen in 2016, hurting hillary clinton if she were the nominee. do you worry that that's a problem that follows by the quirk of the calendar? >> i'm worried about a republican congress that still thinks herbert hoover economics works. that's what i'm worried about. that austerity is a way to get out of a recession. isn't that crazy after what we've seen happen? europe? it depends -- >> who created this recovery? the federal reserve and what it was doing had more to do with this than what barack obama was doing. >> i think ben bernanke had a lot to do with it. but the stimulus package in 2009/2010 didn't continue. it should have. had a lot to do with this.

if we did what the republicans wanted to do, we would be looking like europe these days. neil: you don't fear that we'll look like europe soon? when he said we need to provide benefits for workers and sick-leave. the kind of thing he was saying us businesses need to emulate. he said we're drarving their job gains. precisely because we're not saddling businesses with this stuff. >> i don't believe that. i think the stimulus package had a lot to do with this. and ben bernanke had a lot to do with this. i hope at least that the president and congress can agree on a major investment in infrastructure especially transportation. that would do a lot to keep this thing going and estimating it. and not only that, we need it badly. neil: with the money we spend already, they want to know where that money went. i hear where you're coming. lot of bad roads and bridges.

something has to be done. the president might acquiesce on keystone as part of a broader infrastructure deal that would include hiking the gasoline tax. some republicans such as south dakota senator seem to be on board with that. what do you think of that? approve keystone on part of a broader infrastructure deal? >> well, i don't think keystone really is a significant factor in the economic future of this country one way or the other. i'm not a big fan of it. neil: why not? why aren't you a big fan of it? >> because i think it's moving in the wrong direction. it won't be a major stimulus from an economic standpoint. a handful of jobs. neil: big backers of democrats disagree with that. >> well, they like job creating -- neil: you just said it won't generate a lot of jobs. they're getting all excited for nothing. >> there are a lot of things we could do to create jobs that could screw up our environment

and our future. you don't do it all. it's not just roads and bridges. our transit system is a joke. we need a first class transit system. we talked about that in the past on your program. kitty and i went to san diego on friday. it took us an hour -- i'm sorry -- three hours and 33 minutes to go 100 miles, from los angeles to san diego. a high speed train would get you there in 55 minutes. that's what's happening all over the world except in the united states. i don't see anything partisan about this thing. investing in the infrastructure is a bipartisan thing. and i hope the president and congress can agree on that. neil: you kept track of the money closely as governor of massachusetts. much of the massachusetts miracle we came to see. you did that by watching the pennies too. you're a notoriously

cheap guy. i say that as a competent. >> my wife says i'm the cheapest guy in america. neil: indeed. but do we have the wherewithal to check whatever money we put in infrastructure goes to infrastructure. what we provide in gas taxes, you know, tunnel fees tolls, et cetera we do spend about $100 billion a year on this. that might not be enough. you may be right. don't you think so we should aggressively police where those funds go? something tells me they're not all going to roads, bridges, what have you. >> remember, a gasoline increase taxed something which ronald reagan supported and approved when he was president of the united states. a modest increase in the gasoline tax at a time when the price of gas is a buck less -- neil: no, no, no, i'm not saying that. we can quibble about whether that is necessary. whether we'll police the money we're spending. we're spending a lot of money now governor, it

can't all be going to roads and bridges because someone is pissing it away. >> in this case it ought to be earmarked specifically for transportation which usually is what gasoline tax increases -- neil: that must not be happening. because it seems to be going to a different ear. >> well, you know, some of it is being spent on it. but we're not -- the highway fund is out of money. congress can't seem to do what it did when ronald reagan was president and democrats were in the congress and raising the gasoline tax a nickel or a dime. i don't see why it's so difficult. it's so important to the future of this country to do so. neil: always good talking to you. happy anniversary. that's a big deal. very big deal. and gets you out of massachusetts, which is 3 degrees as we speak. governor, thank you again. in the meantime, deflated balls but inflated tax rates? shouldn't it be the

other way around, after this. ♪

so,as my personal financial psychic, i'm sure you know what this meeting is about. yes, a raise. i'm letting you go. i knew that. you see, this is my amerivest managed... balances. no. portfolio. and if doesn't perform well for two consecutive gold. quarters. quarters...yup. then amerivest gives me back their advisory... stocks. fees. fees. fees for those quarters. yeah. so, i'm confident i'm in good hands. for all the confidence you need. td ameritrade. you got this.

neil: all right. it is time for neil's spiel. and do not, do not blame this on michael decaucus. more like you go, mr. president. you heard me right. i'm in total agreement with barack obama wanting to end tax breaks for stadiums. the kind that could afford building these montrossities themselves. they prefer lowly tax players to pick up the tab. and you know how much these owners like to do it? by saying that its cities and states kick in the bucks for big new stadium digs they'll be digging the jobs and economic boom that will

be coming as a result. that it's a win-win. well, no, it's not. it's just ridiculous. and the president's right to call it ridiculous and these guys ridiculous, these guys no more need tax breaks than i need buffet tips. i'm good at navigating around buffets. so too these owners that prefer feasting off your wallet than offer a crumb from yours. i think it's crummy and crappy. we shouldn't be making these owners happy. that doesn't mean i'm against building new stadiums. i'm just against our having to pick you. up the tab every time we do. show me the proof if they're so good for us. despite all the hype around the new yankee stadium, it has hardly gentified the bronx as it was built. it's tax breaks like these that give tax

breaks a bad name. if you reeve the cuts that benefit a few you'll do a lot to benefit -- the owners don't need them. right down to the oil industry that doesn't deserve them. if your business model is so great, you don't need government to prop you up. if you build it, they will still come. (?) just not on my dime. i say we try things a little differently this time. touche for the president, at least getting this much right when it comes to taxes focus on breaks that will help all, not just some. hopefully he'll work on tax cuts that not just benefit some, but all. that would be fair and balanced. still, i'm not holding my breath. for now, holding off the cast togs who don't need them. by the way, if you haven't checked, they pay through the nose to spite it. (?) take a family of four, two boys, 12 and 13,

with their mother and father to the new york yankees, we spent last time $8,000. and that was just on hot dogs. all right. i exaggerated it, but it's about the cash, capeesh. to sportscaster jim gray. jim, i think it's the last thing we should be doing with the money. you're the expert. i play one on tv. what do you say? >> well, let me ask you a question: was it the best hot dog you ever had? neil: no. it actually wasn't. >> okay. then you shouldn't have paid for it. i understand both sides of the issue. the team owners need helphelp. neil: they don't need help. (?) >> of course, they do. look at what's going on in california where they won't subsidize any of these stadiums. they can't get any federal dollars. they don't have a stadium in california that's worthwhile playing football. neil: don't have the taxpayer be the backstop. >> well, hold on a second.

it's falling down in san diego and oakland. the rose bowl and the la coliseum. neil: it's falling apart because of sewage problems. you made my metaphor. >> look, there is a greater public good to having a football team a baseball team in these cities. neil: i don't deny the stadiums are cool jim. just not out of taxpayer expense because they get squat out of it. >> they get to use it for concerts and circuses. i understand what you're saying. i'm not hear to argue against -- i'm just trying to bring the other side of this. pardon? neil: i don't know. you think it's okay -- out of little people, the guy who goes to the stadiums who fill the seats and pay double for the privilege after they're the backstop for investors doing this leery without the public backstop.

>> the public backstop allows the community to have these teams. the public backstop allows these teams to be able to do this. jerry jones was not the man who had the worthwhile to put up a stadium. there's nobody in los angeles who are willing to do that. we shouldn't have footballs in the city because the public doesn't want to participate? neil: let investors pay. put a municipal bond out there. if it sells itself, that should be enough. >> the people who pay for rental cars and tax hotels are the people who end up subsidize these stadiums. it's literally pennies on the thousands of dollars. these stadiums need to be built. sports are great for all of society and communities. it's the same as anyone wanting to do anything -- my family -- neil: that will do it.

president obama: a lot of

families are saving a lot of money at the gas pump, which is putting some smiles on folks' faces. and -- you know, you're welcome. i mean it's -- [applauding] neil: oh, so this is all your doing? now, i'm not in agreeance with everything the president does. president obama taking credit for these low gas prices. former mccain advisor nancy says he's the opposite guy to take credit for it because it's sheer luck it happened. it had nothing to do with him and everything to do with forces over which he had zero control. explain, nancy. >> obviously oil prices are the result of a world market supply and demand. when demand softens because the european economies are doing poorly, we see supply increasing, but not because of anything this president has done. in fact, he stiff-armed any type of production

on federal lands we've seen. we've seen oil production fall on federal land as well as increase by 60% on nonfederal land. neil: you spend your entire administration bashing the oil guys and fossil fuels. now that oil gas prices are down, you say, you can thank me later, america. come on. >> i think we're used to politicians taking credit where none is due. this is one we'll remember. just when he was running for president kept saying over and over again, you know what their plan is. it's drill. drill. you can't drill your way here. guess what. you sure can. you can frac and horizontally drill there. neil: whatever extra drilling we've done, the innovative ways that they've come up fracking that allow them to squeeze more out of the energy rock, so to speak, things he opposed every step of the way, he is now

taking a bow for the lower prices they've helped produced. i think that's called cojones. >> he single-handedly did away with the keystone pipeline, which would bring us the sands that we would need basically -- two or three years for that supply to get from canada, a friendly country, right about when the gas prices are expected to come back. we desperately that need supply. this guy has not been able to let that forward. neil: well-put nancy. for those of you at home, you can thank me for the fitness phase in america. meanwhile, do you think this guy this guy is leading the war on terror? what if i told you another guy is, only she's not a guy but she is impressive and a hell of a lot more than all those western power guys combined. she proved it again today.

neil: all right. well, talk about someone who does have the cojones about dealing with terrorist. angela merkel works her magic with president obama. the two meeting at the white house today. concerned vets for america, amber smith is helping the chancellor's legendary resolve rubbed off on him. what do you want to see from her when it comes to, first off dealing with vladimir putin and the ukraine? >> well, i think that merkel has proven to be a hard-hitting, no-nonsense type of leader that doesn't just look the other way with putin's antics and sort of calls them out as she sees it, but with the talks with president obama today she came out with hard-hitting words. but she definitely wants to give diplomacy a second chance. where we saw it fail --

neil: she was telling the president, don't screw this up. this talk he might arm the ukrainian government, which oddly puts him in the tougher position. she's just saying, no, we're close to doing something that will avoid that. how does it make her the more seasoned negotiator? >> she's saying, let's give this one more chance instead of jumping in and arming ukraine and making the situation worse. if she has been negotiating on her end and thinks she can possibly come up with a resolution that the separatists all might agree with, then it's better for the entire -- good of the entire world. so i think she's trying to get obama on her side, in terms of, hey let's give it a few more days. let's give it to wednesday until the talks are complete and see what happens. this isn't a new conflict. it's been going on for some time. so i think she is trying to tell obama to hold

off and give it a little longer. neil: and do so in person. she apparently felt the need to come in person and say, hey. >> yeah, and i think that sends a strong message that she's serious. and i don't think the putin, russia ukraine situation is the only thing they've talked about. she's been strong with the middle east in arming the kurds and in afghanistan. she's been strong in the war against terror as well. and i think it was just a little bit of germany/us relationship repairing as well neil: a little bit of both, no doubt. amber was mentioning how to deal with terrorists and particularly isis right now. that is where the president and merkel disagree somewhat. ted cruz, for example, has already said, when it comes to the republican strategy on this, we should be advocating for no boots on the ground, just yet as a last resort. i want to pick the fine military brain.

who said we shouldn't send troops at this point. that we should have done this a while ago. >> we should have done this in august. withwe have trainers there. neil: so we already have troops. >> we have troops there. neil: what about the kurds? >> they had support. but i don't know about our advising the kurds in their training. but right now, the iraqi army is being trained or partially trained by the us government. when they move forward which will be the next couple of weeks, we have to have troops in there following them or associating with jordan setting up a coalition that we're missing right now. jordan is taking the lead now because of the that murder -- neil: what's wrong with letting them take the lead there? they're obviously having great success bombing isis strongholds? do we want to drag americans into another protracted war? >> we want to make sure it's done right and doesn't happen again. neil: but it always happens again. >> we pulled out too fast on this. we didn't get the iraqis

time -- we have to control iraq. syria is a different world. that's where isis is attacking right now. neil: now, isis spread like cockroaches beyond syria. europe. what have you. is it too late? >> no. when we go forward or the iraqi or coalition of iraqi forces go forward, we have to be withwith them. we have to direct our air power and their artillery. otherwise they are like cockroaches. if we secure iraq again then we can coordinate on syria and isolate that country's mess. but right now two countries, it's a bad news. we have to get based on the onboots onthe ground control. neil: ifif isis gains stature in a country, it has the sovereignty of state. that's dangerous. that's like hitler with nazi germany. once they control the apparatus of the government, they had for

lack of a better term, global street cred and it was dangerous. right? >> right now you're correct. we're giving them the caliphate. we're giving them the motivation -- neil: and drawing millions to their ranks. >> so now they're getting trained. we see it in the news and in intel reports. now, these people are getting exported. when you go there with boots on the ground and work with the coalition factors that they have with other nations then we have the intel on the ground. we actually help them train and get these villages back in hand. the manners did a great job in anwar. who helped them out? jordan. we have to go back in that. (?) those villagers have to know that we're there with him. neil: well-put. captain, always good seeing you. he braved the ice and snow to get here. he's actually a real tough guy. free college, not so free. why we'd all be better off if not all our kids went to college. some just shouldn't.

neil: all right. it's time for a cavuto clash. all this talk of free college. in other words, for nothing. conservative commentator ron mike says college is no longer a guarantee for success and giving it away for free would be billions wasted. on people who don't even need it or want it. but mo senior fellow richard benjamin says free college is needed. so they're here now to sort of clash it out. we have the bell there to indicate who is doing well. no i have no idea. ron, you say it's a total waste. why? >> why would we give free community college away when a four-year degree isn't producing

results. half the people that graduated from four-year institutions are underemployed, so they're in jobs that don't require degrees or don't have a job at all. why would we invest tax dollars into a failed higher education system? before you invest into something, we need to make sure it's working. we need higher education reform. we don't need free education. we need to make sure young people are getting jobs after they invest tens of thousands of dollars into their education. what i'm hearing is that's not what's happening. we hear from parents and students who have done the right things, but then they're not connected to the right jobs out there. neil: richard, there is a little of what he said -- a lot of people who go to college who should have been welders the type of skills that are in short supply in this country today and for whom college adds little value. what do you think? >> well, the president was never suggesting that every young person go to college. neil: well, he was making it

easy so that everyone could. >> he was absolutely improving and increasing college access. one of our problems is that our old adult education is the best educated. our 35-year-olds, we don't rank in the top ten. we don't want this low wage, race to the bottom economy, where we say it doesn't matter -- neil: is that the college table or standardized testing at a lower level? we do test poorly. >> at a college televise between 25 to 35 years old. neil: maybe we're sending the wrong kids to college. >> we need to improve college. neil: all right. ron, what do you think of that? >> those people from 25 to 35 have all had a college education. a lot of them have a college education. that's the thing. more and more people have college educations, four-year degrees, but they're not getting them jobs. we need to make sure the educations are resulting in job, not just give

educations. i talked to a tech a week ago 1,000 unpaid tech jobs. 80,000 unfilled tech jobs across the country. these are high-paying jobs that are unfilled because we aren't training our young people in engineering in stem, in health it, and those are the jobs that are out there. so we need to make sure that our higher education system is preparing our kids for the jobs out there. that's why it's a better investment for the taxpayer and the student. >> so why not let more students have access to the education that will allow them into the -- >> we have to fix the education. we have to fix the education. >> of course, we can improve education. but we have to improve the access. neil: all i know, we have a short supply of plumbers. electricians. the last time a plumber came to my house, he had people. the fact of the matter is we're ignoring something beneath us. we're enticing them with free education that might not be their cup of tea. i could be wrong. we'll see.

gentlemen, i want to thank you both. viewers who send me nasty comments. you bother me. and clearly your brain is burnt. so why not watch cnbc. float over to cnbc. you'll join viewers high and high-pitched. go watch cnbc. hebe done with you. the nicer ones, the owner of the knicks took a queue from me and hold off an irate fan.

neil: all right. remember all those states ringing in the new year with a hike in the minimum wage. they're not doing that well. in fact, a lot of them aren't seeing much income growth at all. still early. jonas and lizzie

mcdonald. what they make of this. >> it's extraordinary. i was looking into what san francisco booksellers were saying. they're as you go to downshutting theirbusinesses. they're saying we have to shut down these businesses up the street from where they voted fort minimum wage hike. they're shughts shutting down the businesses in the capitol of california. >> i don't think -- it will not show up in the average wage. not a lot of people make this wage. most people make a lot more money than that. it affects people at the low end. neil: what's trumpeted it's great and nirvana. >> they'll say let's make it $20. then it will have a huge impact. neil: this is my favorite story of all. taking a page out of my book. james, responding to a fan's negative email saying: you are a sad person. why would anyone write

such a hateful letter? i feel your pain. he continues to tell the fans who start rooting for the nets because the knicks don't want you. liz, what do you think? >> well, you know what why send an email? it's like poking a stick into a hornet's nest? neil: i do it all the time. >> yeah. hey, if you don't like it, go elsewhere. neil: mother teresa. >> exactly. he told the senior citizen who is a 60 year fan of the knicks you're a hateful mess. neil: maybe she is. >> maybe he is. >> if i got an email from a delta ceo, i would be really impressed that i deserved an email from the ceo of a company. neil: it beats comcast and slapping horrible things on their bill. >> like calling people the b-word. neil: exactly. >> new york is a strange place. this conversation seems out of place. sports fans in new york

are on a whole another level. the guy kind of deserved it, in my opinion. neil: you challenged him. go back to him. >> the stock debuted five days ago. he's bringing in revenues for the company. but the knicks are 10-41. the guy may have a point. neil: the critic you mean? >> yeah. neil: what do you think of that? >> the whole reason to own a team is the glamor of that. now you have the new yorker fans. neil: everyone is nasty in new york. might as well have a field day and go for it. >> that's what i would do. i would totally send out nasty emails all day. neil: i can't picture that. youred idea of a nasty email is, my man. apparently, a lot of you welcome michael moore's silence on "american sniper." you're wondering why it took the horrific images fromfrom isis to so long. after this.

if you're taking multiple medications does your mouth often feel dry? a dry mouth can be a side effect of many medications. but it can also lead to tooth decay and bad breath. that's why there's biotene available as an oral rinse toothpaste, spray or gel. biotene can provide soothing relief and it helps keep your mouth healthy too. remember, while your medication is doing you good, a dry mouth isn't. biotene, for people who suffer from a dry mouth.

"what's the deal, neil?" neil: what is the deal with the sudden silence from michael moore and howard dean and others? ten isis cage they are yapping on the very social media they have been ranting amax one individual says if they were confined to the same cage in place of the jordanian pilot would either of them want to take a shot at the man? would they then call him a hero? that is an excellent point. why are you complaining about anything, another says, i wish he would be silent forever. and that is the stuff that i worry about and the pope says it

isn't such a bad thing. so how about everyone in the country gets a slap at michael moore. come on, people, we can do this. tough guy says i.c.e. all my kids and they feared me and now they love me. okay. and then we have melinda who says imagine if michael moore were slapped more as a kid. what is this obsession with michael moore? look at what the world could've been saved from today. we don't know what happen either way. it's spanking works, why do people have to keep doing it? what is it that liberals like to say? never spank your kids. wait until christmas morning or their birthday. anyway mike in minnesota thinks it's all part of the bigger problem among the politically correct crowd and kudo was in

the killing of muslims considered workplace violence? and he cited the success something he said that the president could learn when dealing with crisis. i pointed out that being on did not end well. that comment did not go down well. hand in this, that did not turn out so well. i don't care what you call it, my point was that using vietnam as an example of what you do in war, it's not a good idea. and another individual says what is wrong with you. communist attack south vietnam and if north vietnam does not

stop and renegotiate, he will bomb the you know what out of him. and then we abandoned the south vietnamese. my point exactly. and alex says more like bad news. you are so full of yourself you make me want to puke him i'm never in a more condescending lowlife on cable and that's saying a lot. and what if you extend it to all the broadcasting? and you commenting on winning a war is a stitch. what about me commenting on how you lose a war rematch and another says i know what you're getting at. unless you are discussing the battle to get to the deserve bar first.

and i would so love to tap you to get to that last piece of carrot cake. coming up next is "strange inheritance." thank you for joining us. announcer: 100,000 creepy crawlers. >> spiders that will cover your whole face. announcer: all collected from the far reaches of the world. talk about a bug's life. >> old is he wanted to buy the collection. announcer: there is a bigger story behind this request. >> that was a bigger eye-opening experience than the film. ♪ ♪ ♪♪ ♪ of. jamie: i am ja