episode again, in our new friday time slot on fbn. webster. have a good weekend and it's good night from new york. neil: good news! if you are one of those worried about an interest rate hike, it is not happening this year. bad news if you're hillary clinton, and it happens next year. welcome, everybody, i'm neil cavuto. and if the guy they called the mooch is right, mucho headaches for hillary clinton in 2016. wall street dynamo anthony scaramucci predicts that is the stick of dynamite the federal reserve is going to hand her early next year. the first of what he says could be several rate hikes that could plague hillary all year. to the man set to resurrect wall street week on tv this weekend, and he wasn't even around when the actual show was on. he's so young. a fast-moving development that could just leave the possible

democratic nominee very, very weakened. anthony spell it out first why you think it's next year that would not be good timing for her. >> well it's interesting, jeff from double line is our first guest on sunday to promote with an answer. neil: i love it. >> well the question is going to be are they going to wait until after the election? i think that is -- neil: not that long. >> why not? neil: because i don't think they will. >> you see, when you get closer, it then becomes an election issue, and for political reasons they wait. neil: that's not always the history, though. what was president obama super upset about. he didn't want netanyahu in the country during the election. the economy stays weak into the middle of next year which could happen they may not raise rates until the 2016 election. and so i'm on tape now for that, and hopefully you'll invite me back. neil: if you're wrong i will if you're right, i won't.

>> if i'm right, you will hit me with a pizza truck. neil: many say the federal reserve does hike interest rates sooner rather than later it might not be this year, to your point, i think it will be. certainly an early reason. >> three reasons, the fed is super worried about dollar and strength. number two the unemployment data is weaker than the front line data looks. they have a 10.9% u6 number. neil: that is overall aggregate number. >> those people are suffering. wage data is slightly better but not terrific, and what's worse about the economy is the middle class and the lower middle class have a smaller amount disposable income. down about 8% since the crisis. and so those three things from a political issue are super worrisome for the fed because they've had the reflation rate on that's benefitted the wealthy, the cavuto famy as an example.

neil: please. >> the other 96 of the country have not benefitted. neil: the issue that charlie gasparino raises, the recovery itself is long in the tooth. i've argued with him, say what you will of the recovery, we can go on quite awhile. >> i am in your camp on that. if you look at data since 1880 a year you remember well. neil: you look at data from 1880? >> 1880 to 2015 we get a recession in this country every seven years. what are we due for? a recession. i'm in your camp we have been growing slower for longer we're probably not going to see a recession for the next 18-20 months. this is mrs. clinton's huge huge worry. forget about the fed. we could slip into a recession in the middle of 2016. that would be terrible for her. neil: you always do the comparison when you're party took office. if hillary clinton is smart she would say here's where we

were when democrats took over right after the meltdown. in the middle of the meltdown. a lot more jobs we've got a lot stronger market, and whatever the bumps and gyrations in the last year we're still better off. will that argument be convincing? >> i think it's a very powerful argument. you know i'm a republican, i'm worried about it. the biggest problem the republicans have is they think she's beatable. they have to look at her from a point of view she may not be as beatable as they think. neil: grab defeat from the jaws of victory. >> they have unfortunately. if you look at mrs. clinton or secretary clinton, a very powerful candidate. her biggest weakness is herself. she has a tendency to gaffe on the campaign or television or bright lights. if she does that she'll be more vulnerable. the name recognition, the positivity of the clinton years as a republican you have to worry about her as an opponent. no question about it. neil: very hard for a party to

make it for a third term, right? george bush senior did it after ronald reagan but he at least at the time was a much more popular incumbent. >> we had herbert hoover after calvin coolidge george herbert walker bush. other than roosevelt. neil: it's rare. >> the last time for a democrat was 1856. that was james buchanan. do you like the stats, neil? neil: not really, between this and u6 references is this what the show is all about? >> very simple for the viewers. you have such a sophisticated viewership and high iq, i'm trying to impress you on the show. neil: as if you need to. always good seeing you. he is as good as it gets. anthony is hosting wall street week, apparently scooby doo was already used so, it premieres sunday 11:00 a.m. eastern time, major markets. he's got a unique vivacious energy to it, and he's very smart. go to wall street.com for

details and a live stream. all right. fair and bansed now. to the democrat who says everything anthony told you is completely wrong. wall street lefty can i say, that robert wolf says that hillary clinton is in very good shape thank you. she's clearly not taking any chances, she's getting a former wall street stop to be her campaign cfo so she must be reading the rumblings of the elizabeth warren type. >> i think hiring gary gensler cfo they know him from goldman sachs. neil: why now is. >> because they're performing -- >> nothing to do with the fact that she is a creature of wall street? >> neil dodd-frank is not one of the main themes for the 2016 election. we've been there. it's not coming back. it's what and you anthony spoke

about. income, wages, the economy and foreign policy. no one cares about dodd-frank regulation right now. neil: i agree, but the liberals in the party who feel any ties she has to the banking industry, and i agree with you, i don't think they're onerous or embarrassing they're going to make it a big deal far more than republicans. >> financial services are critical to the country. she's going to have relationships with them, and have relationships with them as well. neil: you are an adviser you are a golfing buddy of the president. do you think that she has to step very carefully here that she can't look like she's too close to these guys at least now as she's pursuing the nomination is. >> i don't, i don't think she needs to be pushed far left at all. i don't think that's where the country is. neil: you think someone else comes into the race. >> no one that will worry her.

>> i think she's going to have to prove her vision and prove herself. neil: can you only prove yourself if you have people to prove it. >> listen we all hope there are good people running in the primary. whether it's martin o'malley or sanders we hope there's a primary. neil: do you really? do you think the clintons, if one or both entered the race they would be happy with that? >> it is all about the vision, you have to have the right vision, and i think people recently said she's pushed left on rhetoric not true. her talking about middle income wages and ceo pay is what you're talking about. neil: she was not saying this stuff a few months ago, she was not saying it long before the critics on the left reader their ugly heads on the issue. >> they made a topic on it. it's a topic for everyone.

ceo's are talking about it. we had a meeting this morning. neil: how much were you making? >> i have a start-up right now. i just want to let you know i thought your conversation with anthony was great. i can't wait to see him on wall street week. neil: let me get an overall picture of the macroeconomy and he and i mentioned concern it might be sputterring and delay rate increases because they are not justified. >> you and i are on the same script. we believe there's a tax rate hike in 2015. neil: an interest rate. >> interest rate, sorry. neil: the left liberals immediately want to raise taxes. >> if you think about, that the economy is going slow but going fast enough. at 2, 2.5% we'll chug along. neil: slower than that. a lot of people say the first quarter data. we'll be lucky if we have

growth. >> the first quarter came in better than expected you have to look at overall year. we're looking at 2, 2.5. the dollar is absolutely something that should make everyone nervous, it's going to slow down. neil: the final figures are in. rearview mirror as it is, we'll be lucky to have any growth at all. 2% growth would be respectful but not great. it is more like half a percent. if we're lucky. >> i think unemployment is where it is and wages will slowly start to grow. if you take out slack in the average hours per week of working you have to eventually hire. neil: does it concern you, that this is going on awhile. >> yeah, i think it's been -- normally the recovery is brought back by two things, housing and consumers right? consumers are slow. we saw the data the other day. we live in a 70+% consumer country. when they're slow we're slow.

and housing was slow this past week. if you have housing and consumer slowing down a little bit. neil: the historical challenge of any party getting a third crack at it right? >> i thought what you said about the reagan-bush was interesting. listen, i think right now, have you 45% democrats will vote their way. 45% of the republicans vote their way and everyone fights for the 10% in the middle, which is the 10 swing states. i actually think the secretary will do incredibly well in the swing states. i don't think she's going to be pushed to the left and i think people will think about the clinton years and say we loved those years. neil: you and i remember the clinton years, i think a lot of people do not. a lot of people do not. >> i remember the reagan years too, it's when i started on wall street. good years as well. both sides can work. neil: robert, thank you very much. in the meantime you think mr. corporate is mr. party mainstream. you don't know jack. jack just told me who he likes for president. i'm going to give you a hint.

it is none of these guys. none of them.

. neil: welcome to i guess jack unplugged plugging for a very different kind of president. are you saying you're a ted cruz guy? >> as of today i'm a ted cruz guy. the country needs more truth and trust. he does it. he's as smart as a whip, and he's a good bet on right now. neil: all right jack and suzy welch with me. what does ben stein make of all this? ben he was going on the idea that cruz develops and triggers passion in the crowds. what do you think? >> i've been in those crowds,

and i don't quite see what my friend mr. welch is talking about. i love ted cruz, i would very much like to see him be president. i don't think he's as strong and passionate, and i smart and honest guy and i love him a lot. passion i don't think i'd use the word. neil: you remind me of professors that said respectable work, cavuto. you're saying, ben, there's a mainstream crowd in the republican party that says we need a jeb bush or a governor walker, and others who say, you know and i think this was welch's point, we need someone who fires up people the way ronald reagan did. when i told him, cruz doesn't exactly invite reagan comparisons. the guy has to smile and laugh more and he just might. what do you say to that? >> my gosh. just mentioning ronald reagan

to think comparing our guys now with ronald reagan makes me want to weep. we have one person that i compare with ronald reagan lindsey graham. he's not even running. i love him like mad. he's not even running. i love love, loved reagan but we don't have anybody like reagan. i wish we did. if we had somebody like reagan it would be a wonderfully exciting race. we don't. neil: you know what i find, we find them after the fact or see it after the fact. if you were to look at ronald reagan early when the mainstream was pooh-poohing him with the challenge to president ford in '76, who would have envisioned the conservative ranks would have become the mainstream four years later and led him to a landslide. in other words could any one of these guys be that guy? >> you know, reagan always is a dynamic, exciting guy. something about reagan you should know. when he was a young actor voted the best looking man in the world by some kind of movie

star poll. a movie magazine poll. we don't have anybody like that right now. reagan was dynamic in the 64 convention, you weren't born then when he spoke in favor of barry goldwater. we don't have anyone like him. neil: who do we have that at least the people you talked to, and you know the tea parties and the mainstreamist, the money guys who were they saying stands the best chance to recapture the white house? >> well that's an extremely good question and i don't really feel much enthusiasm for anyone. i've told you now several times talked to you on other shows and said i love lindsey graham beyond words. neil: why? what is the fixation with lindsey graham? >> a national security candidate. he is a strong military vital strong foreign policy. neil: 10,000 additional troops on the ground, and that kind of stuff? >> no, no no big increases in

defense budget and much more aggressive policy against putin and against the islamic state. neil: so those are central issues to you, i understand that. >> national security is the issue. national security is the issue. neil: all right so earlier we were talking about the economy and the fact that it might be sputtering. you don't think that is a potential winner for republicans and a downer for democrats? >> not at all. not at all. not at all. there's very smart people who have vowels at the end of their names who say the economy is sputterring and say things are not that great. the economy is very very strong, and almost every part of the economy almost every party is quite strong, not minerals otherwise quite strong. i don't think the democrats are vulnerable about that. i don't think the republicans or the democrats have any keys to make it stronger. look, you know, it's interesting, i watch you all the time you talk a lot with democrats about hillary's

vision. what the heck is her vision? i don't see any vision coming out of her, and i don't see any vision coming out of the republicans, i don't see any vision anywhere. reagan had a vision of a freer society. neil: but then that's what jack welch would say, i should clarify to people watching the person we are alluding to is not cavuto. jack welch would say that's the thing cruz has, there's a passion and a fervor he thinks is real? >> i mean mr. welch is a fantastically successful intelligent man and i respect his judgment on every subject, but i don't see that passion coming from any republican. the only republican i see who gets crowds fired up is rand paul, and i think he's a very dangerous person on national security issues. neil: wow. ben stein. always a pleasure, my friend thank you very much. i'm not going to tell you the

person with the vowel at the end of his name. and wild horses couldn't drag it out that it's charlie gasparino. how about not allowing

. neil: the public education system they say is now revolting. former d.c. public schools champion says testing is not the problem, overtesting is.

good to have you back with us. obviously it's hit a chord with the folks, and i suspect not because only the students themselves might not perform well on the tests. what do you think is going on? >> i think this is in reaction to something that's very real which is that parents are seeing and feeling overemphasis on testing in public schools. test crazed. they have every reason and right to be frustrated with that but the problem is that the environment needs to be changed. the culture needs to be changed but the answer is not to optout of the tests. neil: how has it gotten to the point. i remember when i was a kid and my own kids, they're taking tests a lot more. what happened? why is that happening? >> well i think with no child left behind and other accountability systems, you know we wanted to make sure that all students were achieving at high levels. making sure that there was

accountability in our schools so that we could ensure that our taxpayer dollars were providing high results for kids academkaechlt but -- academically that pushed people tong tests were the end all and be all of everything that's when you saw the testing craze come into a fact. what we've got to do as a country and school districts across the nation have to do this is to say the tests are one thing that can help us determine whether or not our students are successful. but it's not the only thing we should be looking at. neil: a lot of this is driven by, we want to see some measure, metric of result from our teachers and the push is tests are one guide, grades are another acceptance into other schools high school are the other. we need this metric to criticize teachers who are not doing enough? >> we certainly need to use a

valid and reliable measure of student achievement as part of a teacher's evaluation right? when i was the chancellor in washington, d.c., we had a situation where 98% of our teachers were being rated as doing a great job, and yet only 8% of our eighth graders were on grade level in mathematics. that's a huge disconnect. it makes absolutely no sense. neil: we're going to show a chart that is hard to see where you are, it seems disproportional to the money the government is spending on education and the results. >> absolutely right. in the last three decades we have more than doubled and almost tripled the amount of money we are spending per child on public education, and yet the results have remained absolutely flat. that's why we have to have the accountability measures in place. because in some schools you are spending a certain amount of money and the kids are soaring and acceling academically and other systems you spend the same amount of money and the

kids are doing absolutely abysmally. we have to have those measures to have accountability and say wait a second, this school is not performing, what are we going to do or this district is not performing and not using taxpayer dollars as well. we can't continue to put good money after bad and pour more money into a system that isn't working for kids. neil: michelle, could i just make you education secretary of the united states right now? thank you very much, you make more sense in a couple of minutes than all the chowder heads. in the meantime if you think those parents are bitter, wait until you hear from the bitter boomers. they're back, they're angry and haven't even had their metamucil. are you about to pay more at pump because ofsaid a bottle was just a bottle. that no one would ever notice me.

but i knew i could be more. that one day, i would make people smile. [woman speaking indistinctly]

. neil: well, a d.c. tax push from republicans, before gas

prices creep up? republican lawmakers now are signing onto a bipartisan bill that would essentially double the gas tax. they say it's need for the infrastructure. got to get hopping. let's get taxing. democratic consultant richard goodstein kayleigh mcenany have slightly opposing views on this. you say republicans need to pump the breaks on this? >> absolutely. we do not have a revenue problem. last year the federal government took in 3 trillion dollars in revenue. we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. why do we need to increase the gas tax. like a shopaholic saying i have a spending problem i'm going to solve that increasing my spending limit. neil: we have a bridge and highway and road repair problem. >> we do. the 780 billion dollar stimulus was supposed to fix it hasn't. neil: what happens to the combined $100 billion if you

throw in whatever we get through transportation, gas taxes fees, tolls that supposedly goes to this? where did that money go? shouldn't we settle that before we add more money? >> speaks to how bad our infrastructure problem is neil, that we have all the money going into it and it's still pathetic viewers travel to china and to japan and even high-speed rail in spain. the fact that the u.s. is where it is is an embarrassment. neil: by the way, richard, you're making two assumptions that all my viewers go to china. a lot of them go to the poconos and are happy with that. you mentioned the fact the 100 billion is going to roads and bridges and infrastructure. i suspect you get sidetracked. >> look the fact of the matter is we know that spending on roads and bridges spending on infrastructure, the money the gas tax would go is a job creator it. smooths commerce, right? when things are moving more quickly trucks and individuals commuting, that's going to make

the u.s. economy more efficient so this actually, it's good for these republicans to be doing something in a bipartisan way. they were elected to solve problems and the model they're following is base closing commission. they're going to put something in and effect only if congress comes up with a better idea. it's going to creep up but in a way that is careful. neil: the rational thing to do is to look we did find the base closing commission both parties agreed what should go? >> yeah, i understand thatta point. why increase taxes? we can address this by reallocating spending, put it towards this. neil: do you demand accounting of the money we already spend? >> yes, yes, absolutely. my generation is stuck with the bill. neil: as long as it's not my generation, that is perfectly fine. >> my generation is stuck with

the bill. neil: i know we go back and forth roads and bridges and all of that, ultimately that wins out. i worry we use something like this, might be perfectly viable and reasonable to waste more money, and then ten years from now back at this saying hey we're spending 200, 300 million dollars a year nothing. >> no. we've been hearing about waste, fraud and abuse well before ronald reagan was president but again he was president with republicans in charge of the senate. george bush talked about waste fraud and abuse with republicans in charge of the house senate and the white house, and here we are. no disrespect to them, but it's not that simple neil. i agree with kayleigh, i think an audit would be respectable. neil: i don't want to put good money after bad. that's the thing. >> i don't think anybody disagrees with you. >> is it really the time to go after the middle class go after the american family.

they get a $550 savings because the prices have gone down at pump, and we immediately stick with the new tax? this isn't the time. >> exactly the time kayleigh. fact of the matter is this is the time when gas prices are a dollar, dollar and a half a gallon lower. this is not a cripler to everyday driver. neil: that's a bad rationale to justify what could be a temporary phenomena that prices are moving up to say stick them when they're not noticing. >> we're not sticking it. if you have to do it, this is the time to do it. >> not a good precedent to set. neil: we've settled that entire debate. do any of you remember this? >> who wants the silence? you have to get them and put them away and lose them. yuck. nobody wants a stylus. neil: where the stylus is in style at apple. and i'm wondering what steve jobs would think?

doug. you've been staring at that for awhile, huh? listen, td ameritrade has former floor traders to help walk you through that complex trade. so you'll be confident enough to do what you want. i'll pull up their number. blammo. let's get those guys on the horn. oooo looks like it is time to upgrade your phone, douglass. for all the confidence you need. td ameritrade. you got this.

. neil: is virtually becoming reality. i wasn't buying it. >> you put it on. neil: i don't buy what you're saying fair second. you know. >> you will be buying it. you will be buying it. neil: who am i to question? but i do question it peter is smiling despite my doubting mark zuckerberg is all in on virtual reality, confident the investment will pay off to national senior tech analyst christina warren whether virtual reality is here to stay. you and i were kidding during the break. my big problem is the stupid ridiculous alien-like glasses, you say what? >> they do look ridiculous which is why you don't go outdoors with them. neil: if you go inside and get a drink, you will stumble and kill yourself. >> we'll hear about the oclous

related drinking deaths. this is true. i think the big thing with virtual reality and the reason people like google and facebook and microsoft and investing in it, they see the potential user of the interface. they might be clunky now, but ten years down the line 20 years down the line, they could be smaller. neil: what is the draw to this? are they not as hip as you? what's the deal? >> brings you immersive experience you can't get otherwise. it has interesting uses for medicine and education and ptsd therapy they've done a lot of ptsd therapy with them veterans coming back from iraq and afghanistan where they're in the world and able to have exposure therapy using the glasses because it can re-create a lot of the senses without having to make someone go to another place. neil: and autism and all the rest, i don't buy it become a huge phenom. >> i think it's going to take off in certain sectors.

neil: yeah, people who don't mind looking ridiculous. >> fair enough. neil: worried about the pilot in the cockpit? what if there were no pilot in the cockpit. that day is closer than you think. business insider reporting on rapidly advancing technologies that could mean pilotless planes. maybe it's me worrisome? >> definitely we have driverless cars, why not pilotless planes. we already have so many drones in the air remotely controlled by pilots in another location. i think the idea, the technology to have pilotless planes is probably not very far off. the big thing is going to be making people feel better. the psychological aspect of getting into a plane that doesn't have a pilot behind the cockpit. but i think that maybe a good work around would be you have someone in the cockpit for emergency, if something else was happening, someone on the ground would take control. neil: automated systems failed apollo 13 comes to mind. apollo 11, armstrong had to

take over at the last second, automatic controls would have had him landing on a boulder. be careful what you wish for once you're up in the air, you're not necessarily going to like it. >> this is true, whatever they do people are going to have to feel comfortable which. is why they will never get through for the ability of manual controls. if a pilot has a heart attack on the plane, and no one else is able to land or do what they need to do it would be better if the plane could land itself. neil: or if you had the ridiculous glasses on. >> this is true. neil: is the company bringing back the stylus? apple filing a patent for something steve jobs detested to his death. a pen-like device for the screen. details are sketchy. the post-jobs apple era is serious about this. >> any time steve jobs said how much he hated something, that was the first sign they were going to create one of those devices. we'll never get into phones

they have a phone. never have an ipod, they have an ipod. they came out with the 7" tablet. the big thing about styluses in 2007 is you want to use your finger, you don't want to have to use a stylus. that doesn't mean there couldn't be use cases on the ipad or style jus to do more advanced things. neil: samsungs have them? >> some phones have them. any time it's a requirement, apple is not going to go there. as an accessory, sure why not. neil: do you think the future is the nonstylus phone? i wonder if apple is confusing folks? >> no i think they're definitely not making this something you have to have. if they come out with a stylus it will be accessory, you can use your phone if you need precise point at precise things, if you're doing draws cad work, if you need to be precise you need the stylus your finger looks great.

neil: unless you have mine and they're like sausages the stylus is handing. great guest. i don't know if you heard 60 is the new 40 to bitter boomers who say don't type!

♪ old! turns out you whippersnappers are getting something. studies show the definition of old is getting old. in fact, that definition is wrong. why do i sound like mr. magoo? news flash, millennials 60 is the new 40. so stick that in your no doubt

bong and smoke it! the times are changing kids! many folks working well into their 70s, a lot of them not because they have to but because we want to. so quit coveting our jobs you prepubescent ingrates. with the selects of the less bitter boomers to no end, charlie gasparino, steven leeb and brady. are you with us? >> yes i am, as someone who's getting old. i'm enjoying getting old. when i was a young kid, i was a lot nastier than i am now. neil: that's impossible! >> so i'm enjoying the -- you do as you get older a little testosterone dissipates. >> some. >> you get less aggressive. >> for some. neil: you're less aggressive now? >> that's what happens i'm going to enjoy it and enjoy

working and being more focused on work and not on ripping my boss' head off. >> i think charlie is right. in a certain sense, there's this old adage, as you get older you get wiser, and now they're showing us there's a lot of studies neil out there that say you don't lose so many marbles when you get older. once upon a time everybody thought once you reached 16 or 18, brains stopped growing. they don't believe that. you keep adding more and more marbles. if you use them in the right way you could be better and older at the same time. neil: charlie you invite a lot of young writers and producers here. you should hear what they say about you -- [ laughter ]. neil: because we're living longer and staying healthier longer, 60 is the new 40. >> with the lifestyle change people are living and exercising more physically than ever before. neil: one out of three.

>> my brother is a doctor and has a ph.d. in clinical nutrition, which is essentially biochemistry, with the right exercise and diet can you slow things to a point -- listen i see 70-year-old people who are damn healthy at 70 like people were in their 50s. smart, energetic and i think can you do it. here's the thing you got going for us. the millennials are so dumb, they can't catch us. >> this is true. charlie has a point there, neil in princeton, makes up the s.a.t. tests they had to dumb them down four or five times in the past 20 or 30 years just so that, you know the scores make sense. >> to cover the teachers so they don't look bad. >> so the teachers don't look bad no! >> you are whining. >> our generation was pretty darn smart, and the generation older than us.

if you want one example. two names warren buffett not too bad at 85, turned around entire massive enterprise, berkshire hathaway from a holding company. neil: i know who he is yes. >> and how about the guy who took china out of the rural doldrums and made it into a modern economy. don hewlett was 90! >> what do you make of ken langone supporting chris christie. >> my gosh. neil: on an issue near and dear to all of us, christie said all of you guys would have social security cut. >> i don't have a problem with that. neil: you don't want it grandfathered into an age just above or below you? >> i don't mind paying a little more if there's a public policy in a broader public policy perspective. there is so much with the left and the dumb millennial who support liberal politicians. neil: not all of them do.

>> most of them do, and they elected barack obama and now they are screwed because there are no jobs for them. neil: it's one thing, but it's next year, stop it! >> christie is saying we have to start somewhere if we get our hands around the welfare state. >> neil, i could not agree with you more. i think it's horrid h-o-r-r-i-d. neil: i know how to spell horrid. >> i want to make sure. somebody else. >> millions of americans are paying into it. why is that running out of money? welfare running out of money? food stamps running out of money. if you do that it is welfare. it wasn't sold as wefr. >> we pay into it. neil: now you are glomming onto it. >> i don't mind paying more within the context of a broader -- >> how about the bureaucracy and the legal fees so people figure out how to get salaries

down below 200,000 and qualify. get to the lawyer. >> how about when the millennials want to be bailed out of the student loans? >> good point,

>> what is the deal with my saying presidential candidates should lighten up? a counts for a lot. candidates to snap under the slightest probing questions leads to the question of whether or not they are up to the job. both very good and digging and ribbing back and even making fun of themselves. david and tennessee is not buying it and andy in new york says you're not funny. oh yeah? reagan and jfk had great senses of humor and is that got them

elected? considering this reagan for being too old and kennedy for being too young, the way that each is about as doesn't hurt. and amber says that i think you are right. we could do worse than laugh at ourselves. everybody else is. and another individuals as i recall a line that used about your dad who advised you to stay humble because it would come in handy. that's right whatever it might have would be pure luck just go with it and have fun with it. and when you say this at the end of the fox news show i pay close attention. your money of paul harvey and that is a compliment. and i will take it as such. and another says you have interesting topics and i never know what you will be talking about. with all the others it's the

same old. and so like i said i am a little bit odd. and kevin says be your clownish comic with your clownish reasoning, richard nixon should never have been president. and so the entire nation is sucking it. so just as long as you are funnier than you are talented and if memory serves me right, hubert humphrey wasn't johnny carson. and keep keith says does the same apply to tv anchors? >> not all acres just the folks that say stuff like that. and finally one individual says that's stupid, moronic conceited, and pushy, isn't funny enough for you because that is you.

so clear enough? [laughter] forget about the market. lou dobbs is next. >> at evening, everyone, i am ashley webster in for lou dobbs. president obama dismissing the controversial sale of a sophisticated missile system to iran. and the president went further saying that he was surprised it didn't happen sooner. we will take up the president's dangerous policy failures in the middle east with former u.s. ambassador to saudi arabia robert jordan. in the meantime jeb bush aligning himself with president obama. the potential candidate pushing people to adopt the president's stance on amnesty for illegal immigrants and the confirmation