deserves to be told. i'm oliver north, good night.

deathly afraid of going after a particular corruption program. >> my favorite was donald trump. and later on he said we don't need to be the world's plaun, we need to spend money on infrastructure. >> speaking of cuts, one part of the debate was when the eloquent ted cruz tried to speak. >> the department of commerce, the department of energy, the department of commerce and hud and then 25 specific programs.

>> you probably notice he said the department of commerce twice, he forgot to mention the department of education. later he tried to laugh off his slip. >> look, i just think the department of commerce is such a basis of cronyism, we need to eliminate it twice. >> that's a good point. >> and it's huge. we ran a cover story a year ago. what are they building in there? it's the department of commerce. i like the fact that ted cruz is out there being specific about what to cut. it's when republicans say i'll have balanced budget amendment, no, you won't because it will never pass and you never elucidate what you're going to cut. >> and cruz names things like green infrastructure program, the national endowments for the arts, the catfish inspection program and all that. we have a department of labor,

transportation, agriculture. why don't they want that next? >> this goes back to the fact that marco rubio is engaged to let's just have entitlements for our people, if there are going to be takers, have them look leek us. yet you're not willing to stake out here's what i'm willing to cut back so i don't have to tax others. >> ted cruz had a good dig about rubio. that was right on -- at home base. that was right over the plate, buddy. >> and rubio never defended it. >> because he can't defend it. that's why he didn't bring it up. >> he didn't make it direct. >> i felt like that was a setup for a future debate. >> you don't know rubio takes money from the fanjewel family

and supports the zillions of dollars they get and shouldn't get. >> people believe rubio's an intelligent man so they let it go. >> rick perry let it go and he only cut three departments. ? turns out polls are a shallow guide, just a snapshot of some people's opinions today. rediks markets are much more likely to tell us what's going to happen in the future. they're more accurate predictors because lots of people participate and put their own money on the line. today's price is the best reflection of what the future will bring. in america, no good prediction market exists for politics.

that's because they ban internet gambling. we to go to market based in england. and useful as it is, to us americans, it's basically unintelligible. prices are in pounds, it's tough to understand who's ahead. but look at this web site. this is understandable. that's because a fox producer converted it into percentage so americans can process them. and as you see, hillary clinton has more than a 50% chance of becoming the next president. marco rubio is about 20 percentage points ahead of

donald trump. >> since the start of last debate, rubio, cruz and hillary gained the most. >> hillary, oh, boy. so stay with us. coming up, my fight with. >> donald trump. >> it seems to be worse in cities with democrats. we need more welders and less philosophy.

people need to be educated on the minimum wage. every time we raise minimum wage, the number of jobless people increases. >> it was good to hear that from ben carson this weekend. maybe the doctor has learned some economics or logics. if you raise the price of something, you do get less of

it, but the big government loving media ran fact checks on such. leave it to the "times" to cite a survey where they said we're not sure. 85% shows raising the minimum does cause little job loss. i doubt the "times" will ever report fairly on this. i was glad to see some republican candidates now do get the principal. >> if you raise the minimum wage, you're going to make people more expense of than a machine. that means all the automation replacing people and jobs right now is going to be accelerated. >> they support raising the minimum wage because they don't stand what it means. you're going to have fewer people having fewer jobs,

cutbacks, longer hours. >> republicans seem to be getting that now. it's like it's been an education process. >> at the need to hone those arguments right now. it's not true that every time they've done it it led to less jobs. bernie sanders is going to push hillary clinton to the left on this issue. their far to the left economics doesn't play very well. >> really? i think it plays well. free stuff! >> the new norm, the new normal in the minimum wage is $15 an hour. had the rallying the big protest on that tuesday. but all you need to do is listen

to any ceo that runs a fast food chaen or food change. the ceo of buffalo owe chain says we are not going to a risk on people and pay them $5 hour. >> a larger risk is income inequality. >> the middle class of this country is collapsing. we have 27 million people living in poverty. we have massive raelt and encome eover the last 20 years, the rich have dramatically increased their wealth. the middle fifth gained 40%, the bottom fifth 48%.

yet they get away with this lie, the poor getting poorer. >> it really is a lie and it's also indicative of how backwards an approach is. you heard the. >> i fear the public doesn't realize. >> that's true. it's something republicans are going to have to learn to explain. >> rand paul tiedin come and income inequality to the federal reserve. there is the easy money policy but with sabres -- well, he was saying that the dollar depreciates and up get less for

your money. and the doll will and people do. of that crunched the numbers, economists at harvard and beckly crunched them on 40 million tax return. 50% rise out of the to quinn tile. le policies that they embrace are the opposite of those type of poll signatures. j about what may or, in my

opinion,ing [music]

♪ and i can't change, even if i tried even if i wanted to. ♪

and move only when you hear that includes why? i say it larm lay us of gay eest

long. we need to do a top-to-bottom review of ofsongle relationship on the books. that hasn't been done in 50 years. >> the point that i think she made about the fact that we didn't have a free market health care system before obama care that, we have a system that is designed to benefit these massive hospital systems is a real recognition on his point that starn. >> i'm a d regulator and then he appointed 0,000 new regulators.

once you're in power, it mole many t sfrichlt. >> rework the regulation, the internet clean powers act and the waters act. >> and he stood out when he was talking with about it. >> frony houd the row and you don't get the little guy being very good on that. what i'd like to say d are. f frankly, it's still got.

i wanted who to say we're going to take insurance out of companies providing it. i want all individual to buy it on their own. the thing it, is wouldn't sell. >> big business is generally find with the big relative teams. small businessman integrate. >> i don't know what they to start buck. >> if we elected on that, i'm upset. s they off sfwrfrpg.

>> it fun there as probably (that bir ak bum has in terms of wonch in progress. >> what we've done now is the cream of stam paid regulations, which moves of aspect of or lives. if we can get that out, it makes a big difference. >> i never harr democrats talk about at all. if you looked at jimmy carter campaigning to ties.

. from sfrlt sfrlt more and more money. that's one of the reasons people don't see that amount going up. >> the compliance department is growing. >>exactly. >> democrats treat companies like it free money. what they tell a company what to spend on, this and that. wallle sfrfrmt