lots of you have lots to say about what is going on here in capitol hill. just for you. we'll see you tomorrow night. o'reilly is next. good night from washington, d.c.. i'm back. i'm looking out for you. sleep on it. >> hello, everyone. it's 5:00 on the east coast. this is "the five." we have a lot to cover tonight. first the man responsible for the 1988 lockerbie bombings, attends a pro-qaddafi rally. wait. wasn't this guy supposed to be dead more than two years ago? he gets around more than bob beckle. plus, a cross being displayed at the 9/11 memorial. is this the right battle to choose for my godless friends? and congress needs help fixing

this debt crisis. there's one man who's offering his own advice. >> we're going to default if we follow the road. >> i'm officially embarrassed for america. "the five" starts right now. ♪ >> he had your hair, bob. the debt showdown continues. we're waiting with bated breath to see how this will may out. i just want it to end. it's killing me. right now it seems to me that everyone involved is trying to blame everyone else and pass the buck, or kick the can, if you will. >> there's no point in putting the economy at risk by kicking the can further down the road. >> we're kicking the can down the road. >> this is just kicking the can down the road. >> let's kick the can down the road. >> if we don't do that, we're kick the can down the road. >> looks like we may be kicking can down the road. >> it's a form of kicking the can down the road.

>> it is kicking the can down the road. >> not kicking the ca can down e road is the right thing to do for the country. >> can we please stop saying that? can you explain to me where this stands with the two plans. there are only two plans, right? >> yes. one can -- or two cans. they're still being kicked around. >> they're a man with a can. >> right. man with many cans actually. we don't know what the can will look like, but it's still being kicked around. president barack obama said he would a clean vote on the debt ceiling. we're looking at a boehner plan which would cut $1.2 trillion in savings. yesterday cvo found out it's only 850. he brought his bill back to the cvo. no new taxes and a separate vote on a balanced budget amendment. that's the boehner plan. reid plan similarly, no taxes,

$2.7 in two years, and no separate vote on a balanced budget amendment. right now they're trying to reconcile and get the votes, boehner. the minute he gets to 218, he will schedule a vote on the house floor, i promise you. >> if i sat next to you in class, you'd be the one i'd cheat off. >> miss lehigh? >> yes, 2000. >> bob, you think the republicans are in disarray, right? >> are they in disarray? oh, no, not at all. boehner goes into his caucus, says, here we go, we got it all set. deadly silence. no, of course they are. here's the reason. the cvo -- the republicans have a problem. they keep quoting the cvo as a nonpartisan group, now come back and says it doesn't work. if you think we're going to be in afghanistan then, we're really in trouble. here's what's happened. the democrats are having a difficult time, because when you

look at harry's cuts, for the first time i'm saying he didn't aceually cut. i expected smoke and mirrors. they will have a deal because mitch mcconnell and harry have done an arrange.together. the key to it, i come back to, is this commission. it's real important, that committee, because it's going to force a vote. >> bob, let's go back a couple days ago, maybe middle part of last week. you were outside smoking a cigar, going, we got a deal. o i'll tear you apart today. >> he had his monocle. fast-forward today, we still don't have a deal. we'll get a deal, not august 2nd. august 8th. you know what happens on august 8th. they go on recess all of them. if they don't have a deal, they won't be able to go back to

their districts. they'll stay in washington. let me guess, august 7th or 8th we get a deal. real quickly, we take in $172 billion per month. you can take care of military funding. you can service the debt. you can take care of all social security payments, take care of medicare, medicaid, and have a little bit left over to play around with whatever you want. who doesn't get paid, federal workers. my hunch, at some point they'll say -- >> that is exactly why i wish everybody would stop using the d-word, default. we are not going to default, whether it's august 3rd or august 10th. the united states of america is not going into default. bob, you referenced the republicans being in disarray. yeah, there's contention on the gop side, but the democrats are in equal disarray, because you've got the far left wing of the democratic party going bananas are even looking at entitlements. by the way, watching the republicans trying to go man

know emanio with the democrats is like watching a old lady cross an icy sidewalk. >> you're right, i did thing we had a deal. i didn't say that i was going to punch you out, because if i had you would not be sitting here today. >> you were going to take me apart on air? you were smoking a cigar, 105 degrees. >> i can vouch, he did say there was a deal. i believe at some point there was a deal. monica, you brought up the d-word, default. >> uh-huh. >> the big elephant in the room is downgrades. people aren't talking about what happens if we downgrade. that affects everybody watching. >> i don't trust anybody saying this stuff. i don't trust the moody people. i don't even know who they are. all these people are lousy accountants. they've never been right. >> and also, who elected moodies and standard & poor's to guide

this? the onus is on the house republicans. they did their job. they passed two things. they passed a 2012 paul ryan budget actually deals with the long-term structural issues we're all worried about, and they passed cut, cap and balance, which also deals with this. cut, cap and balance is the only plan out there that can stave off moodies and standard & poor's, and yet the democrats won't take a vote on it in the senate. >> the idea of a balanced budget amendment, it ain't going to happen. you made a good point. you may not have default in the traditional sense, and moody's said it's a problem, it's a downgrade issue. the downgrade will have an immediate impact on our borrowing power. >> absolutely, absolutely. that's serious stuff. >> you have to point out what causes a downgrade. the head of s&p -- >> you do. >> the head of s&p says, no, they don't care about all the other spending. they only care about servicing the debt. by the way, if we service our debt to the tune of $29 billion

or $30 billion, we're not getting downgraded according to the s&p. there's no downgrade. >> bob, i want to go to somebody who has something to say about this from the desk of donald trump comes a new video. >> oh, do we have to? >> oh, you love him. >> i can't stand him! >> don't fold, republicans. don't give up. the pressure's on him. i know you think it's on you. the pressure is on obama and the democrats. do not fold. do not give up. you can tap it along, you can make it go longer. that's okay. as long as it comes up before the election. either make the unbelievably good deal or have this whole discussion start around june or july of next year. and i guarantee you one thing, obama will not be president for long. >> cap it along, make it go longer?

>> would you shut up! trump, you had your shot, you whew itblew it. he had more bankruptcies than anybody else. he may be in bankruptcy right now as far as i know. he has to shut up, get a better eyepiece. why are we wasting a second on that guy? >> because as annoying as donald trump he is, he's right. >> oh, come on! >> he's right in the sense they should get the best deal possible. right now they have to do what's doable, and right now if the tea party -- which i'm a huge fan of -- if they believe in the u.s. constitution. there's three bodies of government. right now jane barneyer is trying to do what is workable and come back and get more spending cuts. give them credit for that. >> the original tea party people threw tea over the boat, right? they're throwing the economy over the boat. i'm going broke. >> the country is going broke.

at some point you do have to stand up and fight. trump is saying, guys on the republican side, you are the worst negotiators ever. you're winning. look, you had the fed chairman, ben bernanke, say, look, august 2nd is a floating date, we could go to august 12th. that means the republicans using their leverage is actually working. >> the his daddy gave him a start with billions of dollars. we're listening to him? >> you're just jealous. >> i'm jealous of, well, his daughter, but not -- i mean, come on. donald trump? >> his daughter? you're jealous of her husband. i was worried for a second, bob. >> don't worry about that. >> i will never worry about that, my friend. oh, it's bob. coming up, he's supposed to be dead already. not bob. instead the man responsible for the lockerbie rally is showing up qaddafi rallies. also, we like to hear you have to say about the beckle.

email us at thefive@foxnews.com.

♪ >> welcome back to "the five." it was 1998, there was a flight over scotland, pan am flight, blown out of the air. a terrorist suspect was convicted and sent to scotland for life. after only spending eight years, there was a release to release him, released back to libya, and turns out this gentleman was seen the past weekend at a proceed-qaddafi rally in libya. there he is. see him right there, with the hat on there, maybe the little thing to cover his face? >> the fake mask. >> here's a guy who killed hundreds and hundreds of people, trying to head back to syracuse during the christmas holiday 1998 free. >> shocking, we can't trust the libyans. look, the can you made a huge, huge, huge mistake on this. the foreign secretary today, william hague, came out and said, when i saw the footage of him at that rally, i knew we'd

made a grave error. look where we're at. we're at, the brits are at with libya. no peace on the ground. it's an absolute disaster, and no end in sight. the nonwar war. >> this dude got released because he was supposed to die. he reminds me of louis farrakhan. he's been dying for 25 years of cancer. he was released on medical grounds. >> compassionate grounds. >> everybody knew. >> do we really need to point this out? he was released under president obama's watch. >> he doesn't deserve a thread of compassion. >> if it were bush, or the other bush, bush 43 or 41, yes. >> do you think you can get through a segment without mentioning obama? >> you're kidding. this guy was supposed to be worm food three years ago, but of course with the far left european compassion policies,

this guy is now still walking the earth. and it's unbelievable that he has the cahones to sit there at a pro-qaddafi rally. he's not even in the witness protection program. >> it's like seeing an employee of yours, calling in sick, and then you see them on the jumbotron at the mets game. you know, what are you doing there? it brings to mind the fact that no one is talking about the war in libya. it's like the jane brady of wars. it's faded into the background. it's time we use this as an excuse -- >> marcia, marcia, marcia. >> let's some of our best doctors in there to help this guy. >> we wanted to bring up immigration numbers. turns out the immigration numbers -- look, you're going -- bob will take a victory lap of people back to where they came from, the illegals back to

where they came from, however there are still illegals flooding america and mr. obama, monica, he's looking to reform immigration. he's looking for an amnesty program for votes. >> the latino vote is the most important going into 2012. his support along latino is slipping. he knows his economic policies have failed for everybody. but in particular for minority groups like blacks and hispanics. that's why this week he gave a pandertastic to a radical open borders amnesty group. by the way, we're in the middle of the debt crisis and -- >> let me tell you why. it started off with we supported more illegals this year, and obama sucks. now, if you would have said -- the obama administration supported more illegals and i do think if you look at the republicans there's a reason why democrats did very well, because

hispanics don't like republicans. why? because of people like tancredo. republicans shouldn't get more hispanic votes, because -- >> you're a pollster? >> i'm trying to give you an answer. >> 67% of hispanics voted for president obama. >> right, true. >> now, his approval rating is somewhere around 43% among hispanics. >> yeah, but here's what you have to be careful of in politics. don't assume that that means that the republicans are going to inherit them. >> bob, can i say one thing? you say they don't like republicans. when i look at hispanics as a group, they tend to be extremely religious, morally conservative, and they work hard. their 1950s republicans, and they don't even know that yet. we have to tell them they're actually republicans. >> that's a great point, greg. george bush realized that point. he was able to win them over. i will agree with bob to say the

gop has to be careful it doesn't look zeno phobic. the reason very continue sealedd the border, they can't get the republicans to do a greater package on amnesty. that's why he's waiting, politically. >> you're not going to get the hispanic votes. >> only the illegals. >> hang on. related story. california, governor jerry brown now has said, if you're an illegal in the state of california, you can apply for in-state tuition. that means taxpayers around the country, or in the state, are paying or subsidizizing illegals. >> they don't pay taxes, but they get aid. it's representation without taxation, the reverse of a revolution, which is kind of strange. why do we have to debate about

whether we have borders or not? we're the only country in the world that has a debate about whether or not we should enforce our borders. doesn't make sense to me. >> because we're the only country people are trying to go into it. >> if you go into another country illegally in the world, you're not getting a free subsidized education. look, california is broke. there's no money in the state of california, and yet what is going on in that state where they're subsidizing the education of kids who came into this country illegally? >> kids is the right word. first of all, congratulations jerry brown had the guts to do it. secondly, these kids have been in california for a long time. they came in as children. they have the highest percentage of medal of honor winners of any ethic group in america. >> they're great people. >> these kids have been allowed to go through the school system. they have a chance to get educated now. they have contributed -- by the way, they do pay taxes. the a lot of hispanics pay taxes

har not here legally. >> how? you mean when they pay sales taxes or -- >> payroll taxes. >> payroll taxes? >> you think everybody pays in cash and mows laws? >> pretty much. the point being -- >> one is about private funding for these kids and the other is public funding. >> if i want to send my 12-year-old to college in connecticut, or likely california some day, i may be subsidizing -- it may cost him more to go to school in connecticut or california than -- >> if you want a loan, i'll give you one. the point is, these kids were allowed to be in elementary school, high school, and now all of a sudden you're saying you can't go to college? i think that's a tragedy. if you were going to take them out, take them out in elementary school. >> they haven't done anything about this immigration problem. >> the republicans. >> that is absolutely not true,

absolutely not true. they tried. john mccain, does that ring a bell? they tried to work together. george bush tried to work together. >> that's right. and you had one guy, tancredo, who started all this -- >> it's still a crime to come here illegally. if it's not a crime, why don't you appeal the current law -- >> i'll listen to that when you start arresting guys that employ them, these good old american boys who employ them. >> will the overall question here is, are we a nation of laws or not? >> thank you very much. >> if we are, we'll arrest a bunch of employers. >> stick around. a lot more on "the five" right after this. ♪ @@

♪

>> okay. welcome back to "the five." you wanted to follow up, clarify something you said earlier? >> yeah. in our last discussion about immigration, bob mentioned, do you think everyone is out there illegal mowing lawns. i simply meant to say there's a big group of -- there's a cash black market business going on. >> it was me trying to catch you, and i did. i know exactly what you said. >> you're a bad man, bob. >> i apologize, too. >> that was beautiful. this was a particularly horrifying story that came out this week. a group of at&ties, accurately called american atheists, have decided to sue new york mayor, new jersey governor, as well as the states of new jersey and the city of new york, over this ground zero cross. now, this cross was found literally within 24, 36 hours

after the attacks on 9/11. it's two pieces of the beam of one of the world trade center towers. there you can see it. perfectly-shaped cross. it's stood on the site of ground zero for the last 10 years. this group, american atheists is suing to keep it from being on the grounds. >> i saw people jumping out of windows. it was a horrible scene. i did also see -- i saw george bush get up on the wreckage and say, they'll hear you, they'll hear you loud and clear. the people who took down these buildings will hear you loud and clear. when that cross emerged, it was a symbol of hope. the whole area was devastated. we saw that. it was like there's hope. someone will look down and take care of this area. now they have. now that the atheists want to take that down. i'm outraged. >> it fell off the --

>> that's the way it fell. >> it happened to be standing like that. everyone just said, wow. you know, honestly, the teddy bears and the flowers around that thing -- >> this is such a sacred symbol on sacred ground, right? >> absolutely. look, i guess that's what happens when you don't believe in god, you have extra time to sue for something like this. the atheists say there's no other religious symbol around. that's not because it's not allowed to have another religionous symbol around. this is absolutely ridiculous. the atheists in new york city need to find something better to do with their time. >> greg, don't you think that ground zero represents a battle in this war? the war was brought to us on 9/11 by islamic terrorists acting in the name of their faith, but we can't up a symbol of christianity or judaism or anything else? >> i think we established, it wasn't a created symbol, it was an accidental symbol.

the argument that we created this cross isng, too, iave no quarrel the question we all face is whether there's a god or not. people come to this decision on their own. however this is a stupid battle to fight. i don't see these guys going to military cemeteries and going, hey, these white crosses -- let's get rid of these white crosses. they're too scared to do that. >> let me let you sleep better tonight. there is a god. i know this will get me into trouble. i want to say it. we'll all remember 9/11. it was 10 years ago. in the meantime we've had the patriotic act which took away a lot of our rights, closed down our buildings, dogs everywhere, 15 new agencies to spy on everybody else. at some point we got to get back to living our lives. i know it's sensitive to you, i know you had friends that died there, but we can't keep going back to 9/11 -- >> he says it's because he

barely remembers what happened yesterday. >> no, no. i'm saying we can't keep living our lives as -- >> we have war memorials in testament to those who lost their lives in war. this is for loved ones that -- >> we don't close down the mall in washington, close the doors to the supreme court. >> paraphrasing you, getting over the world trade center, 9/11, what does that have to do with allowing these people to put a cross up there? here's a $5 bill with "in god we trust." >> we all think it's a dumb idea. i just wanted to raise a bigger point, that's all. >> by the way, we should be libertarian on this question. we don't care when fact you practice, if you choose not to

believe, that's fine, too. >> they claim people would be offended. >> exactly. up next on "the five," how far are you willing to let the government go to invade your privacy? the details coming up next on "the five." ♪

♪

♪ >> all right. welcome back to "the five." now, this section is going to be on one of my favorite topics, which is the government spying on us. now, there's a new -- 40 police departments across the country, have now purchased something, which is a mobile offender recognition and information system at $3,000 each. it's like an iphone, and you put it up to somebody's face, right? >> right. >> it does a photo image of your iris and eyes. and then your face. and then it sends it off to databases for criminals. if it goes off, you're screwed. now, if that would have happened to me, i would be -- the point is this is getting ridiculous. >> they couldn't get through the bloodshot eyes. >> they can go around doing

that. here's the one that will get to you. and one that would have been in my lifetime terrible. in bars, in bars, they have an effort called downtown after dark. this is in -- whoever does this is -- fort collins, of course. >> that will be in your memoirs. >> yeah, i got it. anyway, they can link bars together, and if you've been in a bar fight someplace, you can't go to other parse. now, what the hell is that all about? >> i read this. what it says, let's say if you're unruly or obnoxious they will take your data and send it out to all the other bars, so when you stumble out or were escorted out as i was last sunday, if this existed in new york, i would have had no place to go after i was asked to leave a hotel bar sunday for calling a manager a more ron, and h morona moron. >> i want to listen to one of my favorite senators who talks

about government intrusion, particularly when it's comes to our cellphones, which of course would make most people around this table in real trouble, if they had their cellphone. this is a question. how much is the government, the national security agency particularly, spying on us through our cellphones? another part of the negative -- can we bring it up? i'm sorry. i thought i was supposed to burn time till you could get it up. [laughter] >> government agencies have the authority to use cell site data to track the location of americans inside the united states. >> i think there are certain circumstances where that authority may exist. i do think it's a very complicated and difficult question, and i do would ask your indulgence to allow that question to be prepared in an unclassified setting in writing to you, senator. >> you're damn right it's a difficult question. by the way, that guy looks like himler. >> i'm all in favor of that can

catch a criminal doing something. by the way, you can already do. if there's a crime committed over here, you know, you're the criminal, you've gone from here to here, they can check. >> by your cellphone? >> listen, i think it's fine. i don't want them selling it to anyone else, but if it's for finding criminals, sure. no problem. >> this is anybody, though,. >> criminals are one thing. you are not a criminal. >> well, i don't know about that. >> i agree with you, the more information that they collect -- yeah, right, they store it. the issue is, as long as they don't sell it, as long as some idiot doesn't release it to the world -- >> that's the problem these days. now leaking is the thing. >> and liberals like bob and "the new york times" will defend it. >> defend it? julian assange, he's a hero. >> first of all, i cannot believe the police at the bars with the iris scan, there goes

by underage id. then screaming and yelling over george w. bush and the warrantless wiretaps, which, by the way, obama has continued as policy. >> big mistake. >> but in that case, and obama has continued this, this was tracing terror suspects by the use of their cellphones. in this case under president obama you've got the nsa, you've got the federal government, tracking american citizens who are just walking the streets. >> can i make a point about this? i have high-security clearances when i was in the white house. these are picking up conversations through big massive computers and bringing down keywords, and then in the morning there's a briefing paper put together. i think i'm okay saying this. you can get picked up. it's not a targeted terrorist. it's anybody. they once bugged me -- >> isn't that good, though, bob? >> when i was in the panama canal having a party, and i bugged myself. >> did you find out anything? >> no.

we were taking senators' aides down there. we would a party for them. i forgot we bugged the building. >> isn't this a good thing? isn't this being more safe than sorry? >> this is why i'm nervous, bob is working for the government. >> you may be looking for one thing, maybe you stumble across a few terrorists. >> do you think it's okay that the warrant can g fbi can go ine without warrant? recently suspicion, they can. >> where is the left? they were screaming about george w. bush and the warrantless wiretaps going after terror suspects? here we've got the nsa eavesdropping on american citizens. >> we're still screaming about it from the left. that's the point. it was bad for bush to do it, bad for obama to do it. it's stepping on the bill of rights. i want them out of my life. >> that's monica's point. >> can i just mention, there's hypocrisy going on here.

if a crime occurs, we find out later we had the ability to track something, and we didn't, then we'll scream bloody murder. we had the technology and we didn't. now we have the technology and we go, ooh, we shouldn't do it. that's hypocrisy. >> hope we can anticipate. by the way, has anybody found terrorists from any of this stuff yet? >> probably. >> wireless wiretaps? >> perhaps. >> i thought you guys were libertarians. i thought we agreed on this stuff. >> the problem is once we find the terrorists what we do with them. >> sounds like the boston pops on the fourth of july. bringing your kids to a restaurant tonight or on an airplane for a family vacation? not so fast. we'll tell you why. i can tell you why next on "the five."

>> ♪ ♪ >> welcome back to "the five." all right. they banned your cigarettes, they're trying to ban your burgers. and now they're banning your baby. watch out. i love this story. all right.

so it started way restaurant in pennsylvania. it was mcdane's restaurant that says that children are not allowed. so is banning babies good for business, monica? i love it. >> yes, apparently, because this particular restaurant that started this now global trend, apparently malaysian airways is banning babies from the first-class cabin. thdy started this trend and got flooded with emails from around the world, saying, you go girl, you're doing absolutely the right thing. if you're going to pay for a decent meal, and the check is not cheap, you don't want to be next to a screaming baby or out-of-control kid. >> mcdain's, kids 6 and under. >> we are bigoted against parents with kids. when i see a parent walking down the street with that stroller and they have a beaten look in their eyes like the world is over, i see them as soldiers, as heroes in this world that we have, this world of evolution as we keep creating.

god bless them. they should be allowed to take their kids in there. >> how many times have you been in a place, the pool, the kids have the kiddy pool, come in the pool, pee or poop in the pool, and we can't go in the pool. >> i have experience. i have two of them. they have every right in the world. i took my kid to the bathroom in a plane, and everybody hit the ground on the way down, except for one drunk at the end of the plane, said, "what a cute kid! oh, my god." if you walk into a house way baby, i don't care how much they try to cover it up, you can still smell the damn pampers. >> you have kids. >> eric, you have a kid. are you becoming a second-class citizen? >> i'd rather ban guys over, like, 65 years old from bars. would that be all right, bob? don't ban anyone. restaurants have a right to allow in who they want to, it's a private business, i get it,

but for god's sake it's hard enough to raise a kid. >> why would you take a baby to a fancy restaurant? you think they want to order the escargot? >> look, i haven't cooked a meal in probably five years. i eat at restaurants every night. i rarely see kids out. it's because they're at home dealing with the kids. they should be allowed out once in a while out of that parent they call parenthood. >> we've been all been on a plane before when a baby has been crying. bow airlines with adult-only flights? i know that means something different for bob. don't you think, just do one flight a day where it's all adults or -- >or -- >> i've had the look. man, you have no idea what a pain in the neck it is. they're not people until they're about 5. okay? you got to feed them, you got to poop them, put them to bed, and then they don't stay asleep. there ought to be some place -- we got smoke, those that still

smoke. ever seen that at noon? everybody's like this. now, i don't see anything wrong with asking that you be put in a certain part of a restaurant if it's an expensive restaurant. only you go to expensive restaurants. >> when you're paying thousands of dollars for first-class seat to fly across country -- >> you're talking about crying. i'm talking the other part of it. >> how outdoor play time for kids? >> don't take that away from greg. come on. >> the parents are responsible, too. you can't blame the kids. >> yes, you can blame the kids. >> no, you're right. the restaurant owners that started this trend actually said it's the parents. we don't blame the kids. the kids are kids. >> i don't blame my nephews at all. don't get mad at me. >> you two, you'll get -- it's going to happen. i'll remember this. >> i'm very familiar sitting next to you what it's like. now we got to go. the debt ceiling talks -- that was a loving shot. the debt ceiling talks are driving us crazy, greg in particular.

one man is bringing much-needed comic relief to the situation, in addition to bob and greg. that's next on "the five." ♪ ♪ hi, anne. how are you doing? hi, evelyn. i know it's been a difficult time since your mom passed away. yeah. i miss her a lot, but i'm okay. wow. that was fast. this is the check i've been waiting for. mom had a guaranteed acceptance life insurance policy through the colonial penn program, and this will really help with the cost of her final expenses. they have been so helpful and supportive during this time. maybe i should give them a call. i really could use some more life insurance. is it affordable? it costs less t that's pretty affordable, huh? less than 35 cents a day? that's less than the cost of a postage stamp. so, you said it was guaranteed acceptance? yes. it's permanent coverage with guaranteed acceptance

for people ages 50 to 85. there's no medical exam or health questions. you can't be turned down because of your health. it fit right into mom's budget and gave her added peace of mind. you should give them a call or look them up online at cpdirect.com. i definitely could use more coverage. i think i will give them a call. man: are you between the ages of 50 and 85? or know someone who is? do you think that quality insurance at an affordable rate is out of your reach? for less than 35 cents a day, you can get guaranteed acceptance life insurance through the colonial penn program. you cannot be turned down because of your health. there are no health questions or medical exam. your rate will never go up, and your benefit will never go down due to age-- guaranteed! these days, the average cost of a funeral is over $7300, and social security pays a death benefit of just $255. don't leave a burden for your loved ones. since 1994, over 6 million people have called about this quality insurance. there's no risk or obligation.

call about the colonial penn program now. you'll be glad you did.

♪ ♪ >> your favorite karaoke song right there. i've seen you get down, get funky. all right, you know when an issue has reached the point of saturation is when somebody does a hip-hop song about it. this is from a guy, a comedian named remi, called "raise the debt ceiling." >> ♪ raise the debt ceiling ♪ raise the debt ceiling

♪ raise the debt ceiling ♪ raise the debt ceiling ♪ mr. speaker ♪ mr. speaker could you beam me up ♪ we'll all default if we swallow the road ♪ >> by the way, i didn't understand a damn word that guy said. i've never understood -- i thought eminem was candy, first of all. when my kids started listening to rap music. i can't understand a single word of it. i don't know what hip-hop is. it's taking two records and smashing them together. >> i'm not surprised by this, bob. >> i am a hip guy. >> you are a hip guy. >> the fact that you said, "hip." >> does that rule me out? he still has two words.

>> this is amazingly, this guy, who is white, by the way -- >> there are great white rappers. >> no, that's okay. i would like to see lionel richie do a rendition of "dancing with the debt ceiling." >> what do you against lionel richie? >> nothing. make it rain, quantitative easing? >> would you dance to this? >> she'll dance to anything. >> depends on how many cocktails i have. probably not. >> no, it doesn't. you'd dance to anything. >> i like to dance. >> can i make a point? i've gotten through a whole show and not used one swear word. >> i'm sure the producer are pleased you pointed that out. >> yeah. well, they can kiss -- i didn't do it. >> couple more seconds left. >> i'm not going to do it. i'm not going to do it. i'm going to sit here and be quiet. >> are you s