our cube is a casualty. >> laura: the o'reilly factor is on. tonight: >> i was elected to end wars, not start them. >> president obama goes all in as he tries to convince not just congress but the american people that the u.s. should attack syria. will it work >> laura: plus, who really are the syrian rebels? freedom fighters or al qaeda terrorists? we'll have an investigation. >> it was unanimous that chemical weapons were used. obviously this is disputed by president putin.

>> each of them stuck to his own position. he doesn't agree with my argument and i don't agree with his. >> the world's oddest odd couple vladimir putin and president obama. does the russian boss have the upper hand? caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone, the factor begins right now >> laura: hi, everyone, i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. thanks for watching us tonight. the people vs. the establishment. that is the subject of this evening's talking points memo. today at the g-20 in st. petersburg, president obama acknowledged the steep hill he has to climb back home for military action in syria. and his plan to aaddress the nation tuesday may not do him any good. >> it's conceivable that at the end of the day, i don't

persuade a majority of the american people that it's the right thing to do. and then each member of congress is going to have to decide if i think it's the right thing to do for the america's national security, and the world's national security, then how do i vote? ultimately, you listen to your constituents, but you have also got to make some decisions about what you believe is right for america. >> laura: now, when the president tried to explain why he went to congress he instead made a stark confession. >> did i not put this before congress just as a political ploy or symbolism. i put it before congress because i could not, honestly claim that the threat posed by assad's use of chemical weapons on -- innocent civilians women

and children posed an imminent direct threat to the united states. >> laura: bingo. that is one of the main reasons why the american people left, right, and center are so vehemently against blowing one dime in syria or jeopardizing the lives of our military personnel there there is no imminent threat but there are major questions that this administration cannot to this day adequately answer. questions about the identity and motivation of the rebels. questions about how we pay for all of this questions about what our real objectives are and achievable after mission creep. after a week of trying to sell this the administration and its supporters in the g.o.p. establishment have raised more questions than they have answered. this is why, with the exception of a called dry of washington elites left right and center are united against action in syria in this country. will our representatives be guided by the bipartisan demands of the people

including most veterans and active duty military who are overwhelmingly opposed? or, will they continue to follow a path of endless spending on wars to enforce international norms even though the rest of the world strongly opposes such wars? the time has come for the american people to draw their own red line. the establishment has failed us on many fronts. a jobless recovery, skyrocketing debt, porous borders. wars in iraq and afghanistan where we paid dearly. had great men and women fighting but in the end we accomplished very little. they should stop trying to sell us more wars against nonexistent threats and start doing their jobs in the home front. i'm telling you if they continue to push unpopular policies, the people will eventually take their power away. and send them packing. our enemies love to see us become weaker by squandering our resources and overextending our military. this ends up leading to

more chaos and more suffering in the end by innocence. a stronger, more prosperous america. not more establishment wars of choice will lead to a more stable, peaceful world. that's the memo. now on to the top story. reaction with us now is robert kagan. an old friend and senior fellow at the brookings institute. mr. kagan. now you and i over the years have talked a lot about iraq and you are a learned scholar and incredibly prolific writer. in the end when you look at this today, hat the administration not lost ground in the past week when they tried to sell this war, justify the war and maybe even circumscribe the length, the duration and commitment in this war? >> i think they have clearly lost ground and not just this past week. the public mood really shouldn't be that surprising when you consider that for five years president obama has been telling the american people that they should be nation-building at home, not involved overseas.

we should be be getting out of the middle east and we shouldn't be doing this kind of thing. now he turns on a dime and says it's a big threat and we have to do something about it i'm not at all surprised that the american people have whiplash in this situation. so, he has a huge job to do and they are not doing it very well to try to explain to the american public what is at stake here. you foe, i disagree with you. i think there really are substantial american interests at stake in what's going on in the middle east and tickly in syria. and i worry that as we have in the past as we did in the 1920s and 30's we want to look away from a dangerous world. eventually it comes back to bite us. moving into more of an isolationist mood in the 1930s though? was it not, bob, because of what happened in world war i that the american people believed that that was the war to end all wars but ended up empowering what ultimately became the third like? this crd -- idea that

populationism popped up for no reason. what happened in iraq and afghanistan both wars i was a huge supporter of. and i love our troops. i do a lot as much as i can to help them. see the public doesn't the bang for the buck. we are weaker after all these military engagements. china hasn't been involved in any wars lately have they? they are pretty strong right now. >> first of all your history is excellent it was a reaction to world war i. ultimately an overreaction. and the problem that, you know, american public opinion can go swinging wildfully one side all the way to the other side. >> whose fault is that? it's the elite's fault, is it not? >> it's everybody's fault. in the case of the 20's and 30's. the elite was exactly where the public was. i think what the real question is does any of this matter or not? and that the public opinion, you know perfectly well we were both supporters of the iraq war and so was the overwhelming majority of the iraq

people. >> laura: what happened not carrying about. >> i don't think he didn't care there was bad military decisions made and we paid a big price and we are still paying a price for it and i agree with. >> you this is are the pa of the legacy of iraq because people see the broken men who came back and women the clasped economy and jobless here. iraq is in total chaos. >> it was in better shape before barack obama decided to pull out every last american troop and made that decision. >> obama has been a disaster there no doubt about that. >> that people have been making terrible mistakes there is no question about it. but, unfortunately that doesn't absolve us from the need to make a decision now about what's in our interest. >> who are we funding in syria today? i mean, you know what we found out about factions inside the opposition mood. >> there were factions inside the syrian movement and clearly there is al qaeda al qaeda affiliates

operating much smaller numbers. we have a lot of knowledge about and they are not jihadists and they are not moderates -- i mean they are moderates, not extremists. the problem is and this is something again that the obama administration has brought us to by not supporting those more moderate elements we have left the field open to the jihadists. and if we continue to do nothing, they get stronger and stronger. >> we're getting weaker though. aren't we weaker though over the last 12 years? >> i think that's tremendous overstated. i know the argument and i have responded to it in a book where i have tried to explain why i don't think that we are in as much decline as people say. i would say we are much more in a decline of mood than an actual stats city. >> we have 63% of the country only participating in this economy in jobs today. we have black home ownership at lows that go back to the 1995. >> that's all true. >> people are hurting here. >> that's absolutely right.

although, how much more -- i guess the question i would like to ask is how much will would he be hurting if we are living in a world where all kinds of dictators are using chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction, where we have retreated in the face of iranian challenges in the face of russian challenges and face of hezbollah. believe it or not, things can get worse. the fact that we are suffering economically at home does not mean it's in our interest to do nothing about what's going on overseas. >> up next, president obama faces uphill battle to convince congress to support military action in syria. so can he change enough minds to get what he wants? we'll

>> laura: in the impact segment president obama took a huge gamble when he decided to ask congress for its support of a military strike against syria. well now, along with the serious head counting,

there must be some serious hand ringing at the white house because the votes aren't there yet. members of congress have r. hearing it from their constituents big time. >> i'm opposed to having a single american boot on the ground. >> not good enough. >> let him speak. >> there is no contemplation of putting a single american service man on woman. >> you can say that now, i'm telling you there is not, sir. that is not. >> no go with what they plan. >> it's never going to happen. >> we cannot afford to turn syria no another iraq or afghanistan. i beg you now there is word from the white house that president obama will not strike if congress votes down the resolution has the president decided what he will do if the congress votes no on sending in force. >> we reached out to congress and we had conversations with members of congress across the

country. one thing we heard from nearly all of them is that they wanted their voice heard and their vote counted. >> just a couple seconds will he strike? president has the authority to act it's not his desire or intention to use that authority absent congress backing him. >> laura: not his intention. listen to that language. joining us now the latest prognostication and what it may mean for the obama presidency. larry sabato director for politics at the university of virginia and the author of the book the kennedy half century. in the studio wih me is michael share the washington bureau chief for time magazine. michael, let's start with you. this is interesting. a lot of interesting bed fellows in this debate over syria. i mean, when i wake up and open the newspaper and i'm agreeing with maureen dowd and charlie rangel then that's an interesting bipartisan issue. what does it look like now with these votes, especially let's start in the house. >> it looks bad for the president. right now there are counts out there. if you include people leaning against voting that already have this going

down. now, the president has been away for a he can. would is he going to come back and have another chance to make kiss case both to the country on tuesday night and individually with members of congress. nancy pelosi has been very effective so far in keeping a the love house democrats quieted on this. and i think she still has significant sway with even some of the ones. >> laura: this is unlike something like i have ever seen before really in washington. i have been here a long time. you were probably back in elementary school when i first came to washington. but, kendrick meeks, during one of the hearings this week, he was just brutal in the questioning of john kerry, obviously a member of the black congressional caucus. staunch liberal. other liberals speaking up bucking pelosi on this. i think over the last week they have lost ground. they haven't gained ground in the house of representatives. they are losing it day by day. >> i think that's absolutely right. they have lost ground this week. the question is when obama is back in town and when the members of congress are all together and pelosi can get him in a caucus room whether they can gain some of that ground back. clearly they look like they are in a worse position

thousand than they were three days ago. >> laura: larry, let's go to you on this. i see this as something totally wild. the president always talks about the need for bipartisanship. this is one of those rare instances where you have real bipartisan agreement overwhelming in the country a.m.d. and any think in the house of representatives going. where do you sigh this going now high stakes game at play. >> he said he would bring us together and now he has. so there is some bipartisanship here. and, look, laura, it's actually a good thing to have a scrambling of the lines. >> laura: finally great to see democrats and republicans working together or against. let me make a key point for you laura that people are overlooking. the reason why the senate is likely to approve the resolution is because two thirds of the senators aren't up until 2016 or 2018. whereas 100% of the house

members are up in 2014. even the ones in safe districts have to worry about party primaries. that's one of the reasons they are so skeptical of this syria adventure. >> professor, i saw that paul ryan wasn't all too eager to come out and talk about. this i'm still examining the facts. that's after boehner rushes out to the cameras after that one meeting from obama after kerry. rushes out and gives political cover to the president. meanwhile the boards are lighting down on capitol hill. they are melting down those phone lines and apparently like 95 to 1 against. in democratic and republican offices. how often does that happen? >> it very very rare. and i will tell you another thing. leaders on both sides are finding it's really tough to get followers this time around. boehner cantor endorsed this resolution. there are sevenner republican house members

from virginia. guess how many he has carried with him so far. zero in his own state. >> laura: michael, if indeed the house votes this down as it looks like today they would. where does president go from here? we have big issues, immigration, debt ceiling, how does this plead into that and as our friends over at politico wrote this week this could be draining his credibility. >> if he gets this it could help him. if it doesn't it's not like it's going to hurt him that much. there are not republicans going to hate him more. if he gets it, then he may get a vote in which boehner is going to break the rule and republicans will vote against something house. good press debt for the president going into immigration and debt ceiling. the city is so divided that the chances of him really losing political capital going forward beyond what he has already last is

really slim. >> laura: great to see you both. thanks so much. directly ahead russian president vladimir putin embracing barack obama on the world stage? later, why can't barack obama convince liberal base to strike on syria?

>> laura: in the personal story segment tonight, president obama and russian president vladimir putin have had a rocky relationship. first russia thumbed its nose at us over granting asylum to uber leaker edward snowden. now the russian president has become the world leader arguing the loudest against a military strike in syria. but today, the dueling leaders tried to play nice at the g-20 summit. >> the conversation lasted

for probably 20 minutes it was a very friendly conversation. we stick to our guns. everybody remained with his position. reunderstand each other. we listen to each other. we understand arguments. >> last night we had a good discussion and i want to give president putin credit that he facilitated i think a fuel airing of views on the issue. >> so who has the upper hand in high stakes game of diplomacy here on the world staining now? here now with us is the heritage foundation niles gardner. nile, well, the only thing missing was kind of the hearts -- little fluttering, they were trying to make this look good but what came out of this? in the end, who looks like they have a stronger firmer grip on this? >> well, i don't think this was a very good day for barack obama. in fact, i think it was a very bad day for him.

for he did not secure today the international coalition that he so badly needs to support military action. let's face it president obama has policies of appeasement for the russians for the last four and a half years. and where has that got the united states today? i think vladimir putin walked over barack obama today. it this was a rather hue humiliating day for the president. advancing a policy on the world stage that most key u.s. allies don't actually support. only the french so far have signed up to military action asong side president obama. >> laura: they made a big deal today, the white house, about this coalition letter that they released which was included france, canada, some other countries about how we believe that chemical weapons obviously are bad and there should be a strong reaction. international reaction. but there was no understanding or agreement

about military force. so, while that letter was all well and good, what the heck did that really represent? >> yeah, exactly. 10 members of the g 20 signed up to a statement basically, condemning assad's reality regime and also calling for a strong consequences. what they did not do of course, was support obama's call for a military intervention and so president obama did not actually achieve what he set out to achieve in russia. this was actually a bit of an embarrassment for the president. so far his grand international coalition has barack obama and france socialist french president. compare that with president bush's 40 country strong coalition. >> laura: that they ridiculed. >> but president bush, i think was a real professional on 00 world stage. he wasn't necessarily greatly liked. respected by america's allies. >> isn't that ironic when you look back of all the

criticism of bush i have plenty of it for the way things ended up in iraq and they kept saying about bush my way or the highway. he was a cowboy. and what did putin's people do this week they called barack obama the cowboy reaching for his revolver it's head spinning after the apology tour and reset button. where is that all that flexibility? >> the reality is that president obama looked awfully week. he looks like amateur on the world stage. >> laura: is he not smart? he is smart obviously that's not fair. is he hopelessly naive? does he believe his personality will transcend nationalist interest in the part of russia and china. >> i do think all of those. is he naive on very fronts. very ineffective leader. is he someone who doesn't command respect abroad. he doesn't instill fear

into the hearts of america's enemies at the moment is he trying to be the world leader. doesn't come across as general pat continue. >> laura: i think the ronald reagan with gorbachev. i was still work telling white house as a young little speech writer back then. coming out of that meeting with gorbachev and reagan was steely and back strong. he walked out. people didn't know what happened. it turns out he wasn't going to agree to these concessions that all the aelites in washington. it sended up better off for the united states. >> yes, reagan was a real leader. somebody who projected strong american global leadership. barack obama is exactly the opposite, actually. he just projects shear weakness, dithering, indecisiveness. he is by all accounts like a french leader really. and i think. >> laura: that's why they are getting along so well. >> that's why he gets awell so well with france

president. >> laura: good to he sue. plenty more ahead as the factor moves along this evening. charges that john kerry isn't telling the full story. we'll investigate. later, why are liberals rejecting president obama's argument to strike

aurora lawyer in the factor follow-up segment tonight, americans were horrified yesterday when a video surfaced purporting to show syrian rebels executing captured syrian soldiers in cold blood most analysts

agree most fighters are allied with terrorist groups including al qaeda. does this change the equation when it comes to arming the rebels and striking at the assad regime? with us now fox news middle east expert walid fares. always great to see you walid. you have some criticism for the way the president has approached. this but you believe there is a way that we could effect real change there that the american we will support bring about desired results. lay it out for us. >> the way we agree on is let's fight. al qaeda and assad let them figh if they don't win against each other they will form two sir i can't say. one is al qaeda divide and one backed by hasan. second is to go and arm the rebels. that's what we hear in washington. arm the rebels.

we are going to be arming al qaeda. my third choice would be number one to find an area inside syria, northeast in syria where the kurds are where the christians and other minorities and good guy secular muslims are and have a no-fly zone over them. have a flag for a free syria and from there on people from all sides could aggregate with them and they can move forward. that could be a third choice that would be done. >> laura: i would like to hit lotto tomorrow but that's not going to happen, walid. when has the cia ever successfully armed opposition group in the middle east. in the last 30 years. have we? or the u.s. government? when have we been successful in doing that? >> in the arab spring we wrong side you are making my point. one part of syria but people can travel. can they not?

saddam remained during the no-fly zone. >> i'm not talking about bringing down assad. that's a difference. not talking full-fledged into syria. a zone that is free allies to the united states. it exists 4 or 5 million people as i said kurds and christians and secular muslims. and then once you have it under your own alliances then you can work your way into syria. otherwise, the two syrias, let them fight against each other and become two enemies, not one. >> laura: i don't think the american public will go for that and part of what i discussed earlier with bob kagan is that he we just don't trust the elites, establishment whatever you want to call it to run these types of wars of choice anymore. we don't trust it we don't see that it effect our national security interest and might be interest you laid it out quite well woe don't see it and big time hurting in the united states and see the prosecution of wars in the last 12 years being carried

out by one wonderful young men and women. >> on the ground. >> laura: what's happening in afghanistan? we have insider attacks brutally taking down our own people train these people and they're shooting us in the back. i don't blame the american people for being where they are on this especially with president obama running the show. >> i don't blame as well and i would vote in the same way if i am asked. in iraq we did well when we liberated them from saddam. we did bad when we exited iraq leaving behind pro-iranian regime. in afghanistan we did a good fight but negotiating with the taliban that's the pattern. we partnered with the muslim brotherhood. that's the mistake. we partner with the rate people. i don't think the americans are seeing the right people. >> laura: that's the case the in the president is going to have to make on this tuesday. up next, the obama accommodation pulls out all the stops to gain liberal support for a strike on

syria. is the strategy back firing? we will debate it we're coming right back.

>> thanks for staying with us, i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. in the unresolved problem segment tonight, in a strange twist of political fate, the obama administration is now finding itself practically begging its left-wing base

to support its decision to try to strike the assad regime. secretary of state john kerry has appeared on left-wing cable channels to make the case and has even written an op ed in the huffington post. how is this all playing out in left-wing land? with us now former congressman and fox news contributor dennis kucinich and democratic strategist simon rosenberg. okay, congressman, i saw you earlier and i said the world has totally gone mad. you and i are on the same page on a measure issue facing this country. it's wild right? >> together again at last. i also in response to secretary kerry have a post huffington post. the top ten unproven claims for war against syria whatever came first. we heard from time magazine bureau chief has been flogging capitol hill to try to whip up support nor

warrer that not calling a war that royal foot soldier to keep it going is she not. >> she is. i did a an analysis members who voted against iraq war and switched to vote for syrian war. so far only 1 is% of those who voted against walk war against 126 democrats roughly have claimed that they are going to switch to approval for a war against syria. that's contrary to secretary kerry's claim that many democrats are switching. they are not. i think democrats will home solid by voting large majority against. this. >> laura: simon we have heard that members of the congressional black caucus have been urged, we don't know if it's pelosi or others maybe congressman kucinich to stand down on this which i find actually demeaning.

keep quiet if you are against it free syrian army. we need to free liberals on capitol hill to speak about. this kendra meek was out there. he was tough against kerry earlier. >> i'm not sure they have that quiet. i'm not sure they are heeding that advice. this is a tough issue for both parties. i don't know where we will end up next week the president's speech is going to matter a lot. he has a shot at winning this thing. i think there is still a lot of people who are undecided or leaning one way or the other. i think is he going to have to make a better case on tuesday night than he has been making the last couple of weeks if he wants to win next week. >> laura: i watched him congressman in st. petersburg where i spent a glorious summer as a student. i watched him there and thought to myself is this the best you have for going into war? was that the best performance?

it's not fun. i'm not taking glee in it. if mccain were saying it i would say the exact same thing. we want our president to succeed but is he trying to suck seat in a war where he hasn't made the case and there is some unproven claims. what's number one. >> people agree that chemical weapons were used and even most members of the g-20 believe that assad was behind the use of the chemical weapons there is plenty of reports including from the u.n. that they have. they claim that they have this intelligence about the mixing of chemicals by the regime. there is a lot of fuzziness about that big thing, central thing are these transcripts that they claim to have overheard a conversation between officials of the assad government, but these haven't been released. we don't know what language they were recorded in. we don't know if they were retranslated. this is the central basis for war.

and one other point, laura, a lot of this is classified. we can't have a classified sales pitch for war. that's fund mentally wrong on the democratic society. you have got to be -- come clean with the public. let them know exactly what the case is for war. all these secret briefings. this is classified. we can't tell you. what? >> laura: simon, if the president, contrary to what you kind of heard from his spokesperson today, if the president goes ahead after congress says no, which i'm going to wager, i think they might 00 even bring it up to a vote in the house. that's how bad i think it's going to get for him. if that ultimately happens, that's a big if. if it does and the president decides anyway to go ahead. what do you think the reaction will be in this country to doing that? i think that's a real possibility. >> well, i think in part it depends on what happens in the next week in the kind of case the president makes to the american people next week. look, i think the president has a good case to make. i don't know that they have been making it i think the

argument that we will hear him make is that assad is a bad actor and been exporting a lot of bad stuff outside of his own borders for a long time and he should go, which is the current. >> laura: except the world doesn't want to do anything. nobody in the world community is willing to spend one real dime or one life of one soldier to take out assad except the big bad world police of the united states of america. that's the shocking thing about. this. >> i understand. but i also think that this happened late in august. there hasn't -- the president really hasn't been aggressive about making his case. i think refining it and three pieces really quickly. one is assad is a bad actor got to go it's going to weaken' iran and third it's going to prevent. as long as stay involved in civil war prevent iran from taking syria. can he turn this thing around. >> laura: predictions congressman? >> right now, that house defeats it. >> laura: house defeats it gentlemen, we appreciate it up next, should professors be fired for spewing

radical political rhetoric in the classroom? we have a debate moments away. at farmers we make you smarter about insurance,

because what you dont know can hurt you. what if you didn't know that it's smart to replace washing-machine hoses every five years? what if you didn't know that you might need extra coverage for more expensive items?

and what if you didn't know that teen drivers are four times more likely to get into an accident? 'sup the more you know, the better you can plan for what's ahead. talk to farmers and get smarter about your insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum - pa - dum, bum - bum - bum -bum ♪

. >> in the second personal story tonight, as "the o'reilly factor" stated last night, william penn has been reassigned and will not be teaching this semester after telling his class last week that republicans raped this country. >> if you go to the republican convention in florida, you see all the old people with dead skin cells. they don't want to pay taxes because they've already raped this country and gotten everything they could.

they are the dying white people. if you are a republican, forgive me. if your parents are republicans, forgive me. even if you are a republican, i don't 19 fond you in this class. >> do you get extra credit if you survive that class? here's a question. should colleges be in the business of policing the speech of their professors? joining me from denver, attorney david lane who represented the university of colorado professor ward churchill who was fired after called 9/11 victims little eichmanns. tell me about this case. what is that it has you bothered? the they did not fire the professor. they reassigned him. he is getting pay. i think he will go on to teach the following semester, perhaps a different ping in mind that t

says that adverse employment action could be a reassign many or taking away responsibilities, michigan state has taken an adverse employment action against him based on the content of his speech. the issue becomes, is the content of his speech protected speech under the first amendment? michigan state a public school. and because it is the government, punishing him for his free speech, that should raise a red flag with everyone who is concerned that the government suppressing free speech. now, the class that he was teaching, the content of the class has to be considered here. and part of the class involved culture. is he simply trying to provoke his students? these aren't second graders. these college students. they don't have to be handled with the genteelness of grade schoolers. >> what do you think, mr. lane, let's say instead of talking about republicans having raped the country, let's say the hypothetical involved gay people. and he said something equally

derogatory about gay americans. or let's say it was about muslim americans. would you be here tonight defending his right to say those things? i imagine there would be a huge public outcry demanding not only reassignment but all corners of the united states demanding that he be fired and lose his job, which is not a, not a right to work at the university, in the university system, right? you don't have a right to work at michigan state. so i disagree with your first amendment analysis. i think it would be a double standard. yeah. >> this is michigan state which gets obviously a good deal of its money from the state. but making the leap to say the state is preventing him from publicly speaking, they're not preventing him from publicly speaking. he doesn't have a right to make a complete fool out of himself and say derogatory things that then offend the majority of the students, alumni and board of michigan state.

>> the first amendment gives everyone the right to be an utter fool if he wants to be. >> he can do that in the public square. >> the government is not in the business of punishing people for free speech. the difference is in the university context, you have a right to apoint. years ago there was a case where a professor was doing exactly the thing you were talking about. making terribly derogatory statements about jews. another professor was making derogatory statements about african-americans. they were ultimately fired because the courts finally said, look, at some point it becomes so against the whole academic process that students can no longer focus on the subject at hand. >> exactly. >> but here we're blasting republicans. i mean, i don't know what his context was. we don't know, part of the class involved culture. and cultural identities and things of that nature.

>> if he is trying to provoke these students, he is allowed to do it. >> he succeeded. >> this doesn't rise to that level. so i think it is protected speech under the first amendment. >> well, we'll have a later debate about this. i think your first amendment analysis is flawed but i think a bad professor on top of everything else. thanks so much. we got to go, unfortunately. when it comes

in the back of the book segment tonight, you and i aren't the only ones confused on president obama's choice. >> president obama wants to hurt the syrian government, don't send cruz missiles. sent over the summit's economic advisers. they will fix it. this president obama is pretty clever. do you see what he's doing get

to congress to approve the attack? he told them syrian president assad supports obamacare. >> remember when he was talking about if they find out they used chemical weapons in syria, that would be crossing a red line and if they did that, they would have to go get them? now the preis saying he never used the word red line. he is saying the world used the term red line. it has taken him five years but finally he has learned how to [ bleep ]. >> if memory serves, 100,000 syrians have already died during the conflict with bashar al assad with no military intervention from the west. why now? clip august 2012. >> we have been very clear to the assad regime but also to other players on the ground that a red line for us is, we start saying a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being

utilized. >> the red line. you can't use chemical to kill your own people. you have to do it organically. america and the world wants to make sure they only use locally grown ordinary nan. >> syrian leader assad referred to president obama as weak. yeah. obama was so angry, he plans to ask congress for per mission to think up a good comeback. >> now the president has lost those guys, you know he's in trouble. before we go, we would lake to remind you that bill' book, "killing jesus" is out september 24th. i already have my copy. if you back bill o'reilly member, you get a free book. do not forget you can become a laura 365 member at laura ingram.com for 24-hour a day access to my radio show and you get a lot of other cool things

as well and you can to go my website for the latest cultural and political recaps. thanks for watching. i'm in for bill o'reilly. please rememtops right here because we're always looking out for you. welcome to a special edition of "hannity." for the entire hour, i'll be joined in my studio audience by a bipartisan group of college students and recent grads from all over the country. exactly half of them are republicans. the other seven bravely identified themselves believe it or not as liberal democrats. over the next 60 minutes we'll tackle the hot button issues facing the country from the economy, health care, foreign policy and much more. no subject off limits. so let me welcome our audience. the world will be yours pretty soon. let's start with president obama. how many think the president