joining us with the questioning is jeremy peters who covers congress and politics for the new york times and steven dinan, congressional reporter for the washington times. thank you for joining us. let me begin with a follow-up to the state of the union address. he called it a year of action. he white house that he is within the authority to use executive order to bypass congressional inaction. is it within the onstitution? >> he is frustrated with the gridlock be he misunderstands the checks and balances and separation of power we have in our republic. our fathers did not say it is going to be really easy to pass that. they said you're going to have to work. when government is divided, it you cannot say if you do not let my policies i will do them anyway. some of the people that our founding fathers referred to wrote about this. they said if the executive attempts to become the legislative branch, you will have a form of tyranny. it will not be checks and balances. with every fire of my being i am opposed to letting him do whatever he wants with his pen and his phone. i'm not opposed to

. >> jeremy peters in washington, what do you think the -- that is a bristling attack on the president the united states. >> i don't know if it's anything we haven't heard before when it comes to the president's foreign policy and republican critiques of it. it seems like one foreign crises after another whether it's syria, libya, you name it. this is not a republican party that is going to give this president any breaks when it comes to foreign policy. >> what struck me, john mccain and lindsey graham were at the white house in the early days in the crisis of syria and they were willing to help him garner before congress when he said there was a red line that couldn't be caught. i think this response struck me because i think it illustrates how little faith republicans that i would guess some democrats have in his ability to shape world events. i think you saw in richard engel's piece there are questions about whether the president's words will have any impact on the violence there. >> i wouldn't disagree with that. i think that next to his criticisms over obamacare and criticisms abo

jeremy peters. >> you said libertarian does not mean liver time -- liber-tine. an interesting acknowledgment. there are many republicans among the conservative base that are uneasy with some libertarian views. do you think the republican party needs to be somewhat less squeamish about the social issues, adopt a slightly more embracing point of view if it is going to hang on to younger voters? >> probably we're going to have to have a party that is bigger and includes people who disagree. one of the beauties of believing in federalism or believing that certain issues should say at the state level, see if we can agree to disagree. on marriageng mood and other issues in new york state is quite a bit different in alabama. now, unless the supreme court changes things again, they are allowing states to determine some of these rules. they will be a little bit different from state to state. i think that is a better way to look at it. we agree to disagree. we do not have to agree to the same thing. >> is it safe to say if you did run for president that you are looking at

. >> "the new york times" reporter -- you'll be fine -- jeremy peters is with us. good to see you!> hi, mika. how are you? >> i'm fine. i didn't take that last night, if you know what i'm talking about. and andrea mitchell is looking awesome. i haven't seen you in a long time. >> i missed you guys. >> i've missed you so much! >> i love getting up early. >> i know you do. i know you do. a lot to talk about, joe. would you like to tease the big headline today? do you know what tease means? >> no, i don't. >> it means you say coming up, we're going to talk about dot, dot, dot, then you stop and i do the lead story. go ahead. i'll give it to you. >> i defer to you today but i think we should be leaving this. yet another change. >> i don't really have much to add on that. >> thank you. let me tell you why we shouldn't be leading with it. >> why not? >> because you guys will go on forever and since we are going to do that, we are going to do a few other stories that is significant. >> the president unilaterally changed the law that he wasn't supposed to change unless he had congress' app

joining us with the questioning is jeremy peters who covers congress and politics for the new york times and steven dinan, congressional reporter for the washington times. thank you for joining us. let me begin with a follow-up to the state of the union address. he called it a year of action. he white house that he is wi

jeremy peters writes that the key names on hand was testament to the growing clout of the movement.otshe tea party commemorated five years from the day rick santelli livered and on-air tirade that helped spark the political movement. there was a sense of dejection d restlessness. the 2012after election, the two parties really fighting its own identity," said judd saul. michael, a speechwriter for president george w. bush, has an opinion piece in the washington post. tea party."om the the evidence acumen lights that soberinglican party is up and slightly disoriented from its recent ideological bender. the tone of some rhetoric on the ,ar right, no mercy to enemies was pressed to a nap or and extreme by ted nugent who called president obama a subhuman mongrel. right recoiled at such viciousness and bigotry. no political movement can persuade a great democracy without displaying a measure of democratic race. grace.cratic any movement that claims to be inspired by faith and morality is discredited by language that dehumanizes its opponents. the sobering also proceeds on matters up local

with us on set, we have jeremy peters, julie pace, cokie roberts and al hunt.erts. so you heard joe biden. he was touting his basketball skills. despite being a white boy, biden was speaking at a reception marking black history month. he was referencing former nba star and sacramento mayor kevin johnson. so while we're on the topic of the vice president, he was also in new york -- i believe it was yesterday -- and he sat down with the ladies of "the view" to talk about his future political ambitions. >> ask you about the power that you have and may have in the future. i do not expect you to come on this program and announce that you're going to run for president. i won't object if you want to. do you want to? >> i tell you what, make you a deal, if you stick around, i will announce my decision with you. >> oh. oh. >> i'm not sure that's -- if hillary does not run, will you -- you have said if she runs for president, you will not run. >> no, i haven't. >> okay, tell me what you've said. >> the only reason to run for president of the united states, if you truly b

. >> jeremy peters?> there are many inside and outside the republican party who argue that if nothing is done to address immigration, the republican party is just going to ride out the whole hispanic vote and eventually wither. the other side of that argument is just as interesting. republicans who say that if we pass comprehensive immigration reform, we are going to destroy the party, because you are going to have a generation of hispanic voters indebted to democrats. do they have a point? >> you can also look at it in another way and say -- will democrats destroy their affinity or the affinity of hispanic voters for democrats if the democrats are not willing to compromise? many republicans, i think the majority, are for expanding work them come out of the shadows, normalizing their resistance, making it that they do not have to be feared to be seen in the daylight come over they can get a legitimate job and pay taxes. it stops short of the citizenship russian. democrats are not willing to compromise, w

that headline from jeremy peters and the "new york times." next call is from alabama, sheila is on the line for democrats. caller: i think they should have a term limit. also i think that, you was talking about their approval ratings for the congress and the president. i think that what happened, the president has done everything that he supposed to do but it's the congress that hasn't done anything and that's what makes people not like the president or pull his ratings down. congress, they hadn't done nothing. the people can sit around and listen to the other people, fox news and all the other radio talk show hosts and let a republican get in office and they would not have nothing because all they do is take, take, take. host: how long do you think the term limits should be? caller: maybe like four years. at least four. host: what makes you say that? caller: they're not doing anything. for a person just to sit around and do something and do nothing just every term, do nothing. i don't think so. host: all right. if you want to join our conver

liz: professor jeremy siegel of the wharton school of business and peter barnes, thank you so much. all day long peter's been giving us his assessment of what has been a very bullish sign for the markets. both janet yellen as you heard professor siegel say from wharton, don't count out that there may be a debt deal in washington. both of hose things are creating a very -- those things are creating a nice, fertile atmosphere for stocks right now. and the closing bell is really just about 49 minutes away. what do traders think of janet yellen's testimony, or is this four-day-long rally already too old? we're going to find out on the floor show when we take you to the new york stock exchange, cme and the nymex. and imagine going to an airport, and you're greeted by airline check-in staff who know every single thing about you just by looking you in the eye? one major airline testing the technology that could turn that vision into a reality. we'll tell you all about the stocks that are involved, coming up. ♪ ♪ we asked people a question, how much money do you think you'll need when you r

i'm not only peter from my staff, but jeff from supervisor wiener's office who has been so wonderful to work with. jeremy from supervisor avalos's office that has been working on this for over a year, maybe a year and a half. and yoyo chen from supervisor ma lely a cohen's office. but we are fortunate to have such great staff ~ to help with crafting a very tricky measure to hopefully place on the november ballot. i also wanted to say that the advice from the number of nonprofits has been really instrumental not only the shape up s.f. coalition both supervisor wiener and i recently visited and they had their kickoff last week for their bill board and bus campaign on sugary drinks, but also the department of public health staff, university of california san francisco, ucsf, san francisco health improvement partnership, especially arial vargas who has been a great community asset in building broader alliances, especially in low-income communities. and i also just wanted to say on the national level besides ucsf the center for science and the public interest, the california center for public health advocacy,

i'm not only peter from my staff, but jeff from supervisor wiener's office who has been so wonderful to work with. jeremy from supervisor avalos's office that has been working on this for over a year, maybe a year and a half. and yoyo chen from supervisor ma lely a cohen's office. but we are fortunate to have such great staff ~ to help with crafting a very tricky measure to hopefully place on the november ballot. i also wanted to say that the advice from the number of nonprofits has been really instrumental not only the shape up s.f. coalition both supervisor wiener and i