very schizophrenic. music together in 1967 and we'd played in a bunch of bands, done a tour and formed this group to make this movie, went out on the road and when you're playing as these guys you look out in the audience and you don't know really what people are thinking because we're playing music as opposed to actually the groups going out now that aren't. but that's a whole other -- that's a different show. so it's an odd thing. it's always been an odd thing because we created this band which then became a real band. we've done several tureds -- tours. why am i doing that? >> i don't know. >> because life is like a chinese box. but to follow up on that, to save chris, i think when we did live shows as spinal tap i think the best show from my standpoint was watching the audience, the shows we saw. because some would be getting the joke, reciting all the words with us, serious fans, bringing cucumbers or other things they thought were funny to conjure up things in the film and others who were clearly t

every schizophrenic is dependent on drugs and cannot get them.ng machine and every hospital. >> nuclear weapons are real --ç in every hospital. there are people out there tried to figure out how to get a dirty bomb. my only point is we need to have a much more robust security strategy and much more robust, and security strategy, and there is a simple measure. are we controlling the border? if we are not controlling the border, who are we kidding? greta: mr. speaker, thank you, sir. >> great to be with you. greta: up next, the best of the rest, and, oh, boy. vice president is making news again for something he said in the ukraine. yes, a pub and women can be a risky combination. risky combination. they work to make a difference. to make an impact. to improve the lives of others. they're people in positions of great power. the power to effect change. for them, career advancement is a goal. but not the only goal. for them, it's not about the money. although money is always nice. it's not about a corner office. it's about a greater good. there's a s

when he does say things, it is almost schizophrenic. as i said, they keep talking about cutting costs, and then they keep talking about expanding coverage. there is something called the law of physics, you know? sean: it becomes mathematically impossible to do this. how do you answer this charge? you have a liberal commentators, and they get these thrills running up and down their legs every time the anointed one talks, he and then you have these commentators out there who do not understand conservatism. these. commentators are out there, and they are saying that conservatives -- these idiots commentators saying things. nothing could be further from the trip if they listen to me or you or rush limbaugh or read your book -- further from the truth. >> demint, the cato institute, the heritage foundation. we believe in true reform. what obama says about reform is really destruction. he wants to destroy the greatest health-care system. here is what i know. during his press conference, he did not say one word about the wonders of the american

every schizophrenic is dependent on drugs and cannot get them.ospital. >> nuclear weapons are real --ç in every hospital. there are people out there tried to figure out how to get a dirty bomb. my only point is we need to have a much more robust security strategy and much more robust, and security strategy, and there is a simple measure. are we controlling the border? if we are not controlling the border, who are we kidding? greta: mr. speaker, thank you, sir. >> great to be with you. greta: up next, the best of the rest, and, oh, boy. vice president is making news again for something he said in the ukraine. yes, a pub and women can be a risky combination. and president obama got caught wearing "mom jeans." he has a response. greta: ok, you have seen our top stories, but here is the best of the rest. it must be tough being president. the eyes of the world are always on you. your clothing. president obama is being hammered for wearing "mom jeans" when he threw out the pitch at the all-star game. >> here is my attitude. michelle, she looks fabulou

when he does say things, it is almost schizophrenic. as i said, they keep talking about cutting costs, and then they keep talking about expanding coverage. there is something called the law of physics, you know? sean: it becomes mathematically impossible to do this. how do you answer this charge? you have a liberal commentators, and they get these thrills running up and down their legs every time the anointed one talks, he and then you have these commentators out there who do not understand conservatism. these. commentators are out there, and they are saying that conservatives -- these idiots commentators saying things. nothing could be further from the trip if they listen to me or you or rush limbaugh or read your book -- further from the truth. >> demint, the cato institute, the heritage foundation. we believe in true reform. what obama says about reform is really destruction. he wants to destroy the greatest health-care system. here is what i know. during his press conference, he did not say one word about the wonders of the american

>> it really was, you know, schizophrenic risk management at the time because when you let lehman failnd the merrill lynch bailout and all the bailouts after them, gm included, so much more expensivexpensive. not many people realize this. but there was a meeting back in the spring of 2008 between former treasury secretary hank paulson and dick fold and a lot of people in the press thought it was a warm and fuzzy meeting but my research shows me that these two men really weren't getting along in the meeting. dick fold at one time lectured the treasury secretary and said something along the lines, you know, i've been in my seat a lot longer than you were at yours at goldman sachs. real tensions here and this is real tragedy and never should have happened. >> let me pick up on that point. lawrence, did then treasury secretary paulson, let me ask it this way, a former goldman top exec allow allow lehman to fail because of personal dislike because of competition? >> they were trying to make a stand and make a point and i think they massively misjudged the systemic risk and that is one thing

we have this schizophrenic rule of the law where we define death of the absence of those, but we refuse. and all of us are dependent at different levels on other people at all stages of our development to the very early in the womb to outside the womb to very late. it concerns me that we are so inaccurate or inaccurate is an improper term, inconsistent in terms of our application of logic. you said that rowe v. wade settled law yesterday and i believe it settled under the basis of the right to privacy, which has been there. so, the question i'd like to turn to next is in your ruling, the second circuit ruling on, i'm trying to remember the nam the case, baloney. the position was is that there's not an individual, fundamental right to bear arms in this country. is that a correct understanding of that? >> no, sir. >> please educate me, if you would. >> in the supreme court's decision in heller it recognized an individual's rights to bear arms as a right guaranteed by the second amendment, an important right and one that limited the actions a federal, the federal government could take resp

it's a little bit schizophrenic, because you and i talked about in the last hour they are trying to downplay progress, the fact that they could get a deal this week. so, they're doing that, while at the same time trying to portray an image and a sense of momentum, and that's what we just saw from senator baucus just now. >> dana, it's interesting. one of the important pieces here is the idea that the current shape of the compromise has been scored by the cbo, because there are a lot of plans out there, not all of them have been scored. at least what is being worked on has been scored and it comes in around the $900 billion mark over 10 years, correct? >> reporter: correct. but what this is -- i want to apologize to our viewers, because it might sound like it's in the weeks, but it's important, what's been going on in the room they've been taking big pieces of this puzzle and working on it. i want to give you an example of something they're working on this morning, the idea that the president has been talking about, giving independent commissions, instead of congress, an independent commissio

we have this schizophrenic rule of law where we have defined death as the absence of those, yet we refuseof us are dependent, at different levels, other people during all stages of development very early in the womb. it concerns me that we are so inaccurate -- not a proper term -- inconsistent in terms of our application of logic. you said roe v. wade said a lot. it settled the right to privacy issue, i believe. the question that i would like to turn to, in your second circuit ruling on -- trying to remember the name of the case -- maloney, the position was that there was not an individual, fundamental right to bear arms in this country. is that a correct understanding? >> no, sir. >> please educate me, if you would. >> in the supreme court's decision, they recognized and individual right to bear arms -- an individual right to bear arms as something guaranteed by the second amendment, an important right, one that limited the actions that the federal government could take with respect to the possession of firearms. in that case, we are talking about handguns. the maloney case presented a d

. >> truly in a schizophrenic.s but that is where we make our private aircraft -- profit in our practice and like the fact because of the delay payment into these tricks. we hate what medicaid pays as but we like the fact that they pay promptly at least a louisiana and like the fact that medicare pays property, so i think our hope is we will get the piven schedule of the private and the promise of the public but i think more likely will get the payment schedule of medicaid and the promptness of the private system. [laughter] i say that because joseph hacker de is of the brains behind and the public plan, he has a phd in political science from san francisco and it would seem strange a political scientist from san francisco with designer health care system that has been one of the things i've learned in my first year here. [laughter] but ended he says the problem is we are paying physicians and hospitals to much and in his paper he basically says once you have the ability to assign a payment you shouldn't negotiate p

we're truly schizophrenic.on the one hand we hate the insurance companies but that's how we make our practice. and we like the fact because they always delay our payment and do these little tricks and we hate what medicaid pays us but we like the way they pay promptly, at least in louisiana, and we like the fact that medicare pays promptly. our hope is we get the payment schedule of the private and the promptness of the public but we'll get the payment schedule of medicaid and the profertness of the private. and i say -- promptness of the private. and i say that because joseph hackler is the brains behind the public plan. and dr. hackler is a ph.d. and political science from san francisco. if it seems strange that a political scientist from san francisco designed our medical system, that's one of the few things i learned here. we're paying physicians and hospitals too much. in this paper he basically says once you have an ability to assign payment, you shouldn't negotiate payment, you should assign payment. and

we have a schizophrenic role of a law where we have defined death as the absence of those, but we refuse to define life as the presence of those. all of us are dependent at different levels of other people during all states of development from the very early in the womb, outside the womb to the very late, and it concerns me that we are so inaccurate -- it is in proper term -- inconsistent in terms of our application of the logic. you said that roe v. wade is a set of law yesterday. and i believe it is settled under the basis of the right to privacy, which has been there. so the question i would like to turn to next is in you're ruling the second circuit ruling and i am trying to remember the name of the case, maloney, the position was is that there is not an individual fundamental right to bear arms in this country. is that a correct understanding of that? >> yes search. >> please educate me if you would. >> in the supreme court's decision in heller it recognized individual rights to bear arms as a right guaranteed by the second amendment, an important right, and one that limited the act