trace gal better is hosting the fox report tonight. log on to the shep page on foxnews.com. neil is next. >> neil: thank you greg. hammering them later. welcome, i'm neil cavuto, president obama talking up plans to help small business promising to funnel $30 billion to banks. not a peep about the cash he could be about to take away from the same businesses with a huge tax hike. if the goal is to create jobs, my buddy, who did not get this, charles is big on saying demanding, saying the president is offering a mixed message. >> first of all the $30 billion is a small bank bailout. that's all it is. banks are sitting -- small banks, they only have 82% of deposits on loan. cash isn't the problem. the banks that get the money will sit on it. >> sort of like the big zang right. in the meantime, the increase in tax rates on the top level to 35 and 39%, that's going to crush so many small businesses. the numbers are debatable. the low end it will impact 100,000 businesses, on the high end, several million. either way it's a loose-loose for small businesses because they pay their taxes individually. >> i heard the -- the white house chef and the gardener say you're overstating the small business case. very few fit the definition and you're overstating it. >> when i went through geithner's testimony today they used things like they want to give moneys to banks, qualified small businesses. the small businesses they're talking about meet the threshold. they're the ones that make 250,000. >> we should stress that's the level, like individuals, that will be taxed at the higher rate. doesn't matter if you're a business or an individual. >> right. it's just -- then the breaks. 5 grand for a new hire? money for new equipment. i remember when president bush did this. i bought nothing for my business. the copier worked, it didn't make sense to get 40% back when i could keep 100% and not spend it. >> there was no incentives to go to staples or -- >> absolutesly not. >> maybe you're cheap. >> i'm cheap but it doesn't make sense. >> neil: you're saying the president is giving with one hand, taking with another. >> this is another program that sounds great on the surface but doesn't work. the home mortgage program is a disaster. i don't know if you saw this neil borofsky report but 75 -- >> the tarp guy. >> the inspector general, he's the straightest guy out of everybody. maybe that's why we don't hear about him. >> he's toast. >> $75 billion set aside to help 4 million homes. he says it helped only 6 6,000. think about that. >> you've been raising this on on the new hit show you're a parts of. you've been a rock star. >> that show is phenomenal. we have a tremendous cast and chemistry. >> i'm showing -- this is today. no this is the first day. i complained about this charles because look how you are seated. it looked like the dating game. >> by the way, me and liz. >> liz says i'll take. >> me and liz went to the movies that night. >> i bet you did. whatever happens at fbn stays there. >> i complained and said could we get them closer? now it's jeopardy. great show, you're phenomenal. is this as close as you're going to get to stuart? >> if we get closer, we'll northbound a hot tub together. it seems this is the perfect distance for us. >> you know what i like -- i'm not just saying this to brag about fbn. it's high energy and you're getting to the issues right away early in the morning right before the -- >> the issues people care about, that's what we're getting to. we're not talking about ibm, because it's wildly held but they moved a pen y we want to make sure people get news that impacts their lives on a financial bases. >> by the way, stuart is very magnanimous and shares the limelight. i don't want you to get that impression when you help out on cavuto on the weekend. >> i've been getting the urge you. >> you do great. charles, thank you very much. warning about some of the small business stuff as it cascades through the system. president obama still says the program's going to create jobs. he wants to get $5,000 tax credit for each worker small businesses hire. the next guest says it won't help him hire anybody and he voted for the president. mike brey is president of hobby works and employs 50 people. this wouldn't make a difference? >> no, if you're already going to hire somebody, this will be a nice windfall but certainly $5,000 as the previous guest said is not going to make me say i need to hire more people. $5,000 barely covers the healthcare cost. >> so we don't know what the healthcare costs will be but you're saying whether we get reform or not, they're high enough it won't cut the slice. >> correct. absolutely not. >> are you in the -- you're not to give away business particulars but are in the camp of 250,000 and over? >> i'm in retail and sell toys, which is something people easily cut out so i haven't been close to that for the last couple years. >> so i have nothing to worry about. >> right now i have nothing to worry about but it's not because -- i wish i had that problem from the president's trying to help with the $5,000 incentive to hire each worker. better than nothing, right? >> i suppose it's better than nothing, but again, the problem is that a lot of these things i appreciate the idea the administration is trying to finally get money to where the rubber meets the road, neil, but the problem is small businesses don't typically operate like big businesses. my employees, most of them, have been with me for a decade. so i've spent the last couple years as my sales have declined, trying to hold onto employees. my problem is not i need to hire more employees. my problem is i'm desperately trying to keep the ones i have, which is part of the reason my personal income declined. >> mike, successful small business guys like yourself, what would make you expand? what would give you confidence to hire more workers, credits or noncredits. what would get you on the fence? >> even if the economy like this, neil, there's real opportunities. there's -- as competition -- as competitors go out of business, there's room to expand. commercial real estate prices are plummeting, which gives me a chance to possibly go out and look for a building of my own that i could have. but really what gives you the confidence is you know, some sense of stability. things don't have to go getting better for me to invest but i have to have confidence things are going to be getting better. >> you don't have that sense? >> i don't have that sense right now. and i got to tell you, i know a lot of small business, democrats and republicans, here's what i know. the last thing you want as a small business person is to sit in front of your bank asking for money when you need the money. that's a scary situation to be in. >> that's a very good point. a very good point. mike brey, thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. is this tarp money the president is taking for the taking? here comes the jungle. two weeks to the day since scott brown won, governor basher wondering in the governor got the news. Ășn the day of a the budget fallout from the feds, the fast and furious reaction from the states. a lot of states. who hear governor's tell it very little of that for them and likely for you. with me mississippi governor haley barber. good to have you back. >> thank you for having me back. it's interesting about states because while the federal government acts like it can't cut spending, in my state i cut spending 8 1/2% just this year. and a lot of my fellow governors, democrats as well as republicans, have cut spending 10% pour and more, 20 in some categories. so it's offensive to us that washington says they have to spend $3.8 trillion on a federal budget. >> one you were cutting there, i was researching to be ready for you. that was a fairly across the board cut. you didn't pick out a tiny slice and say that's where i'm going to cut on nondiscretionary programs. that was a tough political pill to swallow but nevertheless, you and a lot of democratic colleagues were doing the same. what do you think of the fact washington picks and chooses budget fights? >> well i wish i had more flexibility but the fact is our state law doesn't allow flexibility after a certain point. after you cut everybody a certain amount you have to cut the same from there up. it's the magnitude that -- that washington doesn't get. i mean there's nowhere in the world it says that a real spending cut can't take place in washington. families are doing it every day. businesses are doing it every day. even states are doing it every day. sometimes the states are cutting billions and billions of dollars and as i say, 10%, 15% in some categories even 20%. so we think washington, instead of having a $1.6 trillion deficit, ought to have some spending cuts. do you know the $3.8 billion -- $3.8 trillion spending is about $50,000 for a family of four? i mean i wonder if every family of four watching today says am i getting my $50,000 worth of government spending. >> what i wonder too is this is two weeks to the day, governor, where scott brown was elected in massachusetts in largely a spending protest on healthcare, although there were a lot of issues in the state but by in large, washington, you know, chewed of too much. yet the message in the budget was we don't hear that, we don't see that. we're proceeding merrily on and todays $30 billion tax credit with money many tell me he shouldn't be spending out of tarp. what do you make of what happened in washington two weeks ago? >> it seems to be bifurcated. the administration is screaming as loud as they can, we know we should have been talking about jobs, we're going to start talking about jobs. everything's about jobs because we got our head handed to us because we didn't talk about jobs. yet at the same time, they're totally deaf to the american people saying you can't spend yourself rich, quit spending so much, quit running up debt that i'm going to have to pay for, my kids are going to have to pay for, my grandchildren are going to have to pay for. get control of spending. as i say, the american people know you can do that because they look around and they see their state governments doing it all the time. sometimes very, very difficultly, i feel for my friends in california that are making gigantic cuts. but even in a conservative state like mine where we never let spending get out of control and built up a rainy day fund we're still making 8 1/2% cuts. >> even with -- >> even with the rainy day fund, democrats in your state are saying why don't you give it to the people? why don't you spend it? i think you and your colleagues have been saying, well, that's why we call them rainy day funds. it's a fight, isn't it? >> well it is. there are legislators who want to spend everything they can get their hands on, who are no more willing or think you're able to make cuts than people in washington. fortunately for me, in my state, most legislators, including all of the democrats, understand we have to live within our means and they understand the rainy day fund was not set aside to spend in one year. we're going to have two or three more difficult budget years in state government, including my. so i'm committed to the rainy day fund lasting four years. >> wow. governor, thank you very much. good seeing you again. >> thank you. >> order the most expensive thing on the menu then tell your friend who just picked up the tab to go screw yourself. it's not okay for you but it's okay for the president? >> if someone told you the plane you're about to get on was missing a bolt, would you rather not know? good because it's happening mori than you'll ever care to know. gecko: all right... gecko: good driver discounts. now that's the stuff...? boss: how 'bout this? gecko: ...they're the bee's knees? boss: or this? gecko: sir, how 'bout just "fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance." boss: ha, yeah, good luck with that catching on! anncr: geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. over a million people have discovered how easy it is to use legalzoom for important legal documents. so start your business, protect your family, launch your dreams. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. if you can't beat them them, redirect them. a new bill introduced today that would block all funds needed to try khalid sheikh mohammed and other 9/11 terror suspects. in court, republican congressman is a lawmaker trying to make it happen. congressman, this is the way to make sure that maybe you dry up the funding for this sort of thing, right? >> well, it is. i think there is good reason for doing it. one i think it would endanger new york city or any area where this were the case. secondly, the cost were going to be roughly 250 million a year. he will be wherever he goes, if it's a civilian trial, four or five years. mew sally was in alexander four years. that takes it to a billion dollars. the city was asking for 215 million, the marshal service was going to buy 17 new cars and thirdly you were going to treat khalid sheik mohammed better than a young man or woman who serves in the military and does something wrong. lastly, you were going to give khalid sheik mohammed four years of a platform to spew hate and keep in mind, he beheaded daniel pearl and was the mastermind and already acknowledged both, was the mastermind resulting in killing almost 3,000 people in 9/11. >> obviously you created buzz, he have 30 some odd congressmen to sign on, including some democrats. did they tell you privately, congressman, they hoped the president rethinks the whole gitmo shut down thing and this whole burden would be lifted off them. >> i don't hear from the administration to that effect. acre eric holder is committed. >> i wasn't clear. the people signing on, maybe the other contemplating, did they tell you we could get the monkey off our back if we did that? >> no they haven't said, most members would not want to see him tried in new york stock newn washington in a civilian court. everyone knows what he's done. he's pled guilty and withdrawn that. i think they sincerely think this is a bad idea. nobody said it takes it off the table. it's not a political issue, eric holder put the administration in a tough spot. i believe it is pass in congress and i think the best thing would be to try them on a militaries court i believe better than guantanamo bay but on a military base in a remote area before a military court. >> neil: congressman, thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. we told you how the rich are picking up the tab for the president's budget and with higher taxes to come, how they plan to account for the spending but far from saying thank you all washington can do is say screw you. would anyone of us behave that way if someone treated us as a restaurant? who better to ask then a restaurant owner and a ad man as well. blau >> good to have you. >> good to be here. >> i thought of you in that time. you must see a lot of rich patrons come in and they treat a bunch of folks. who do the treated react? >> they're usually very nice but it's done voluntarily. no one is saying you have to do it except i'm going to institute every friday night, obama night. and that's 10% of the people in the restaurant, the wealthiest, will pay for the other patrons and they'll be forced to pay. i'll ask how much they make and if they're in that 10%, you have to pay for the others. it's called -- i'm a slogan person. it's called from each according to his means. so each according to his needs. >> but is there he etiquette or program protocol? i like to treat because i feel guilty if i don't. irish catholic. other people are happy letting someone else pick up the tab. >> there's a certain paralysis. there are people who you watch on the tennis court have great reflexes but time comes to pay the check and they have trouble moving their hands. [ laughter ] >> some people have their kidneys tuned into when the check comes. they say excuse me. i have to go, they come back and say was the check paid? thank you. >> excusing all that, i would think it behooves them not to complain about the meal or certainly the tip that the -- the said treater left. >> well i think that the fact is most people are really happy to say thank you so much and then people take turns doing it. i know i eat with a group every wednesday and we take a turn. but the one thing we are not doing anymore, and you don't see it to know at my restaurant or others, people are saying who had the chopped steak? you owe -- so people are grateful, they feel good about it. >> do you have -- have you ever had customers to complained, they haven't picked up the tab, not that they would at your restaurant but they haven't picked up the tab and they're bitching about it and they're not paying. >> fortunately we've not had that but sometimes people say i didn't like this soup and you find out they didn't pay for the soup, they sponged off someone. the fact is when people are not paying for it, they should be kind enough and nice enough to say a quiet thank you. >> you mentioned something key as you always do. the difference here is they're not obligated or concerned about the cost or ordering an extra appetizer or extra drink because they're not paying so they have no skin in that meal, in that game, right? >> absolutely. >> so my larger analogy much the government is then you'll take whatever's coming your way because someone else is picking up the tab. >> and they're doing t face it, 10% of our population are going to have to work harder to afford to pay for the other 90%. he -- obama may say this is not socialism but maybe it was the socialism i studied in school. it clearly we -- he said this from the beginning. he did not lie -- when he was running, he said we're going to take the money from the wealthy and give it -- and it's -- >> he was consistent about in a. >> consistent. he told the welt wealthy he was going to screw them then. >> i didn't want to frame it that way. jerry, thank you very much. a rock star in the hamptons. go to his place. >> forget about a guy with a bomb in his undies, a report on unsafe planes that will scarein you right out of your undies. âȘ now all they let me have is this dinosaur âȘ âȘ hello hello hello can anybody hear me? âȘ âȘ i know i know i know i shoulda gone to âȘ âȘ free credit report dot com! âȘ that's where i shoulda gone! coulda got my knowledge on! âȘ âȘ vo: free credit score and report with enrollment in triple advantage. >> neil: all right. earnings on the parent company of this very channel you're watching right now, news corp., the parent of fox news, fox business network among others. the "wall street journal" out with numbers that handily beat street estimates. it made $254 million before some special charges in the latest quarter. versus a year ago, loss of $6.4 billion. across the board, turn-around pretty much in all the key businesses. keep in mind, the company, which, of course, was the movie house behind "avatar," 20th century fox, a lot of it isn't factored in this last quarter completed. that's coming in the future quarters. rupert murdock head of this kingdom, putting out a letter to colleagues more or less saying that "avatar" with its nine academy award nominations continues to be something that looks promising and credits fox news channel. a special addendum he says without makaveckka neil cavuto r world" i don't know where i'd be. he didn't say, that but bottom line we're all making money and very good to work at a company making money than let's say a company that is not. we keep you posted on further developments. the stock was up early in the day on indications the report might be good. indeed it was. all the time we've been looking at the characters flying with us in the plane, who knew that we should be far more worries about the engines on the plane? in the "usa today," a report reveals the staggering number of flights that take off every year that never should have left the runway. try 10,000 of them. because they weren't properly maintained or not maintained at all. charles is not surprised. he's an aviation security expert and it said the quality and maintenance on a lot of the planes is something we should be looking at. this is scary stuff. >> it is scary. it's been going on for a very long time, as we both know. a number of years ago chief mechanic for major carrier at j.f.k. came to me and asked if he would be heldli held lia r signing off when he knew the airport was not fully maintained. i said why would you do that? he said, "my job depends on it." i said are you eligible for retirement? he said yes. i said then retire. he did. >> neil: so you are saying that they're skimping on safety? >> yes. >> neil: skimping on maintenance? >> yes, i am. >> neil: how would we know if there are better than 10,000 planes a year in question for taking off because they're not according to the study, how do you know the plane you get on is okay? >> you don't. unfortunately, the faa who is there to tell us whether or not that airplane has been properly maintained doesn't always do that. the f.a.a. feels the assigned duty is to accommodate commercial aviation, which it is. their interpretation of the accommodation and ours would be very different. for instance, an airplane may have part of the protocols a fly to failure standard. in other words, you know, you hear the pinging in your engine in the car but it keeps going so you keep driving it until it won't go further. sometimes in an airplane, they do the same thing. that part works and we know it continues to fail. we allow it to continue in service until it does fail. >> neil: when it fails, that can often times be a crash. >> usually it isn't, because the part if question has a backup. redundan redundancy. >> neil: my nightmare of reading this is the part in question fails and the backup fails mid-flight. >> that is the problem. >> neil: how realistic is that? if we haven't seen it in an alarming degree, should we overassess the data? >> sometimes what we don't see doesn't mean it didn't happen. we hear about airplanes that are going down. we are never quite sure as to why. for instance, that airline they're went down off brazil, peto-2. we know it fails. we knew it at the time they were ill faing. >> neil: we take some comfort, whether it's a jet that crash and the people survived and all. but that's them and it's libyan airliner. leb news airliner. that's them. it's less our stuff. what do you say? >> we knew it was failing because it was failing on our airplanes as well. >> neil: we have been lucky to dodge the bullet? >> that's right. the greatest engineers in american history were the wright brothers. they built airplanes to fly. things can fail and the aircraft will still fly. they're amazing. very, very difficult for an airplane to fall out of the sky. but the fact of the matter is that after a period of time, number of failures, it will fall out of the sky. >> neil: on that upbeat note, charles, thank you very much. good to see you again. he has been warning about this. some say too much so, but he has been ahead of it. do you think joseph alito mouthed something at the "state of the union"? what the president is doing today that got our judge napolitano really mouthing off. we oar paying them watch wall street. aapparently well're paying some of them to watch this too. true or false. people who switched... from geico to allstate saved $373. ( scoffs ) false! it is false. they actually saved more. an average of $473 a year. now that's the right answer. âȘ an average of $473 a year. now that's the right answer. eating healthy is important, but only vegetables can give you vegetable nutrition. one of these will get you more than half way to your five daily servings. v8. what's your number? what is going on here? >> somebody has to pay. >> pay for what? >> i don't know. just pay! stop whining and take it like a man! >> neil: all right, well a tiny owen wom wilson and giant ben stiller. why am i talking about? imagine little owen representing, well, the government. specifically the cash that president promising to shave from the next decade budget shortfall. $8 trilli2 trillion. chump change compared to big ben stiller with the $21 trillion debt that uncle sam is supposed to pile up? see where i'm going. dave ramsey says it's a fiscal nightmare from the museum. he joins me from his hit radio show and catch him on his big show on 8:00 p.m. eastern time on f.bn. now -- >> never get ben stiller on your show. >> neil: no. >> not after that. >> neil: i don't know. comparing him to the government was probably not a wise move on my part. what do you make of that? all of a sudden we are bragging about the wrong stuff here. >> it's kind of like the venacular changes in washington we used for years. we're going to reduce the deficit. now, what people sometimes at home is hear is we're going to reduce the debt. reduce the deficit means we're not going as far in debt this year as last year. that's reduce the deficit. which is, you know, if you talk to joe and suzy on their personal debt think'd laugh and say we can't keep going into debt if we want to get out and spend more than we make if we want to get out. but they change the verbiage and say it will cost us money if we ching the tax rate. it will cost you money? no, you're just not going to collect as much. change the venacular around. they make a big deal about a little savings and then it's almost as if the huge overspending is going to be swept under the carpet. >> neil: you raise a good point, as you always did. if we are spending more than we're making and we keep doing this, even if we are spending less of what we are making we still pile up debt. individual get that, listeners and viewers on the show get that, so why doesn't the government get that? >> i think they are about to. i think people are keying off on this issue. there has been issues that come to the forefront politically a time or, two illegal aliens and different things piled up politically. this one, the pile is getting very high. the emotional pile in the average american's mind. i think we are going to see some regime changes in washington. i'm not just talking about in the white house. there are republicans that ended their career with some of their votes lately. i know this are some democrats that ended their career, because i think people are paying attention to the fiscal money irresponsibility like never before. >> neil: i think you're right. i'm right about the questions you get this week. here is this week's -- >> hey, neil and dave, i'm colleen from connecticut. i recently got married. i have a condo to sell. i'm just wondering in this economy would it be better to put it on the market or rent it out? >> neil: a tough call. what does she do? >> i don't like telling you to hold on to a condo but probably the worst time to sell something if you don't have to sell it in years. best time to buy something. i'm buying real estate personally. a great time to buy real estate. if you are in a position that the condo is close to you and you can watch over the renters and be firm but fair with them, not be taken advantage of. buy yourself a year's patience for the real estate market to finish its recovery, that will be very, very wise. >> neil: a year or, two you're saying a year or two for the recovery? >> yeah, a year or two before the real estate market will snap back. we don't know what city that condo is in and we don't know how long it will take it. some places it may not take that long. have patience and let this thing heal. >> neil: thank you, my friend. good to see you. >> you, too. thank you for having me. >> neil: regulators missed the financial meltdown and a lot of them were busy watching porn at work. more than two dozen of them in fact. wat "washington post" reporting that's how many securities and exchange commission employees and contractors are are scrutinized for possibly getting mez her mimerhighesmeri different figures popping up on the screen. one supervisor trying to access 1900 porn sites in 17-day period saying later it was kind of a distraction per se. what? david williams from citizens against government waste on what apparently went very, very wrong. david, man oh man, now i know how the meltdown happened. >> yeah, this is crazy. especially an agency that is supposed to be looking after the economy and making sure there is no shenanigans. 1800 and 1900 images in 17 days. i don't have good math skills but that is 100 a day. that is a lot. it's taking resources from the inspector general because they're investigating the people looking at the porn. the inspector general should be looking at the other things, audits, grants, making sure that those things are done properly. not monitoring employees and their porn watching. >> neil: well, i guess what i'm more worried about is if they're very busy doing this and one guy said while i was doing it, staying late, i wasn't taking nil o any overtim whatever, then it's fairly easy to see how financial crisis could bypass them. >> well, go home. don't stay there late. go home. some people were saying they used it in lieu of comp day. what is the formula? 25 images per comp day? what is this? this is ridiculous. >> neil: that employee said i joked about it because i worked late and i rarely put in any for kind of comp time or anything like that. i don't know if this was the 1700 porn guy dude. it was a different guy. >> i hope the white house doesn't count this as stimulus spending, because that would be the real shame of this. >> neil: all right, you know, it's weird because this is what happens -- we beef up a budget for agency, overmanned or understaffed or whatever. that's what happens, right? >> that is what happens. they get away with it because they can. what are the repercussions? what is going to happen from here? what will happen to the employees? slap on the wrist. that will be it. you know something? i bet in a year's time, look at the watches right now and come back in a year and see if they are still doing it. it bet you dollars to doughnuts that it's still going to happen. >> neil: weird stuff. tomorrow, my excluse iver sit down with white house pay czar kenneth feinberg. only tomorrow on fbn at 6:00 p.m. eastern time. if you don't get this, demand it. tarp, the gift that keeps giving. why is the judge saying it's not the president's job to be givingch? >> neil: we are hearing the top intelligence officials of the united states and britain are warning in hearing today that the u.s. can expect al-qaeda to attempt an attack sometime on u.s. soil in the next three to six months. they don't define that or explain that and they don't go into greater details than that, but they say in the next three to six months they're serious about attempting an attack. it just pass that along because they said that, and that's a big deal. we'll see. in the meantime, the president is tapping tarp to pay for the $30 billion small business jobs plan. the judge has a big problem with that. the bail-out bucks aren't legally the president to give spender the touch. talking about judge napolitano, who says not good. >> tarp was a blank check given to treasury under premise it's used to purchase mortgage asset. mortgage backed securities that are bundled together and hard assets about to be foreclosured. indeed its very name troubled asset relief program was sold to congress as way to unfreeze the credit market, way to take the bad debt off the books. government got $700 billion and didn't buy a single toxic mortgage asset. instead, it force fed cash to 60 largest banks in the country and said sell us shares of stock in you. take our money. or we will audit you and the audits will cost you a fortune. banks took the money, some greatfully, some reluctantly and paid it back. now the executive branch of the government has the money in a bank account and wants to spend it however it wants. >> neil: but you are arguing it's not their credit line to spend. >> eccorrect. correct. it belongs to the people of the united states of america for whom it came under the constitution, only congress can decide how to spend the people's money, not treasury department. >> neil: what if congress is okay. put it to jobs or put it to mortgage relief or whatever the fashion -- >> that is the unconstitutional aspect of it. congress cannot delegate away its power to spend money to the president or the treasury secretary any more than the president could give away his power to run the military to a committee of the congress. the constitution says who does what, and the players can't change that. so when the tarp money came back, and this money is there, the president says it's mine to spend however i want. can't do it. congress is saying the president can do whatever he wants with it. can't do it. such thing called the constitution. to which they all took an oath of fidelity. that says the president can only spend money how the congress tells him. >> neil: what he is doing is illegal? >> what he is doing is illegal. i should go to treasury to reduce debt. it can't be used for a program. he can't establish programs on his own. he can't pay bills unless the congress incurs them. do you think he will listen to me? >> neil: i don't think he. will i don't think he likes you at all. >> it's the institution he doesn't like. >> neil: me and you. listening to the cable chatter the president says he doesn't, or the judge, but are his actions the opposite? >> neil: you know, i'm listening to the white house press secretary robert gibbs yesterday who is asked to comment on a comment by commentator on cable news channel, not this one, and gibbs says something to the effect smartly the president does not occupy his time watching cable television. i'm thinking to myself, self, how is it he always seems to very aware of the comments being made on cable television? i mean, if he is not listening to any of our droning on and on, why is he always droning on about our droning on? how did he know months back about the folks waving tea bags around? i thought only we at fox news were covering those rallies. and how would he be aware of the cable chatter on healthcare unless he listened to some of the cable chatter on healthcare? how did he know frank luntz last week if he's only on fox news every week. if he doesn't bother with the pundit arguing on the news shows how would he know the pundits argue on the cable news shows. if if he says the news network is lop-sided over him, if he doesn't watch how does he know that or not? does his staff gather in the morning and recount chatter on cable tv to save the boss the trouble from watching chatter on cable tv? i don't know. somehow i doubt it. i'm not saying he watches 24/7, cable news but i'm willing to wager at least 24 minutes every seven at least. how else could he know so much about what he claims he does not or slights from shows he says he doesn't watch, but i suspect does? how would the white house know who cable news booker calls to take and not take unless they had a very pretty good take on those news outlets they like versus those they did not? like saying you're ending business as usual in washington but submitting a budget very much as business as usual in washington. okay. wait a minute. i've done. that your words say one thing. your actions say another. that is the chatter. all over the cable news chatter. but you wouldn't know because you aren't listening. you don't know i even said this. maybe it will get to you in a memo. addendum to a memo. a ccc thing. man. programming note, tomorrow on fox business network one-on-one with the pay czar,