ceiling. arthel: we re going to get to the interest of the president later. , but this is the interest of the people. the bill is up come february. we need more money to pay for the bill. so richard, let me ask you if you think this is good or bad for the good of the country, and would it matter if the shoe were on the other foot? well, there is good news. today we ve actual will he had two ideas taken off the table. we ve already heard the treasury department and the federal reserve earlier this afternoon say this notion about this platinum coin, which was a little batty is now not being considered. and let s agree just among the three of us that this whole idea of using the 14th amendment, which remember action bill clinton said he would have considered doing back in to 2011, that s something that the president has said he s not going to do. so i understand why these senators have urged him to do it because they would rather not go through the fight. i get that. arthel: the pre
trophy suggests you are. [ laughter ] glowing 7th grade report card despite every assurance of a certain purple dinosaur, that nice mr. rogers and your batty on sylvia. no afternoon how long your eternal cand crusader has swooped in to save you you are nothing special. ouch. don t sugar coat did. david mccullough s advice coming from a time when today s youth suffer from self-importance. the reaction from the speech was positive even from the students. i loved it. all right. there you go. a little medicine. dave, tell us what s going on. out of running, i will have another won t be vying for the triple crown at belmont today. the kentucky derby and preakness winner withdrawing from the stakes. counting himself out from being the first horse in 34 years winning the triple crown as ceremonial tribute i ll have another will lead. the third place finisher in
i have to pause here to let you know some of this reporting is from the washington post, a good reporter with sources on the right. i would trust her to the end of the earth. some of the rest of the reporting comes from the washington times. the washington times is a conservative paper for conservatives only and the times can get a little batty at times. it is not a particularly credible news source, except when their stories are about internal feuds on the right. then the times is often dynamite. when michael steele was head of the republican party, there was an insurgency to get right of michael steele, most of the quotes that came from people willing to talk about that fight was within the republican party, most of those showed up in the pages of the washington times. that was the place where that entire saga played out. do you read the washington times for an authoritative account of some partisan party line dispute in congress or some internal deliberation in the obama administrat
from the washington post, a good reporter with sources on the right. i would trust her to the end of the earth. some of the rest of the reporting comes from the washington times. the washington times is a conservative paper for conservatives only and the times can get a little batty at times. not a particularly credible news source, except when their stories are about internal feuds on the right. then the times is often dynamite. when there was an insurgency to get right of michael steele, most of the quotes that came from people willing to talk about that fight was within the republican party, most of those showed up in the pages of the washington times. that was the place where that entire saga played out. do you read the washington times for an authoritative account of some partisan party line dispute in congress or some internal deliberation in the obama
i have to pause here to let you know some of this reporting is from the washington post, a good reporter with sources on the right. i would trust her to the end of the earth. some of the rest of the reporting comes from the washington times. the washington times is a conservative paper for conservatives only and the times can get a little batty at times. not a particularly credible news source, except when their stories are about internal feuds on the right. then the times is often dynamite. when there was an insurgency to get right of michael steele, most of the quotes that came from people willing to talk about that fight was within the republican party, most of those showed up in the pages of the washington times. that was the place where that entire saga played out. do you read the washington times for an authoritative account of some partisan party line dispute