model gaining popularity across the u.s. is a way to cut costs but there s some drawbacks. will carr live in l.a. with the details. hi. how well do you think that you and gregg would work together if you had to be together all the time? a lot of companies are now offering that option to employees and more and more, it looks like, are signing up. imagine working, eating and sleeping all at the office. living at work 24/7. every day we re working together. we wake up, have meetings, get our work done and keep working into the nights. the weekend we continue working. interactive and billboard company has 40 workers with 12 staying in a bel air, california house. c.e.o. says their model is extremely efficient, cutting down on costs and commuting time. it s very family-like. we share everything from the food, we share bedrooms, share bathrooms, it s a very communal and people are extremely
thanks, peter. gregg: they say timing is everything. president obama raising a few eyebrows on saturday when he went out to play golf after announcing that he will seek congressional approval for an attack on syria. should the media have taken him to tact for hitting the links during an international crisis? let s bring in the fox news watch panel. jim pinkerton, contributing editor and writer for the american conservative magazine. alan colmes, host of the alan colmes show and author of, thank the liberals for saving america. indeed. fox news contributors. makes you laugh, gregg, right? gregg: alan, let me start with you, woodrow wilson apparently played something like 1200 rounds of golf. i think eisenhower, 800 rounds of golf. so, you know, this president, but, the ticks on this thing don t look good, do they. no, they don t. optics don t look good. presidents have done it of both
because on the dollar bill and other symbols throughout the nation, the word god is used and supreme court in past cases has said that s permissible because it s tradition, not religion. this is a recitation of words. is there a difference? one of the questions that the lower court decided with the defendants request, is this a prayer or a pledge to the country that happens to have a couple of religious words in it? that s the defining issue here. so far past cases have not been on the side of the plaintiff but they re bringing a new legal theory here so we ll have to figure out what happened. gregg: what do you think could happen? it could go either way. i think if the words were removed, we wouldn t be a weaker country because of it. gregg: do you agree? i m not sure how it s going to go at this point. gregg: good to see you both. thanks so much. arthel: thank you. more coverage of the crisis in syria coming up and the possibility of u.s. military action in the middle east.
chemical weapon. but the international community continues to struggle to decide what a firm response should be and who should join the united states in this firm response. all of this ambiguity from nato, also from the arab league and from the international community really puts the pressure on president obama and congress to sort of decide on something. now, privately both saudi arabia and kuwait and other countries in the middle east are pressuring the united states to take military action but that is a very divided community and what actually will be sort of publicly said should be done before any type of military action is taken, that s all very unclear right now putting the united states in a very difficult position going forward. arthel: thank you very much. gregg: there could be real pitfalls with taking military action in syria and the unintended consequences could include al qaeda taking over syria if the asad regime is
which is what past presidents have done, that s a clear national security interest. but i mean, why but how is that now? right. if we use the humanitarian justification for this, then why didn t we get involved a long time ago? gregg: exactly. why indeed. why wasn t that the case? did we have to wait for 1,000 plus lives to be lost by the chemical weapons? but here is the bottom line of the entire equation here, that the obama administration and congress have to really consider that there should be punishment for chemical weapons. absolutely. but should we, the u.s. and our interests in the region and abroad, also be punished for the fallout that can happen as a result of these military strikes? that s really the what we have to weigh out here. gregg: the other thing we re learning is that a horrible atrocities have been committed not just by the asad regime but the opposition forces in syria.