tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News November 20, 2012 1:00pm-2:00pm PST
netanyahu. we will have live coverage. the dow is closing for the day. it is off 13. stewart is in for neil as breaking news continues right now. >> spiking union workers and it is what it is like to be the busiest shopping day of the year. and now he is sticking his nose into things. welcome, everyone. i am stewart in for neil. this is "your world." unions flexing their muscles targeting airlines as holiday travel and the shopping season prepare to kick into high gear. and now billionaire george saurus is getting involved. he is using his move on .org to urge people to more protests on black friday even if they don't work for wal-mart.
critics claim it is part of a massive effort to unionize wal-mart's 1.4 million employees nationwide. that could bring in billions in union deuce. she says these strikes aren't about protecting workers. it is about protecting entrenched big labor power. we will be speaking to a union official in a few moments from now. michelle weerks have travel and shop -- we have travel and shopping intentionally disrupted in a very big week for both of them. what do you make of this? >> it is a toxic combination of the left wing activist groups funded by george sorros along with a rag tag group of occupiers across the country who have been foment nie g this agitation for more than a year now. i think that what viewers really need to understand is this has been planned out for months and months and months. as you will recall, stewart, september last year is when we
had the first inklings of what was really going on here. that in fact the occupy movement was never really just about protesting wall street. where did these days of rage start? they started on the west coast as part of an agitation with long shore workers unions in long view, washington. you remember the horrible stories that came out of there, mostly on fox news and alternative media. it was not covered in the mainstream where they were doing things like sabotaging rail lines and holding workers hostage jie. what is the objective? clearly they have leverage. it is thanksgiving week. you disrupt travel, you disrupt shopping. what is the objective of the demonstrations. is it -- it is about workers ensuring that people have good, quote, unquote living
wages. it is to make these corporations bend and bow and capitulate at the most vulnerable moments. leading up to these port strikes you had shipping lines who have had to redirect these lines to mexico. it is to avoid many of these port shutdowns. of course we had one in oakland last night, and they have been threatening this for a longtime. what is it really about? it is about the refusal of these big labor entrenched powers and power brokers to get with the times and take some of the necessary cuts and movement toward modernization and efficiency they have been fighting for decades and decades. >> you could argue that they won, that union power helped president obama win a second term. they won the election for him in someways. do you think that they will win this battle. win in the sense that maybe they will turn more people off than they will turn on of the
you disrupt shopping in the thanksgiving period in the united states of america and you are taking on something. >> yes, that's right. shopping and of course involve because what sharping in the case of a lot of these ports is you have airport union workers who are also working and taking off and demonstrating in solidarity with their brothers and sisters. and i think there needs to be an educational effort. people really need to understand that these big labor thugs do not have workers' interests at heart. you talk about the truckers, the shippers, the farmers, people who work in the agricultural industries who are being hurt by this. and with regard to wal-mart, of course, all you have to do is look at social media. the response we are getting from 11 million people who are out of work who would love to work on thanksgiving for wal-mart if they had a chance. >> michelle, we are out of time. thank you. see you soon. thanks, michelle. >> you bet. take care ?ie. now to california where -- now to california where a
thousand union workers are expected to protest at l.a.x., l.a.'s airport, tomorrow, on one of the busiest travel days of the year. several protests are underway at oakland airport, again, california. my next guest is not ruling out major disruptions. he is the director of the siu's southern california airport division, and he joins me by phone. i want to quote you from an interview on knx radio. you said it is entirely possible that we will be significant travel delays. they are deliberately hurting average americans. you are deliberately inflicting maximum pain at a peak travel time. are you comfortable with doing that? >> this is really about the workers at l.a.x. who have had their families' health care ripped a -- away. it has been brewing for more than a year and we attempted many, many avenues to
negotiate. and most recently the mayor's office broke off negotiations. we will attempt to -- >> andrew, would you consider halting this protest next week when you won't hurt so many people. so many people? >> the part of the protest is that this is a week when americans are supposed to come together and celebrate prosperity with their family. the workers who make that possible for people to get to their family are suffering badly. >> are you making it impossible for countless people to get together for the holidays, aren't you? >> we have workers -- there is one woman dying of cancer and there was one woman with a stroke the week before last. what kind of thanksgiving are those workers going to have if they don't have assurances that their family member will be taken care of. >> i'm sure we have many viewers watching us right now who may well have their travel
plans in and out of l.a.x. disrupted because of your union active tree. i want you to consider what would you say to them? you have the camera. you have the air time. go. what are you going to say to those people you are deliberately inconveniencing? >> we apologize for the inconvenience, but this is about whether or not airports like l.a.x. are going to provide prosperity for the workers who work there and the communities around them. >> are you apologizing, but refuse to postpone this so fewer people are hurt? you could have this demonstration next week. >> well, no one is going to be hurt. this is going to be a peaceful demonstration, but we do need to bring the public attention to the press. >> no one is going to be hurt? i wasn't born in america, but i know the meaning of thanksgiving. i know the meaning of getting families together. 1.8 million people are going to go through l.a.x. airport over this holiday period. you say that you are apologizing, but you refuse to move this?
you don't want to hurt people, but you are. >> by hurting people i think you mean physical. >> well, i think there is emotional hurt involved here. a very significant proportions. >> with family members' lives on the line these are working paishes who need to provide for their spouses and for their children. >> so you refuse to put it off? you apologize, but refuse to put it off. can we leave it at that? >> they are fed up with over a year of attempting to resolve this situation. >> do you think some travelers will be fed up with the sciu? >> well, the workers here are fed up with going no where at l.a.x. >> andrew, the director of southern california airport division, thank you for joining us. we appreciate. it thank you. >> thank you. >> talk like an egyptian. well, since they are brokering a deal, we should keep the billions in aid flowing to
to jerusalem where secretary of state hillary clinton is in a press conference with net netanyahu. they are discussing the situation in the middle east. we willisen in for a moment. >> thank you. evidently the press conference just ended. secretary clinton goes on to cairo tomorrow. cairo, egypt. stay in the middle east where relentless airstrikes and rockets continue to rain down despite talk of a cease-fire. to david lee miller in israel with the latest. >> stewart, it was a late night for diplomacy. the israeli prime minister
netanyahu meeting with secretary of state hillary clinton. no announcement regarding a cease-fire. they both addressed the fact that whatever is produced has to be a lasting and just peace. meanwhile, hamas spokesman says israel has not responded to the latest cease-fire proposals and the earliest there could be any type of truce is tomorrow. meanwhile, we have seen today more rockets launched from gaza by militants. at least 130 of them -- one of the rockets landing not far from the city of jaw jerusalem. it landed in a palestinian village. also another rocket hit a building on the outskirts of tel aviv. this was the farthest rocket hit yet since this conflict got underway. it traveled some 45 miles and there were some light injuries in the tel aviv area. throughout the south, a steady garage throughout the day of
rocket attacks launched by militants. and in the last hour or so, stewart, the israeli military launched repeated airstrikes over gaza. the israeli military say manage half an hour's time, at least 13 different targets were hit. meanwhile the death toll on both sides continues to increase. at least 22 palestinians killed today, and we are told that the israeli military had its first casualty, a soldier not far from the border was hit by a mortar. it looks like now the prospects for diplomacy are put on hold as the conflict only continues. stewart? >> david lee miller. egypt may be attempting to broker the talks. but the defense of hamas is already fueling calls here to cutoff billions in u.s. aid to that nation. security consult at the present time -- consultant says it is time to cut egypt off. welcome to the program. the argument is egypt is helping us.
therefore keep paying them. you are not buying that? >> no, i am not buying it, stewart. what we have here in the most simple terms is a country that is being run by an islamist who fundamentally believes that hamas has the right to fire rockets into israel. the reason why he has openly gone on record and condemned israel for all of its actions and operations in gaza. they are carrying out operations to take out terrorist targets, and refuses to admit israel has any right to defend itself. we give over $2 billion a year to a country that is openly aligning itself to a terrorist organization. it is a fundamental problem, especially in one of the worst economies since the great depression. >> the argument goes on that if we cut them off now, they will dilt even further away from the united states and toward -- and toward the
militant terrorists. cut them off and make it worse. what do you take of that? >> it is an interesting point, but the fact is when you are dealing with terrorism and dealing with operations against terrorism, there is no exact science. it is a continuous on going operation that involves looking at everything on the macro level or the strategic level. the fact is that president morsey, i believe it was in 2007 specifically said the u.s. never presented any evidence regarding 9/11. so we are giving money right now, billions of dollars to a person who literally wanted to have a conference, a scientific conference because he challenged the actual evidence that 9/11 is connected to a terror organization which is ludicrous. giving this money to a terrorist leader or to a president of a country who openly aligned himself with terrorism, truthfully is i'm marl and irresponsible
especially in a economy like this. >> do you think that at any point president obama has threatened egypt and said look, turn it urned or -- turn it around or else we wul cut you off. do you think it is as sharp as that? >> i don't think that president obama has really had what it takes to be able to step up and look into the type of eyes of a guy like this who really is going to understand -- >> secretary of state clinton is about to go directly to cairo. do you think she will say that tomorrow? >> i think there will be a lot of lolly gagging and light footing and a lot of diplomatic talk that will skate around the tough points. hillary clinton talks for a living, and we understand that's what she is paid to do and good for her, but she is playing a balance. at the end of the day it is stoping rockets going into civilian targets. and until it stops they will
do what they have to do. >> thank you. >> coming up,. >> there will be no more tax funder bailouts. >> if that was true, mr. president, why are we talking about a $93 billion bailout now? and heading home for the holidays? you could be taking something else with you if you are flying. we will explain it.
what are you not buying that the president will not compromise and reach across the aisle or no deal at all? >> we will not get the deal by the january 1st deadline. >> so we go over the cliff? >> we begin that move toward the cliff. we have to be careful that the lights go out on january 1st. this will be destructive over the course of the year. and i think washington knows that you don't get january 1st and the stock market speaks out. that's the danger of waiting that long and waiting to be forced. then you get something haphazard. >> you don't think the president will bend on raising tax rates on the rich and the republicans won't cave to that? >> i hate say raising tax rates on the rich. again it is a $250,000 threshold. >> that's what the people believe. >> the president wants that, and i think $1.6 trillion is an outrageous figure he tossed
out there. ultimately when there is some sort of a compromise he will be able to claim victory with the number under that level. the republicans on the other hand, they haven't necessarily set themselves up the same way. >> there was no compromise on volume. >> ladies and gentlemen, we had the great pleasure of interest dash of interviews a patriotic millionaire. he wants to pay more in taxes. listen to this. >> are you a millionaire. you want other people to pay higher taxes. why don't you volunteer? >> i want all of us to pay higher taxes. >> i challenge you to do it. >> this is entirely beside the point. >> you make me, but you do not do it yourself. >> i am trying to make us all. you and i should pay equally. we should both contribute. you are now asking why should you be able to free ride? >> free ride?
>> let me, wait a second. would you agree to not allow the government to do anything for you? you are not going to allow the police to protect you and the fire department to put out a you are foo. you are not going to let the u.s. and military -- it is the same argument. you are asking me to contribute to, to pay for those things myself so you can free ride on that. i say if you don't want the benefits of government, you can go to a place like somalia. >> hold on. people are paying zero federal income tax and suck up more of the benefits are you talking about in a day than stewart would suck up in a year. >> yes, charles. we asked the gentleman. you have your checkbook with you, write a check. he wouldn't do it. >> some of these guys try to assuage their guilt they inherited so much money. if that is the case, write the check. i had the same argument with russell simmons. i don't know why you are complaining so much. by the way, here is the real
disingeneral wise part. none leave their money to the government. they leave it to trust or somewhere else. why would people who are self-made, not trillion theirs or even multimillionaires, but successful in america have to be punished for it? i find these to be the most despicable people on the planet. they are not being honest. it is not knew economic policy. it is punishment and punitive. guess what, everyone out there rooting to are it, you ask yourself the next day, will you wake up with better job skills? will we make up a a -- wake up a more competitive country? >> i must invite you on more often. >> tax hikes, yes, cuts, no. unions out with a new ad holding democrats speak to the fire. proof we will never get entitlements under control. catch rudy jewel yawn know's reaction to that tonight on fbn. remember this? >> because of this reform the american people will never
again be asked to foot the bill for wall street's mistakes. there will be no more taxpayer funded bailouts. >> don't look now, but the housing administration is broke. so is another taxpayer funded bailout next? and steve says hold on to your wallet. what inned could of a bailout are we mentioning? is it that high? >> that would be the upper limit, but we are looking at multi billion dollars of bailouts to something called the federal housing administration. a lot of people don't know what the fha is. it provides insurance that people will pay their mortgages. if they don't, the taxpayers have to step in and pay the mortgage for them. the interesting that happened in the housing market and the way we got into this pickle is remember when we had the sub prime housing crisis when the banks were making these loans they they should have. as soon as that marketd, guess t
institution started taking the place of the sub prime 11 deers? lenders. >> as i understand it, the bailout is almost automatic. congress doesn't have to approve the money. it is just paid out from the treasury. is that accurate? >> we provide a taxpayer guarantee on the mortgages. if you look right now it is something like 1 and 7fha mortgages is underwater. we will pay a lot on this. amazing statistic, if you look at the new loans for mortgages made since 200990% of them, 9 out of 10 carry with them virtually 100% taxpayer guarantees on repayment. >> what happens if we don't pay out this money? jay we have to.
-- >> we have to. >> what happens to the mortgages? >> we have made a guarantee. >> i hate to tell threw is no getting out of this. what we can do is exchange the pom sees. the first thing the f.a.a. has to do is stop with the down payment loans. do you know what the down payment of an fha loan is. >> 5%. 10%? >> 3 to 3.5%. all you would have to do to fix the program. why not going back to the idea of a 10%, 15% down payment. if you do that, you will not have the defaults and taxpayers having to bail out the institutions. >> that's the way the obama administration tend to fix the housing problem by sub subsidizing the mortgages. >> answer me this question, does it help to put people into a home and give them a mortgage they can't afford to
pay? the answer is no. we are putting people into homes they can't afford to facial. >> we should have been asking that question, seven, eight, nine years ago. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. republicans against susan rice are racist. a congressman making that charge. now one of the republicans is about to charge back. h
republicans are sending a letter to president obama urging him against the possible nomination of susan rice for secretary of state. saying rice is, quote, widely viewed as having willfully or incompetently misled the public on the benghazi matter. james clyburn said the letter was full of racial code words. >> we heard them during the campaign. during this recent campaign we heard them calling our president lazy, income tent. these kind of terms that we have been hearing these words and phrases all of our lives. and we get insulted by them. >> reaction now from one of the republicans who signed the letter. congressman, does representative clyburn have a point? racist code words do exist and
to label someone as incompetent is traditionally a racist approach to passing judgment. do you think representative clyburn has any point at all here? >> i think you have got very little if any kind of point. representative clue burn is number three -- clyburn is number three. he is a well respected member. i like him very much. he is an educator. he is a smart man. incompetence can be applicable to anybody no matter what the gender or the race or ethnicity orie lig general. said or religion. he is grasping at straws there. several members of the house select committee on intelligence were signa fors to the letter. there was duncun from carolina 1k3* mccal from texas. we don't want her being secretary of state. i agree with the context of the letter that basically says one of two things. either she is income at the
present time or she was part of a cover up. i personally do not believe susan rice is incompetent fnlt she is a -- she is a grajett with of stanford and did road studies on african countries. she is not incompetent and dumb. she is very smart. it is highly likely she is part of a cover up. >> have you objective reasons for objecting to susan rice to become the next secretary of state. you are objective, you believe , in your letter. >> why do you think president obama was considering susan rice to be secretary of state? why did her name p poo up? >> from >> why did her name pop up? >> they are very close as he is to eric holder, the attorney general. and these are people he has confidence in and friendship. we can understand that. why did he put her out there -- if he said she knew
nothing about benghazi, well why you put her out there? why not put sout hillary clinton. maybe she knew too much about ben go swrea and refused to go out there and perjure herself on the sunday morning talk shows. i think susan rice was on five shows. i saw every one and heard her with my own ears. i know what she said. clearly we need to get to the bottom of this. it was james clapper who said he changed the memo. i think that is unlikely. >> we do not at this pot know who changed the talking points that went from intelligence to susan rice, but were intercepted somewhere in between and they turned up in a different set of talking points. >> clapper said "we doopt need him. we never did. this is a creation of the 9 lsh slen commission.
i can understand the fames of the 3,000 that lost their lives and wanting to know why we were not connecting the dots. now have you someone that can trump the cia, especially if the president says to him, i am not suggesting he did, but he could have, look, we need to clean this up a little bit. we are doing really well. it is about time for the election and we are doing well for national security and this could blow our cover. thank you for joining us, sir. >> thank you. >> thank you, stewart. >> if you are flying home for the holidays, you could be spreading something else.
theythey are not just in the bathroom. he is known as dr. jerl and has been looking into this. i always thought the dirtest place on the plane is the bath m rue. it is, isn't it? >> oh yes, it is probably the germiest bathroom you will ever go into in your life. >> am i right that you found e-coli on the handles to the sink in lavatories on 41% of flights? that sounds serious to me. >> yes you would be amazed. there is 50 people per toilet on an airplane. it is difficult to wash your hand. the sinks are small and the water shuts off. it is not surprising that many surfaces are contaminated with e-coli. >> what are the dirty spots on the plane? >> nobody is thoroughly cleaning and disinphysical tig that.
disinfecting that. on the trays we found mrsa and nor norovirus that causes diarrhea in and flew wean swraw that cusses the -- and influenza that causes the flu. >> how about the seat pocket in front of me? >> they get a lot of bacteria because people are putting their hands or material in there that they handle. you will see that getting pretty contaminated. >> is the interior of a plane when you take a flight, the dirtiest place and the most germ-laden place in the public arena? >> probably because you have a large number of people in a small area. in a crowded plane particularly. they are touching common services. every time somebody touches the surface they can put down germs the next person can pick up. >> you know, dr. germ, it is a great pleasure to have you with us on this thanksgiving week when more people travel
than any other week of the year and more people take flights. when you take a flight -- i presume you take a flight, what do you do? i bring a hand sanitizer. most of the common infections you get can be readily transmitted by your hands. if you bring a hand san sanitizer and use it appropriately, after you were out in public and on a plane and before you eat, that's the best defense you can do. >> it is thanksgiving week and it is toesed to be -- it is supposed to be fun. here you are giving us a dire warning about the planes. >> just be cautious. you are increasing your exposure to things that can make you ill. wash your hand, use a hand sanitizer. if you have a wipe with you, wipe the surface. >> i get your point. you are taking this, i suppose, very, very seriously. have you done a connection between the people getting sick and taking flights? is there a correlation? on. >> no, not on buses, but
airplanes. >> so hand sanitizer. that's the message of the day this thanksgiving week? >> that's it. i wouldn't leave home without it. dr. charles gerber, dr. germ, hope you haven't scared anybody. thank you for being here. >> thank you. as black friday protests get closer, a court decision is expected any moment on wal-mart's move to block them. does the retail gibbet have the law on its side?
happening at its stores nationwide. wal-mart is saying the united food and commercials union unlawfully staged the rallies and disrupted business. rebecca rose woodland and rosemary arnold on whether the retail giant has a case. first to you, rebecca. you say the law is on wal-mart's side. wal-mart can stop these protests, right this. >> yep. wal-mart has had consistent protests over the course of the last seven to nine months. in that case it consists of a unionization attempt. unionization attempts have to be requested through the national labor relations board, and they have to go through a process to unionize the store. they have not done that, so this is seen as unlawful picketing. >> so wal-mart could win. >> absolutely. >> and you say no they can't win. the law is not on their side. >> if you look at the exception to the law, the law only applies to nonemployees of the company. it does not apply to employees
who are claiming what these employees are claiming is retaliation. it is their attempt to shut these people up because they don't want customers to hear what they have to say. >> hold on. wal-mart has gone to the national labor relations board. >> not yet. >> that is not a court. it is supposed to be neutral, but under president obama it is secured very much to the left. therefore the chance of wal-mart being successful with the nlrb is slim to none. would you agree? >> it is slim, but wal-mart believes the nlrb will confirm a finding to move it to the district court. and then once we get to a district court, it would be in the mlrb's best benefit to just move this over to the courts and have an impartial judge decide this. the facts are skewed here. >> but wal-mart cannot stop workers walking off the job if they so desire. it cannot stop people showing
up outside a wal-mart dore and say, lousy labor practices. >> that's freedom of speech. that's okay. until it becomes organized and it is backed by union which there is belief and factual information that this has been backed by the union over the course of months. >> only if it is a union organizing. >> if it is a union organizing there are laws the union has to uh body by. >> i don't know why you are smiling, but are you laughing at me here. there is an e-mail saying everybody show up at wal-mart on friday and protest these lousy labor relations. you can't stop him from saying that? >> you can't, and you can't stop the employees either. i agree, it will go to the district court. but why they are doing this sbt to stop them. isn't to stop them. it is to scare those who don't know any better and not showing up on good friday. it is their big day. they are trying to make it into greasy thursday too. greedy thursday too. >> fast-forward and it goes to the court you mentioned there.
they have legal jurisdiction. could wal-mart win damages from the outside union which has been trying to organize this protest? >> they don't pay the people enough money? >> well now we are getting into a different situation. once they are in the court and a court determines, it does president -- it doesn't mean they can't protest. there are ways and rules to abide by. it doesn't mean they will stop the protesters entirely. the protesters might be quite valid. we are not discussing the validity of the claims of the protesters. what we are talking about are procedurally are we doing the right thing? >> at the end of the day the protesters protest and wal-mart can't do much about it. would you agree with that, raw raw -- rebecca? >> i do. >> and you would agree with that? >> for sure. she likes your accent. >> thank you, ladies. appreciate it. waiter, do you want proof that it is mark orubio in
and these come together, one thing you can depend on is that these will come together. delicious and wholesome. some combinations were just meant to be. tomato soup from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. three words dad, e-trade financial consultants. they'll hook you up with a solid plan. wa-- wa-- wait a minute;
the media playing gotcha with the "globe." senator marco rubio sitting down with an interview with "gq" and creating media firestorm over a question about the earth. the magazine asking the senator: how old do you think the earth is? rubio responding. "i'm not a scientist, ma'am. i think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow." the hill's bob cussack says the attention from the left over this proves up with thing. before we get to what it proves, what is the left saying? are they going crazy about this tinyic? are they? >> yeah. it's a slow news week and a lot of liberal blogs have seized on this about the whole issue of whether the earth is 4.5 billion years old, or more along the biblical strict
review of that, more like 9,000 -- >> eric: so they are pulling in a biblical, religious arguement? >> correct. >> and they say he doesn't deserve to be president if we doesn't answer a simple question like that. is that what they are saying? >> they are trying to hit rubio. he is the front runner for 2016. i can't believe we're talking about 2016. but you have to set the stage. rubio went to iowa recently. rubio is someone that the left is concerned about, i think. >> do you think that is it? as early as this, two weeks past the aelection they are looking four years ahead and going after the man who may be the front runner? that is why they are going after him on the age of the earth, really? >> well, i don't think anyone will be voting on this issue if and when rubio runs for president. it's just not the issue. if you can start to chip away at him, certainly that is what you will do. republicans do that to
democrats. the republican, you talk to them and they are like we have to nominate someone who can speak spanish and doesn't look like an old white guy. rubio is not in that mold is thinking on running on the national stage. >> i remember when president obama could have been accused of doing something similar. way back, before the 2008 election. he was asked when does life begin? obviously trying to draw him in to the abortion debate. he said, i think he said something like i'm in the not right pay grade. >> above my pay grade. >> that is what he said. nobody went after him for that. >> no. no. you want to dodge these things. i'm for unusual questions to put politicians on the spot. but that is an unusual question. it might have been rubio thinking well, i don't know the exact age 4.5 billion or 5 billion or 7 billion. so, he deflected on that. you have to be careful. but clearly, it cause adminny uproar. >> let me switch gears to the
fiscal cliff. what is your opinion? i got an opinion. i say the republicans will cave and that we will get higher tax rates on the rich before the end of the year. what does bob say? >> i think it is going to be a roller coaster ride. i think that republicans are going to agree -- i agree with you, they will agree to a rate hike. i don't think it will be $250,000. no way. maybe at $1 million or $2 million. but there will be some threshold, and it's $are a lot of smoke and mirrors but when the dust settles rates will go up. >> i think you are right. it won't be a $250,000 cutoff, much higher than that. which will allow the republicans to back off and say okay, okay. just for millionaires we can do that. okay. >> yes. i think they will say we protected small businesses because there aren't many beyond $1 million. >> i have to leigh time for the other side of the deal. what about spending cuts? any idea what cuts they might promise? >> you have to look at the age
of medicare going up, the eligibility age and the reforms to medicaid. democrats, you know, they know that medicare and medicaid will be touched. you have to put something on the table to get republicans to increase tax rates. i don't think social security is going to be part of it. harry reid said let's not mess with that. the left will look to protect social security and begrudgingly go along with medicare and medicaid reform. >> even wants to know and you answered it already. yes, there will be a deal before we go over the cliff on january 1. you stick with that, bob? >> yes. but a week ago, really close to christmas if not new year's. i agree. there will be a deal. >> roller coaster ride here we go. launched on it. bob, always a pleasure. thank you indeed, sir. >> thank you, stuart. >> all right, everybody. that is it for here. be sure to tune in to "varney and company" tomorrow morning at 9:20 eastern, beginning sharp at 9:20. question: what does antitax crusadeer grover