have some thoughts about the show, share them with me. we will consider your thoughts and try to incorporate them the next day. even your pitches sometimes make it on. i'm megyn kelly, everybody. this is the kelly file. in a moment i'll be joined by the man who unveiled the proposal yesterday, congressman republic republican, paul ryan. but john boehner was asked about conservatives who have spoken out against the deal and this is his reaction. >> they're using our members and the american people for their own goals. this is ridiculous. listen, if you're for more deficit reduction, you're for this agreement. >> the speaker may feel that
way, there are many on the right, kervegts not happy with the so-called compromise. tonight, we want you to join the conversation and log onto our facebook page and tell us how you would cast your vote tomorrow and sign on twitter using #hannity. congressman paul ryan, how are you? >> good. great to be back with you, sean. >> there's a lot of conservative opposition. before we get to that, let's look at the deal you worked on, tell us what it is. >> it doesn't end quegs, it gives temporary relief, we keep 70% of the sequester and 30% of the sequester we give relief to we more than pay for with smart spending cuts that are permanent in the other part of government
spend i spending that pays for the sequester relief over the life of the sequester and keep 92% of the sequester. what we're saying is in some of the across the board cuts which hit only the military starting in january which is a concern of ours we cut spending in other parts of government to pay for that and we cut -- we get $85 begin in saves from the au autopilot side of government spending to pay for $63 billion in sequester relief. that gives us $23 billion in net deficit redurkction. when i went into this bottom line keep our principles intact, no tax increases and cut spending in smarter ways to reduce the deficit. we think we kept those principles intact, what this agreement does. the democrats didn't -- went in no sequester at all and then 72%
and then 92%. we see that as a good step in the right direction. not the budget deal would spend $63 billion the next two years and saves the back end and many future congresses won't be be holding of this and a criticism of washington in general. get the tax increases now and all the good stuff comes late >> there's no tax increases. i understand the point. this is the nature of autopilot spending changing the law immediately that accrues saves over time and that does take time to accumulate that saves. it's not back loaded just compounds. take for example federal employees, we're suggesting that the hard working taxpayers who pay the taxes to pay for government workers' benefits don't pay as much for their benefits and the worker pays s
more for their benefits and something we did in wisconsin and think we should do all across. >> $23 billion in saves over a long period of time and the budget deficit now stands at 17$17.5 trillion is headed towas $25 trillion, add to that 9$90 trillion in unfunded liabilities, we're still increasing the debt, increasing our deficits, not the amount but we're still increasing the debt every year and we're not getting anywhere near a balanced budget. >> sean, let me make the last point permanent spending and law changes, they take time to definitely. you're right on the money. this is not an agreement to balance the budget. that's what our budget does. guess what, sean, elections have consequences. we have to win a couple elections to pass the budget you and i are in favor of, the one i house last spring. the house republicans passed
three budgets in a row that actually pass the budget and pay off the debt without raising taxes. >> this isn't your budget? >> this isn't even close to my ideal budget. here's the point, sean, is this a staep in the right direction or not, cuts spending, lowers the deficit and doesn't raise taxes. >> we're concerned about what it does to defense. stops those defense cuts from happening any more. we see this as a step in the right direction. our ultimate vision is our budget. this srcisn't our budget and an agreement that gets us a step in the right direction, a small step. it stops government shutdown in january and in october. we don't think it's in our interest to have these government shutdowns. we want to focus on obama care and obama care oversight and focus on truth to power and real congressional oversight on this administration and rolling out our pro-active agenda. if we have all these government shutdowns we don't think this
helps us do that and prevents the government shutdown. >> prevents the government shutdown and gets you to the next election. i guess i view where we are right now and tell me -- feel free to interrupt me. i see america in a financial crisis we will now have $25 trillion now headed for in debt, the 90 trillion in unfunded liabilities. 25 million more me on food stamps 1 in 6 americans on poverty and 1 in 5 children on poverty. a small step. i know you only have one house but you have the power of the purse. tell me why it's better to have the status quo and not go to the american people and say, we're hitting a crisis, we're going to be bank rurpt, medicare is going bankrupt and social security is going bankrupt, we are on a path unsustainable, the penny plan, any other plan to balance the budget is better, here's what we
should do. why not take that message to them versus accept that can't happen? >> sean, i've been doing this for five years. >> i agree. >> for each of the past five years i have passed or supported budgets you said. here's the problem. barack obama is the president of the united states and harry reid is the senate majority leader. sean, we're going to have to win some elections to do what you just said. we've already passed our budget that does just what you said. i've got to tell you, sean, i don't think the president is willing or able to do what you just said. so what are we going to do in the meantime? in the meantime, it's three yards and a cloud of dust. we will get incremental gains and we think it's in our interests nationally and for the year, to not have government shutdowns. here's the precedent i want to set. every time we have budget negotiations, democrats say i want 50% tax increases and
spending increases. they didn't get that this time and we said when the pressure comes we will go after entitlement auto-pilot. >> assume the republicans maintain the house and get control of the senate, we're still on a trajectory towards a $25 trillion debt in this country in terms of -- >> you and i have had this discussion. you don't think it's sustainable. i don't think it's sustainable. >> i think we're playing with fire. i think the window of opportunity is closing very quickly. we get the senate we'll take that house budget and balance it. >> obama is still president for two years even with the house and senate. >> we'll pass it to the senate and sessions will be chairman and put it on the president's desk and give us more leverage than what we have now. to be honest, i don't think president obama is going to be our solution to our fiscal crisis. the question is what can we do in the meantime to buy the country time? what can we do in the meantime
to get a foundation under this economy. every time we do continuing resolutions where we give the power to the president to set spending priorities, we're seeding the legislative branch power to the executive branch. this agreement brings that power back. this agreement by writing our appropriation bill says we're not going to give the president a blank check with continuing resolution, congress is going to set the spending priorities and congress is going to write the spending bills. that's one of the things we get. you and i agree with each other. >> i know where your heart is. i know we're coming to a critical point in our history, that is the country is facing bankruptcy, we're robbing our kids and grandkids blind. i know you don't want to do it. this budget deal still brings us to 25 trillion in debt. that, to me, is bringing us to a crisis. >> i'm not going to pretend this budget solves our fiscal prob m problems because it doesn't. the budget we passed in the house in the spring does solve
our fiscal problems. in this divided government, you're not going to get that. what we're trying to do is make this divided government work and get the democrats to drop tax increases and work with us to cut spending which is what this does do, as small as it is, a good precedent, a step in the right direction, reducing the deficit. >> will it pass? >> yes, it will. >> thanks. >> thanks, sean. coming up next on hannity. >> knowing what you know today you would have startnot started october 1st? >> i would have done a slower launch with fewer people. >> kathleen sebelius can't give a straight answer on dozens of questions during today's brutal hearing. we've been getting all your feedback on twitter. option number one, was the sign language imposter, did you see him at the mendela service yesterd yesterd yesterday. >> it's nonsense.
welcome back. kathleen sebelius was back on capitol hill trying to defend obama care. she struggled to answer simple questions. for example like this one. >> knowing what you know today, you would have started the launch october 1? >> i would have probably done a smaller launch with uh fewer people and done additional beta testing which is part of what has happened frankly in the
early months of the launch to identify what we had. >> oh, a simple yes would have sufficed. but that's not all. after the so-called website fix her math is fuzzy when it comes to the number of people enrolled. >> when amazon.com records a book sold they record a book sold based upon someone who has paid for it. i would ask that when you return that you give us actually who has purchased plans. do you understand our frustration with that? >> sir, as you well know we did not take over the private insurance market. people will purchase -- >> you are telling -- >> from insurance companies. >> you are telling us those who shopped are enrolled. >> i told you, sir, who has enrolled. >> that's why we are frustrated. we just don't get the truth. >> part of the reason she may be dodging the question is as politico points out she said in the past that 7 million users was a realistic target for the
first year. only 365,000 have enrolled. we have uncovered the most shocking statistic of the day coming directly from her department. new document explicitly states in oregon only 44 people have, quote, selected a plan. guess how much money obama has dished out to that state to push their disastrous health care law? $300 million. in other words, you the american tack payer pay more than $6 million for each of the 44 enrollees. that's a disgrace. here with reaction, mike lee. welcome back. >> i'm still looking at it. >> a lot of conservatives are angry at the paul ryan bill. what's your reaction? >> i'm still looking at it. as i look at this, although i don't envy paul ryan's position of having to negotiate with democrats in the senate and with the white house, when neither the senate democrats nor the president appears to have any desire to pass a budget i see
flaws in the document they come up with. it doesn't necessarily make government more efficient. if anything it makes government more expensive and puts off more spending cuts that need to be made now. >> am i suspecting right you're a no probably? >> i can't support this. i will not be able to vote for this. >> let me talk about sebelius. one thing that amazes me we can't get an answer to a report we broke on this program with peter schweitzer, did the president meet alone with kathleen sebelius. she struggled with that answer. have we been able to confirm if they had any meetings since 2010? not to my knowledge. this is inexcusable that there was this little oversight going on in the launching of this significant enterprise in which the government is very ill equipped to act.
i want to emphasize that this is about so much more than just a website. in many respects, i think this administration would like us to focus more on the website because the website is the thing that can perhaps most easily be fixed even though it's apparently very difficult to do. the bigger problems relate to the fundamental unfairness of the law. the fundamental unworkability of this law. it's what's behind the website that's most troubling. what's behind the website that's causing millions to lose their health coverage. others to lose their job and have wages cut and hours slashed. >> we have a series of promises the president made. how many millions of americans do you think ultimately lose the plan that they wanted to keep? do we have an estimate? do we know at this point? is it going to be as high as 0 $100 million? >> we have one study out by aei that suggests it's about a hundred million. we have a duke university study
that estimated 82 to 105 million people will lose their health coverage they currently have or at least see substantial changes to the coverage between now and next year. a lot of people will be left out in the cold. an awful lot of people for whom that promise the president made will prove to be utterly false. >> now, we have rate hike shock. we have lose your plan shock, lose your plan shock, rate hike shock. now deductible shock. people finding out they have high deductibles. some of your colleagues up for election next year, mary landrieu and gene shaheen, mark udall and others are trying to come up with an obama care fix to fix the problems or do-over. does that have any chance of moving in the senate or are they stuck with their votes on this? >> what has a great chance of success is if they decide we need to start over, suspend this thing, we need a time-out on the law. >> they're not going to do it.
>> that would have a chance as far as getting (support. of course, they passed this without any bipartisan support and they are stuck now with what they've got. unfortunately. we did what we could to protect american people. the truth is you can't just do minor corrective surgery on the law and have everything be okay. as you point out, it's not just people loseing health coverage r their job, it's people seeing their premiums go up and deductibles skyrocket and those who once they have gotten health insuran insurance, if they can afford it, are seeing that the treatment they need and they have come to rely on will no longer be available. >> these doctors say they are having conversations about introducing a package of fixes at the appropriate point in time. they have a majority. i can't see it passing in the house. is there anything you would support short of repealing and replacing the law?
>> if there is a fix i haven't seen it. i can't foresee a scenario in which i could get excited about something that tinkers with obama care around the edges. i don't think you can make this dog hunt. obama care on the edges. i think you have to repeal it. now that it's funded past the first of the year our best hope would be to adopt a law that winds it down and transitions us into a completely different system. this one will not work. >> thank you, senator, i appreciate it. >> still ahead tonight, kimberly guilfoyle stops by. president obama's popularity continues to plummet. up next, karl rove in studio breaking down the numbers as to why the white house is in the red. here is the second choice for video of the day. danica patrick stole the show at last night's american country awards in las vegas. is this tonight's pick? stick around and find out ahead.
meanwhile the numbers are worse in this poll. only 38% of voters approve of his job performance. 57% say they are not happy. what exactly is behind these terrible numbers? here to explain it all, with his white board, the architect, karl rove. how are you? >> fabulous. >> thanks for coming. >> thanks for having me on the set. christmas tree. >> we have the christmas tree, yeah. >> the holiday spirit. the staff is drinking the eggnog. did you know that? >> yes. it's spiked, too. >> there we go. 38%, 43. he's now creeping into the 30s in a lot of polls. what does it mean? >> first of all, you have the wall street journal numbers. those are interesting because if you take a look at the in terms on that. 60% of people said their opinion is being formed by obama care. in the "wall street journal" poll, 50% said the obama care is a bad idea.
47% felt strongly about it. 27% felt strongly it was a good idea. only 34% total. you have this dynamic as obama care plays out driving his numbers down. the quinnipiac is driving the numbers down. it was interesting to me to look at the internals on it. overall in two months from september to december, the overall approval dropped in three months. among the groups were independents, millennials -- 18 to 29 -- and women. that sort of follows with what the gallup says. if you look at gallup from january to december, among all americans, there's been a 13 point decline. >> pan in on this a little bit. get closer to that. we have to get you a bigger white board. >> it's not the size of the white board. >> we can come in closer, guys. >> 13-point decline among all voters. 18 points with hispanics. millennials, 14%. women, 13.
among independents, 13 and college graduates, 12. >> another poll said down with hispan hispanics 24% and millennials want to remove him from office. >> that was from harvard from the institute of politics. >> a poll with women, blue collar hard working women in this country are not happy about it. doesn't the problem get worse because every day, every week, every month another cancellation letter, the realization rate shock. maybe the deductible realization kicks in or you lose your doctor. it will get worse every day, every week, every morning. >> i don't know if it's a straight line. i think this is going to weigh down the electorate in a way that's going to remind us of 2010. the only difference is in 2010 the bill passed in march. big ceremony in april and the election was in november. we are now sitting here 11 months before the election. there is a bunch of bad news yet to ripple through the system. people are having things happen
to them they didn't anticipate. i had a friend in austin, she's 34 years old, her premiums are going from just over $100 to $400 a month. her deductible is going from $2,000 to $3,000. i'm not certain she is a republican. my suspicion is from listening to her she is not going to be voting democrat in 2014. >> the promise is if you like your plan, keep your plan. keep your doctor. annual purse savings per family, $2500 a year. let's look to 2014. you have red state senate democrats mary landrieu, arkansas, north carolina, alaska. six of the states. >> there are seven democratic seats up in red states that were won by mitt romney. west virginia, south dakota and montana. democratic incumbents pulled the rip cord in alaska, arkansas, louisiana, the incumbent is trying to get away from their vote for obama care. mary landrieu and kay haguen.
mark pryor and marc begich in alaska. the other interesting thing is remember this, this is not the end of the democratic exposure on this. the four red state senators running for re-election who said the same thing. i have chronicled in my column how they said the same thing the president said and are trying to get out of it. in 2010 the republicans picked up six seats in the senate. they picked up four of those seats in states barack obama had carried two years before. only two were in states john mccain carried. this means next year purple states like new hampshire, michigan, minnesota will be a difficulty where you have -- >> franken, shaheen -- >> and an open seat in michigan. there is a new poll. >> senate race, the gop leads there. how do you feel about the candidates now? we have had problems over the years with picking the right candidates. achen was a disaster.
hurt the whole party. murdoch didn't help either with his comments. >> we have a way to go but i think the quality of candidates is significantly better than in the past. you have a democrat who voted for obama care. he said the same things the president had to say and he's being weighed down, too. the difficulty for democrats, this is not an issue that simply plays in red states. it's powerful in red states and in 2010 we learned it's influential in purple states. there are at least four and could be five or oh six senate races. >> you said something that's key. cautionary tale. you don't want to go out on a limb because a lot can happen between now and then. >> the quality of the campaigns matters. we learned that in 2010, whether it was indiana or missouri. should be 2012. you know, those were states that looked ripe for us. both were states carried by mccain and romney and we lost both of them. >> one thing i will unveil in january.
i'm not reinventing the wheel. but conservative solutions to america's problems. we have a lot of problems. there has to be a positive agenda. >> no. >> can't just be obama is awful. >> that's the key with with obama care. we can't just gripe about what the democrats have done to us by passing the law. we have to have a positive alternative. the good news is we do. the more we talk about it the better off we'll be. start talking about allowing people to buy health insurance across state lines or allowing people to save more tax free for out of pocket medical expenses or allowing small businesses to pool their risk and get the same discounts big companies get. transparency in pricing. given the tax advantage to the individual and the company so the insurance becomes completely portable so nobody is stuck in a job they hate because of being afraid of losing health benefits. medical liability. >> a lot of applause. >> you know. i have heard it. i'm not sure if all the american people have heard it. >> they won't until we are in the middle of a hot campaign.
435 candidates for the house and 33 candidates for the senate talking about these kind of solution solutions. >> certainly the republican governors with as many states as they have. it shows they are winnable states. good to see you. i need to buy you a bigger board for christmas. >> come on, man. >> i need one we can see. you can't read it. >> the camera can come in. i wear glasses. >> the camera can come in. >> all right. coming up, breaking news that parents need to hear. as of today, new york city is forcing kids to get a flu vaccination. could this be coming to a town near you? we'll explain. coming up next right here on "hannity" -- >> it's not that i want to punish your success. i want to make sure everybody behind you has a chance, too. when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody. >> we have new numbers from the cbo that proves the government is all about redistribution of wealth in the country. our friends from "the 5," they're here to react.
plus it was our third and final choice for the video of the day. my favorite show, duck dynasty, willie robertson singing along with general dempsey in afghanistan to the christmas jingle. "have a very hairy christmas." ♪ like jesus and santa claus we've got love behind these beards ♪ ♪ wishing you a hairy christmas ♪ ♪ and a happy, happy, happy new year ♪ >> don't forget we always want to hear from you, log onto your companion site, hannitylive.foxnews.com. you can vote on our online poll. the question tonight, how much do you trust president obama? that's live at hannitylive.foxnews.com. join us on twitter and vote @seanhannity. we'll continue.
welcome back to hannity now. it seems the president's wishes about people paying their fair share may have come to fruition. unfortunately it only applies to a minority of taxpayers. an analysis reveal it is top 40% of households in america paid get this, 106% of the nation's net income taxes in 2010. on the flip side, the bottom 40%, they paid negative 9% and actually took in an average of 18,950 bucks in tax credits from the government. why should we be surprised? this is exactly what the president has been calling and hoping for all along. we all remember candidate obama's infamous spread the wealth comment with joe the plumber. remember this? in 2008. >> it's not that i want to punish your success. i want to make sure everybody behind you has a chance for success, too. i think when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody. >> since then it appears the president's ideology has remained the same but he's fine tuned this redistribution talking point.
watch this. >> a dangerous and growing inequality and lack of upward mobility that jeopardized middle class america's basic bargain. if you work hard you have a chance to get ahead. i believe this is the defining challenge of our time. the combined trends of increased inequality and decreasing mobility pose a fundamental threat to the american dream, our way of life and what we stand for around the globe. studies show we actually tend to trust each other less when there is greater inequality. greater inequality is associated with less mobility between generations. rising inequality and declining mobility are bad for our democracy. >> joining us are eric bowling and kimberly guilfoyle. merry christmas to you both. >> you as well. >> help me with washington math. >> it's funny. >> it needs a little help here. how does 40% pay 106%?
how is it the bottom perce percent -- i know this includes social security. and also food stamps. how does the top pay $106,000 and the bottom pays $19,000? help me out. >> that's a calculator that's broke like our government. eric is the numbers guy. i'll let him take a hit at it firs first. >> her he is. he started this whole thing, spread the wealth around. joe the plumber caught him saying it. went to fair share to you didn't build that. i have a real problem with this newest inequality. he's missing an opportunity here. president obama is saying as the top one, 10 or 40%, the income grows. the bottom out for or 50 or 60 or innoce90%, incomes aren't gr
as fast. guess what, that's okay. in a capitalist society that's good. as long as they're both growing! frs finally incomes are turning around. >> you think that? >> they are. they're starting to turn around. we're four years into a recession. it was going to happen with or without president obama. >> how is it happening with the labor participation rate the lowest in years? >> a 35-year low. if you take the people who have left the work force and add them back into the work force -- >> 11%. >> you are up over 10%. you are right. >> he's also the part-time job creator. >> obama care is making it worse. >> that's the problem. when you're looking, that won't sustain long-term growth. those are people that are part-time creating greater in equality. it's the inequality he finds so abhorrent. what i find abhorrent is the fact you have the top 10% paying the majority of the taxes. why don't you make it equal?
why don't you make everybody pay taxes and pay their appropriate amount so we can put it back into the infrastructure. into the economy. that, to me, makes a lot of sense. not penalizing successful people that are successful and believe in free market and capitalism and doing their part. >> look at the watch he's wearing there. >> my family was dead broke growing up in chicago. not middle class. lower class. sometimes we couldn't afford -- i will never forget it. my mom said i couldn't get pro keds. i said, why? we can't afford pro keds. all the other kids had pro keds. >> what did you do? >> i vowed i would never be poor again and i worked for it. i didn't wait for president obama -- >> for a hand out. >> you and i know 2014 is coming. the election year. class warfare, the race card and the war on women. >> it will be played because it works. people won't be examining the numbers the way we are right now. >> >> right. >> how do you counter that?
>> the problem for the president is if you look at the new numbers he's unpopular. the negatives are bad. people are dissatisfied with the administration, the abject failure of obama care. it's a unique opportunity in 2014 to argue strong economic principles and trustworthiness. >> you don't think the old talking points work? >> they can try it. they will resonate less with the american people who are no fools and have really seen what this administration has delivered. i think they will reject more of it. >> i think she is hitting the nail on the head. the left will try to talk about contraceptives, the war on women and abortion, gay marriage and the republicans if you have brains in your head you will go, okay. let's talk about obama care first. the conversation will heat up. you know what? obama care touches every single american. >> well said. >> and a part of the five. >> i feel like i'm part of the team. >> isn't it cozy? >> it's fun. a great show. good to see you guys, thank you so much for coming.
>> up next, should the government have the authority to force you to vaccinate your children? thanks to nanny bloomberg, that's exactly what's happening in new york. a heated hannity debate coming up. we'll reveal your choice for favorite video of the day. did you and your favorites win? that's ahead.
favor of the mandatory flu vaccine for children under 6. it will affect 150,000 children who attend a licensed preschool or day care. proponents say it could prevent 20,000 kids from getting sick. needless to say many parents are strongly opposing the plan. so the question is do you want the government mandating that you force your children to evacuation flight th-- vaccina them against the flu? here to debate it are republican strategist regina schlapp and steve murphy. why do i think the government, the same michael bloomberg that says we can't have salt, you have to ask for it in the restaurant, you can't smoke. smoking is dumb but people want to smoke. same guy tells us how much coke we can buy. why do i think it is none of his business? >> i think mayor bloomberg is taking on a new title once he retires, dr. bloomberg. he may have his own show by then. it's the heavy-handedness. this is how mayor bloomberg has
functioned from the beginning. when you look at it, for example, let's take the soda ban. the new york supreme court ruled against the soda ban saying the same new york board of health that approved it exceeded its legal authority. saying the new york board of health, they are all appointees from the mayor, activist in their way of thinking and they don't believe parents can make the best decisions for their children. of course parents are outraged. >> to be fair, they do have an opt out. most parents won't hear about this. go ahead, mercedes. >> the opt out is on religious and medical grounds, but if you are philosophically opposed to it -- >> i am. >> and many doctors won't agree to it. mark levin doesn't either. it should be in the hands of the parents and their health care providers. >> i have friends that are holistic in health, belief.
i come from a more traditional family, sisters who are nurses, brother-in-law is a doctor. i'm in favor of the shot. but i have people who have strong opinions against it. i think we ought to respect their opinions. they ought to be able to raise their children as they see fit. >> first of all, i'm completely in favor of this. secondly, i think it's totally wrong. you don't have a legal right or moral right to expose your child to disease undernecessarily. >> you don't have a legal or moral right to give them a shot that in many cases makes kids sick and in a few isolated cases violently sick. you don't have that right either. >> the medical community is overwhelmingly in favor of this. >> what about those that get violently ill because of the shot? >> it happens with all vaccines. you don't vaccinate for diphtheria? you don't want to vaccinate for cholera? all those make people sick
occasionally, they all do. why don't we hand our kids over to you, steve and nanny bloomberg. >> you've got him, not me. >> when it comes to independence, there's a study saying they couldn't find circuit effectiveness with a flu shot. we learned last year 65% of seniors who had gotten the flu shot, it wasn't preventing them from getting the flu. it's a big controversial course. there should be educational campaigns if you think the flu shot should be effective. it goes back -- >> jenny mccarthy is on television saying don't have any vaccinations, they cause ah 'tils. that's nonsense. the medical community strongly recommends it. >> we should look to steve. what medical training do you have, mr. professor? >> i don't have any. neither do you. i'm talking about-
>> get the hell out of our lives. you're pro-choice, aren't you? >> we're not talking about abortion. choice. vaccinations here. >> it's interesting that mayor bloomberg allows a 10-year-old to go into a school clinic to get emergency contraception they don't have to call the parents about-the. >> we're not talking about contraception here. about vaccination on kids who don't have a medical problem. >> and dr. steve doesn't know anything about medicine. you know better how to raise our kids. i love this. we have to roll. >> hey, i'm going at it the same way you are, sean. >> we will have the tonight's video of the day. stay with us.
mandela's memorial service. his hands are moving but experts say it didn't mean a thing. meanwhile, having their own idea what the guy was doing and poked fun at this mishap. >> it's nonsense. >> every word is the same sign. >> a very repetitive speech. they were hammering home the point. >> it was nonsense. look at him. >> that's the sign for stealing third. >> he's dead serious. you have to hand it him. >> there are a bump of other questions that need to be answered for this. >> how did he get there? >> how did he get up there? >> he was close to them, standing next to these world leaders. who vetted him. >> he's obviously insane. >> he's standing next to the president of the united states. >> that's pretty funny. don't forget imus in the
morning, weekday mornings on our sister station and fox business network. that's all the time we have left this evening and start each weekday morning at "fox & friends," 5:00 to 9:00. this is a fox news alert. the worker who was promoting a race war is off the government payroll. he is no longer employed with the government and dhs would not say if he was fired or resigned. >> we will see what kathleen sebelius told us on the record. and the inspector general called up to talk about the