Skip to main content

tv   Bulls and Bears  FOX News  February 1, 2010 4:00am-4:30am EST

4:00 am
services, inc. >> sean: as republicans begin their march towards the 2010 midterm elections there1= are rumors who may step up in 2012 and attempt to unseat the anointed within. we've been following movements of several heaviways. )jrq' one steps foot in a key primary state. wouldn't you know it, my next guest is headed to the great state of new hampshire this weekend for a major event. he's here to tell us about it, former speaker of the house newt gingrich. he has a free online newsletter at newt.org. when i see that smile i know i'm not going to get the answer. it happens you more than anybody right now are heading to new hampshire, iowa, south carolina. so, you are thinking -- you
4:01 am
can come clean now. you are thinking about maybe running? >> well, i'm thinking about being helpful to the citizens who are concerned stuart, new hampshire is going to have a tremendous training program saturday looking at new media. looking at scott brown's great victory. looking at what we can learn from obama's campaign and they asked me to come up for american solutions and share a set of ideas about the things we are doing to try to expand the ability -- how could i turn them down. >> sean: they are going to have fried twinkies and corn on the cob. >> i can't turn her down. >> sean: i'm going to move on. i know i'm not going to get that answer. you've got that smile on your face and it melts my ability to grill you on it. certainly, i suspect you are probably going to give in serious consideration. >> of course. >> sean: okay. first of all, let me move on
4:02 am
to the issue. i think of homeland security, now big news broke late last night, in fact they are now reconsidered this issue of ksm and the trial in new york. here's my question. instinctively, they didn't think it was a bad idea. instinctively they thought it was okay to give miranda rights to the christmas day bomber. instinctively they say there is not a war on terror. he thinks he cancu negotiate with iran without preconditions. i'm concerned about their instincts. >> you don't know where they are going to end up because they keep equivocating. if mayor bloomberg had not come out so aggressively against what he estimated to be a billion dollar waste offhañ money they might still be going to new york. i don't think they are doing this because they are rethinking it. the obvious answer is try them in a military tribunal and try
4:03 am
them in éñ cuba. we have a facility at guantanamo go ahead and use it. they are going to maneuver, dance, bob and weave and do all sorts of things. it is a terrible idea to take terrorists into a civilian criminal court under procedures which allow them to try to get american secrets out in the open. it is a terrible waste of money for the american taxpayer to fund that kind of effort. i agree entirely with scott brown, one of his campaign promises kept telling people let's spend on equipment for american troops not on lawyers for terrorists who are trying to kill americans. >> sean: listen, i am hopeful, this is such a bad idea, it is going to cost hundreds of millions. frankly i think put people's lives in jeopardy and at risk in new york. it is going to become a worldwide circus. iwo reconsider maybe immediately in the 50 minutes we interviewed the christmas day bomber, he said more attacks are coming. he trained with people who are
4:04 am
planning these attacks. can we immediately begin interrogating that person? is that something for reconsideration? >> look, the first big threshold for president obama to cross is to recognize we are at war. if you're at war, none of the criminal defense rules apply. when you're at war you are allowed to take an enemy combatant, the christmas day bomber is certainly an enemyav6 combatant as is ksh and you are allowed to have them interrogated by the intelligence and military community there is zero reason, zero reason, to give them miranda rights. they are not american citizens. even american citizens would not have miranda rights if they were engaged in combat against the united states. totally different set of rules. >> sean: i was asking in the last couple of times you have been on the program, very specifically, if you thought that barack obama had the ability -- you witnessed this
4:05 am
up close and personal, maybe the tendencies or -- for self preservation, the ability to move to the center, to the right, as bill clinton did on endingóiñ welfare as we know i. the era of big government is over. was that question answered for nut president's state of the union wednesday night? >> i thought it was a very weak state of the union. i thought he was all over the place. he was pandering to every group, a little here, a little there. it was very disorganized. i thought hisl' style was weak. peter roth in u.s. news had the right analysis, he say he looked so small compared to a previous great speaker. he said no, i'm not referring torc(ñ george w. bush or ronald reagan, i'm talking about obama the candidate. if you look at how relatively lacking in authority he was last night, and compare it to what was like as a candidate
4:06 am
this is sort of an amazing shrinking presidency, at the present time. >> sean: did you think he almost, you know was attempting to get the chamber to rise and start chanting, "yes we can" that he missed the old days of the praise and adulation. >> two of the places i was struck by. oneeh was total explicitmr28 hypocrisy of speaker nancy pelosi, smiling and standing to applaud when he called for the end of earmarks. i thought it was such a total act of hypocrisy, knowing that the chair hand has asked for members to submit all earmark requests by march. i just -- if you look at that clip, it is truly astounding the contempt she has for the american people and her leaf we are stupid enough to think that -- and her belief to think we are stupid enough to think it has any meaning.
4:07 am
the other was when he was wrong about the supreme court decision. my impression is justice alito was saying that's wrong. if you watched his face at that moment, he sort of reacted involuntarily. . >> sean: what is interesting, the president was wrong. here's the supreme court justice saying, not true. the justice didn't know he was on camera. but the president knew he was on camera. fairly unprecedented for a president to attack the supreme court that's in front of him with congress and get the applause that followed. orrin hatch characterized it as rude. more importantly on substance the president was wrong when he said that foreign corporations can influence american elections because the ruling specifically said it does not. so what does that say about the lawyer from harvard? >> first of all, the citizens and the work there is
4:08 am
extraordinary important case and historic landmark. my take is the president's lawyers were as wrong about the supreme court as they are about trying terrorists. it should worry every american that the president is getting legal advicezçex and is out of touch with reality and factually wrong. >> sean: when we come back, i want to ask do you think the president's tone was angry? look into your crystal ball and tell us what you think is going to be happening for 2010. more coming up after the break. crime is down across america. the people keeping us safe are under attack. our own ainsley earhardt looks at disturbing trend of law enforcement officers under fire. and larryrc
4:09 am
4:10 am
4:11 am
>> sean: we continue with former speaker of the house newt gingrich. i want to go to the tone of the president's speech in the state of the union. i thought he came off as angry. maybe cool on the surface underneath i thought it was small-minded, whining, self-justifying not exactly honest. there were certain phrases in there he said we've got to be more transparent. we've got to work openly. i was screaming c-span. he hired all the be lobbyists then complained.
4:12 am
you mentioned earmarks earlier. do you think the president, this is the first time he's experiencing disapproval and he's having a hard time handling it? that's the impression i'm getting. >> i think there were two different character ricks -- characteristics within emotional the other intellectual. the emotional petulance this was a teenager upset, stamping his foot saying how dare you notñ#sñ give me what i want. i thought the tone was very under presidental and very unlike the obama candidacy which was positive, and which really was uplifting and optimistic. i thought the intellectual thing, just unbelievable. i mean, how can he talk about transparency, when everything they tried to do on health care is secret? how can he talk about eliminating earmarks when they are in the process of writing earmarks? the degree to which intellectually, this speech was profoundly dishonest, not
4:13 am
only factually wrong as we discussed about the supreme court case. area after area, fundamentally, misleading. i think is amazing. probably not a record for presidential speeches. but it certainly in the league with those that are truly fundamentally misleading. >> sean: i think the most misleading thing he's said we've lost four million jobs in a year. we saved two million. the math doesn't add up. we've never used that type of standard before. then trying to act as a fiscal conservative, when they've run up more debt, more deficits in one year and in two years, than, you know almost the entire eight years of george w. bush in that two year peer. it doesn't make sense. -- two year period. it doesn't make sense. >> the right benchmark is the congress if you measure the time pelosi and reid took over in january of 2007 and how much the democratic congress
4:14 am
in three years has increased the size of the deficit it is a breathtaking example of totally wasteful spending politicians aggrandizing themselves in earmarks all unprecedented. it is ironic the voters fired the republicans in 2006 for too much spending and put in power liberal democrats who have spent on a scale no republican could have dreamed of. >> sean: looking forward, you were there and i was emceeing an event the night you became speaker of the house and i lost my voice that night and i will never forget it. i remember you being interviewed, seeing you many times that night and getting one of the first interviews with you. as a local radio host, you were loyal to your local friends and i will never forget it. more importantly, you captured/w 54 seats that night. we saw what happened in massachusetts, virginia, new jersey. we see where independents are moving. do you think that this could
4:15 am
even be a bigger year than people are saying? that nancy pelosi could lose her job? that even the senate if things align the right way the republicans could take back the senate? >> well, let me start with michael barone made the case recently,qz you look at scott brown's vote in massachusetts. a state where obama 26% of the vote there may be as many as 150 democratic seats that could be in play. the number of new candidates that pete sessions and others tell us are starting to come out of the woodwork. people saw what happened with scott brown suddenly people are saying gee, i would be willing toer is of. i think you will.h"÷ get a new wave of candidates showing up in the next two months that expand the universe of democrats who are in trouble. in senate where the vice president's son declined to run this week. i think mark kirk is going to win the senate seat in illinois. i think pat thom going to win inejwujbzáv&vania.
4:16 am
think mike cast going to win the seat in delaware. all of a sudden you could see the getting close to 47 seats even money boehner is going to be speaker of the house next year. >> one of the things you did effectively, we'll look at past models that worked, reagan model, contract with america. you were able to nationalize the election with a positive agenda, specific promises. if you look forward the strategy of the democrats is to try and divide. according to what we are hearing they want to divide the tea party movement with the republican party. they want to isolate, they want to sort of separate. do you think that strategy would be effective? what do you think the strategy of the republicans ought to be if they really want to achieve the goal that you say is attainable? >> well, let me say first of all, adam's help with american solutions i met with tea party leaders in arizona and dallas, texas this week.
4:17 am
i think the tea party leaders understand their goal is get congress away from big spending, liberalism, big government. i think they are going to be skeptical of cynical efforts by liberal democrats. they are willing to work with republicans. they are clearly independent but they are willing to work with them to defeat liberals. republicans ought to offer a positive alternative. i think they could have the tea party movement help. >> sean: have fun in new hampshire, enjoy your fried twinkies and corn on the cob in iowa and don't give us any answers. i don't expect any answers for a while. the day is coming, i'm going to be pushing hard, looking for answers. mr. speaker, good to see you. have fun in new hampshire. >> let not your heart be troubled. when we come back the great, great, great, american panel is next. ♪ ♪ chloe is 9 months old. she is the greatest thing ever.
4:18 am
one little smile, one little laugh. honey bunny. [ babbles ] [ laughs ] we would do anything for her. my name is kim bryant and my husband and i made a will on legalzoom. it was really easy to do. [ spits ] [ both laugh ] [ robert ] we created legal zoom to help you take care of the ones you love. go to legalzoom.com today and complete your will in minutes. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side.
4:19 am
4:20 am
4:21 am
. >> sean: tonight on our great, great american panel he's former mayor of the city of province, rhode island hosts his own program the buddy ciani show vincent buddy
4:22 am
cianci is here. he's a nationally syndicated radio talk show host on the salem radio network. hugh hewitt is back. she is the co-host of happy hour on our affiliate sister station, rebecca diamond is here. good to see you all thanks for being here. happy friday. they are going to move the ksm trial. still not gonna interrogate the underwear bomber. >> of course you want the underwear er interrogated he was so stupid he couldn't light himself on fire. the most important thing, remember when you mayor like bloomberg said today, you can't handle it. it is funny to watch how they changed their attitude. before the massachusetts election they were into making sure this happen in the city of new york because they wanted to make an example. it doesn't belong in the city of new york. the terrorism threat could come again. >> sean: it doesn't belong in any city. >> guantanamo bay is where it
4:23 am
belongs or some corn field in idaho. >> sean: we don't have a war on terror this is i think ultimately in the end, pray to god i'm wrong, these mistakes, it is not a war on terror, man caused disaster, we don't interrogate the underwear bomber, mirandizing enemy combatants. this is going to be obama's legacy. >> i agree. the worst decision of the first year until they gave miranda rights to abdulmutallab was to say ksm was going to new york, irresponsible, uncomprehensible7oo. eric holder the attorney general still has not been able to explain it, there is no explanation. he's a military combatant. it is a category error he should be tried in gitmo. he should have already been executed he wanted to plead guilty. >> i think there is something going on behind the scenes. before blomberg was all for this he's like -- bloomberg was all for this he's like we
4:24 am
can handle it. new york city has the finest police officers and security, no problem. after massachusetts all of a sudden he's saying it is too expensive. and the federal government may not get the funds approved by congress to reimburse us for this i don't think i there may have been persuasion from the white house to push bloomberg and schumer and to say this gives us a good excuse. >> sometimes you like to have trials in your city. like we had the von bulow trial, celebrities come in and take hotel rooms, media comes in, that's a good trial this is a crazy trial. >> sean: what bothers me their initial in s on everything are wrong. in the minutes they intergated the underwear er the guy said oh yeah, i trained with other people and they're coming. who are they, when and where are they coming. >> you don't mirandize them. those rights could be revoked. he could be sent to gitmo tomorrow. everyday is another mistake not to send him.
4:25 am
>> sean: first instinct not a war on terror, we can negotiate with iran, close gitmo. >> know you know why they are down in the polls. 48% approval rating. this country not being run by the liberal wing. >> >> sean: if your poll numbers are that low and the american people are rejecting by 70% to 30% your health care plan, do you reverse course? >> he's not reversing course maybe a bone here and there. if he wants to keep flying around in air force one he'll start changing quick. >> i revert to the judge napolitano on this one he's been on happy hour many times. he's saying according to the constitution unless we're at cannot try these people in a military tribunal. >> the judge is wrong. you must tell him, the judge is wrong. he's wonderful, he's wrong. >> thezé judge is a guy that i always look to. >> wrong. >> why is he wrong?
4:26 am
>> because the united states not extended judicial rights to combatants in a time of any declarationá of war. >> we are going to have you and the judge on for debate. >> sean: there's supreme court precedence, congressional legislation has passed this is has been what has happen in the revolution war, civil war, world war ii. i'm talking constitutional law right here. >> times have changed. sitter . >> that's the thing this administration doesn't see it as a war. >> sometimes -- obama was wrong when he looked at alito he that whole opinion wrong. sometimes people make mistakes. this was a mistake. >> sean: three strategies by they think they can divide the tea party movement more conservatives from mainstream moderate republicans and out in latest one emerging in the political points white house
4:27 am
plans to step up efforts to hold republicans accountable. they want to create a series of votes that will take place to say see you're obstructionists, the party of no, does that work? >> i don't think so i think the obama administration is struggle for any strategy to survive. this thing iíog massachusetts and i'm from that area was amazing to watch what happened. the democratic machine and the kennedy machine is very strong in massachusetts they couldn't hought they had won it. they didn't even take a poll. >> however, you guys we have a short memory, a year ago everyone wanted to throw out the republicans and this is how obama came into office, hold on. if they don't go for something like these tax credits, republicans have been calling for this $5,000 per -- new hire tax credit how can you not go for that and all of a sudden people are going to say, wait, they are more for their agenda than helping the country.
4:28 am
>> [ inaudible ] >> sean: we to take a break, more with our great, great, great -- special investigative report with ainsley earhardt, are police officers under attack across the country? larry the cable guy. more with our great american panel, straight ahead.
4:29 am

164 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on