DISCLAIMER: THE FOLLOWING "Cost of Freedom Recap" CONTAINS STRONG OPINIONS WHICH ARE NOT A REFLECTION OF THE OPINIONS OF FOX NEWS AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AS INVESTMENT ADVICE WHEN MAKING PERSONAL INVESTMENT DECISIONS. IT IS FOX NEWS' POLICY THAT CONTRIBUTORS DISCLOSE POSITIONS THEY HOLD IN STOCKS THEY DISCUSS, THOUGH POSITIONS MAY CHANGE. READERS OF "Cost of Freedom Recap" MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN INVESTMENT DECISIONS.
CALLS GROWING TO CUT OFF ALL FINANCIAL AID TO PAKISTAN
Charles Payne: Stop the check. I don't get it, stop the check, I understand the strategic location. The reality is, you know, a lot of people are worried we're not there and then China moves in. Let China move in. Let Pakistan play them the way they played us over the years and let them be their welfare child, ungrateful ingrates, rather, it's ridiculous, it has to stop.
Ben Stein: Well, there's a saying that I learned from the godfather, which is keep your friends close and your enemies closer. These guys have been playing a double game from day one. I don't see it does us any good to spit if their face now. We clearly know it's as clear as black and white that they've been harboring Bin Laden and that tells us we should keep a closer eye on them. On the other hand they let us murder their people with drones inside their territory and I think that's a pretty amazing sovereign state that does that without being at war with them, let us murder people within their territory.
Dagen McDowell: Well, what have we gotten for the money? And you can't say we've gotten nothing. Drone strikes on Al-Qaeda, Taliban forces, logistical support for the Afghan conflict we have gotten something, it's a rocky relationship indeed, but we have to ask ourselves, what is the alternative, war?
Charlie Gasparino: Although drone strikes in exchange for Bin Laden. It seems like they were playing a game with us, where they would allow us to the drone strikes, but they clearly protected Bin Laden. I don't think there's any way around it. There's a purpose for Foreign Aid, you have to give us stuff. I don't think they're giving us enough.
Adam Lashinsky: You know, there's factions within those factions that undoubtedly knew and there's other factions that undoubtedly didn't and we can understand that even in our own government. There might be congressional committees that know something that some other committee or some part of the administration doesn't know. And I'd say, you know, should we put strings on our aid, sure. Should we try to invest that money differently than just giving it away? Absolutely. But remember, we give this Foreign Aid for our own reasons as well. We're not just trying to help. We're trying to achieve our own foreign policy goals.
OUTRAGE GROWING OVER D.C. DEADLOCK DEALING WITH $4 GAS
Dagen McDowell: You're absolutely right and I don't say that because this show is named after you. You are spot on. If you take away these tax breaks, what's that going to do? It's going to send the cost of fuel higher in this country. Pure and simple. If you make drilling more expensive in this country, where is the cost going to go? The company is not going to eat it. The American consumer is going to get hit with it.
Charlie Gasparino: Corporate welfare makes me sick. Now, I think you need to get rid of these tax breaks in the context of overall tax reform, obviously, I don't think we should be demonizing oil companies and subsidizing. I tell you, tax breaks for oil companies is just not, it's not good.
Charles Payne: We definitely need this. We hold the key in our hands and we don't need to spend all of our money on shore. I agree with Charlie. Oil companies don't need tax breaks. I'm afraid the administration wants to take the 4 billion dollars to pump it into wind mills and solar projects and don't want the money back in the treasure treasury, that's the disingenuous part of it. It has nothing to do with oil policy or economics, it has to do with how can I fund my pet projects and demonize big business.
Ben Stein: I don't believe that they're really tax breaks and I don't believe in the theory that all money that corporations earn belongs to the government and if the corporations keep any of it, that's a tax break. That money belongs to the stock holders in the corporation. There have been, many, many, takeaways, you can't imagine how many tax breaks the oil company used to get and now it's down to the bare nub. Why do we blame the oil companies, there's a worldwide spike in commodities. It's not the oil company's fault. Not all money belongs to the government.
Adam Lashinksy: This was Charlie's point before. If they're getting subsidies in the form of the tax code that other companies don't get, then we should take it away. We should not do it in response to high oil prices or their egregious profits, even if they're egregious.
HHS SECY: GOP MEDICARE PLAN WOULD MAKE SENIORS DIE SOONER
Charles Payne: The Democrats continue to use these scare tactics and it's at a point that I find I'm very resentful of it. They've always played this game, these people want to hurt you, they're after you that makes it weaker overall. It's not true its mischaracterization, but has lingering effects on making a country feel like we should all be in a bunker, because our neighbor is after us and going to hurt us.
Ben Stein: If you say we're not going to cut entitlements that are like saying we're not going bankrupt as a nation. It's going to be hard choices that have to be done. If we don't cut entitlements we literally go bankrupt as a Nation and I'm sorry Miss Sebelius, it will be hard for us, especially us old people, but we've got to make those hard choices.
Dagen McDowell: It's up to the American people and what happens, you see the Republicans punting on the issues. People have already punted. The problem is, these scare tactics work because the American people let them work because they don't look at the Paul Ryan plan. They don't read the Paul Ryan plan and they see something that's different and throw their hands up and say you're taking away my health care.
Charlie Gasparino: It's also the media. This woman is one of the most strident public officials out there. I think somebody called her the Spitzer Sebelius. And the media lets her get away with it.
Adam Lashinsky: We would not want to do a ledger which party is worse on scare tactics over the last five years, both parties have been pretty bad ton this subject. She made an imprudent comment. It would be far better if we could have a thoughtful discussion on the Ryan plan and what the president brought up.
STOCK PICKS: EARLY ELECTION WINNERS
Charles Payne: Celanese Corp. (CE)
Adam Lashinsky: Cabot Oil (COG)
Ben Stein: Boeing (BA)