This is a rush transcript from "The Five," March 4, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Greg Gutfeld, along with Andrea Tantaros, Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling and she once bumped her head on the toadstool, Dana Perino.
This is "The Five."
(MUSIC)
GUTFELD: So, tonight on this edition of "That '70s Show," our fearless leader fails to see Russia from his house, blinded by an activist agenda meant to placate the progs.
Meanwhile, an energy crisis feeds our enemy's coffers as our befuddled hero dithers over pipelines, beholden to protesters who don't use windmills to heat their dorm rooms.
Venezuela roils into the noxious hell of exported radical sheikh symbolized by the now absent Sean Penn.
Meanwhile in New York, the most progressive mayor ever trashes charter schools that help minorities because it doesn't comport to his cronies. Al Sharpton cheers.
A health care law meant to help the unfortunate is delayed to help the fortunate, as the dopes you voted for lie naked and terrified before its implosion. So instead of saving the patient, they plan the wake.
But we're the dumb ones, right? Skeptical of a president who conveyed cool, not experience -- we're so racist.
But in the world rife with evil, you don't bring a pet rock to a gun fight. You certainly don't bring a community activist to a KGB fight.
The next step -- the only step from here -- is rebirth. It is so 1979. We've been here before when a wave of weakness caused by a left-wing disdain for the West sets the table for the real revolution.
We must find our inner Reagan if only to answer this one question: How low must we go before patriotism is no longer beneath us?
So, Bob --
BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: Yes, Greg.
GUTFELD: It does -- you were there in the 1970s. It feels a little bit like the 1970s?
BECKEL: Not, not exactly, no. But I think the point about being -- Carter being surprised by Afghanistan, I was in the White House doing national security issues and we were surprised by it. We shouldn't have been. We had a break in our national intelligence operations we shouldn't have.
But leaving that aside, I keep listening to -- the comparisons are apples and oranges. Going into Yugoslavia for the Russians was to try to stop the new government from getting into the power that was anti-Soviet.
But here's my question back to you. What exactly is it that Ronald Reagan accomplished?
GUTFELD: I think that after a sense -- it was trying to undo what President Carter accomplished, which was create a sense of malaise.
ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Are you serious?
(CROSSTALK)
BECKEL: Let me go back to a couple things.
(CROSSTALK)
GUTFELD: He's got an idea, Bob.
BECKEL: Yes, let me go through a few things. He never said he was going to cut the (INAUDIBLE) rates, it's not one, two were added. Not a single employee of the federal government was cut. Taxes did go down, I'll give you that. The budget did go up. He invaded Granada to save 400 rich medical students and he went into the Middle East with 2,000 Marines, more Marines killed in one day than any other time in history.
Now, tell me where in all that does Ronald Reagan --
GUTFELD: Probably the most inspirational leader, and he came at the right time, Bob, which is what's happening now.
BECKEL: I understand your context of what you're saying. Go ahead.
BOLLING: Can I answer?
BECKEL: Sure.
BOLLING: All those things are true, but you forgot to mention unemployment went down from 9 percent to 5 percent. You forgot to mention that inflation was running 14 percent when he took over. He brought that down to about 4 percent or 5 percent inflation number.
Amazing, he created more jobs than any president, including President Obama. And then he did this -- he won the Cold War without firing one shot.
BECKEL: Won the Cold War?
BOLLING: Won the Cold War.
BECKEL: (INAUDIBLE)
BOLLING: What?
BECKEL: You can't say one person won the Cold War. There were a lot of people who won the Cold War.
BOLLING: There's a reason the day Ronald Reagan was ready to go, they took the wall down. He had everything going for him. He didn't want people to like him. He wanted them to fear him, and they did fear him, number one.
Number two, he also had the strategic -- the Star Wars, remember that?
GUTFELD: The SDI.
BOLLING: The SDI.
BECKEL: It was 15 years before it was ever --
ANDREA TANTAROS, CO-HOST: He put intermediate --
BOLLING: I will tell you this, you're going to tell me, that Star Wars, the SDI had nothing to do with the Cold War?
BECKEL: I think it did. I think it did.
Let me ask you, you think Reagan would stand on the border of Kiev and say get out?
GUTFELD: He doesn't have to.
Can we bring -- let me get --
TANTAROS: The most important thing Reagan did besides draining and bringing the Russians to their knees which is why they have been building up their oil. They know if we got another Ronald Reagan, they could bring them back down to their knees, as they put an intermediate range nuke missile into Western Europe.
Now, what does President Obama do? The exact opposite of that. He says, no, we don't need missile defense shield. Putin got his goal with missiles and NATO, Putin has the E.U., a feckless E.U., abandoning defense budgets for the welfare state.
How is the president going to rally the E.U., which was I think a big point yesterday on the show when we have the French sending vessels over to help the Russian navy and the Germans have showed no appetite to get involved. President Obama has no cards to play in this one.
BECKEL: Those mid-range weapons in Europe, by the way, were introduced by Harold Brown and Jimmy Carter in 1978 and 1979. That we put that in some context.
You're right about the French. I think you're right about the feckless E.U. That's the problem.
TANTAROS: At least Carter canceled the Olympics. President Obama doesn't even have the guts to do that. He canceled, what, the Paralympics?
BECKEL: But you're right about the E.U. I mean, I think it's a difficult position because they need this energy that Russia gives them because there's no other way to give it to. Although, we could lift our ban on it --
TANTAROS: We could help, but God forbid, we would want to piss off the environmentalists.
GUTFELD: That's what --
DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: You know what? I'm not needed here. That was my point. A good point.
So, OK, amazingly, Bob turned this into a question of what is happening today to what did Reagan accomplish? So, that was for five minutes spent rehashing that.
I'll also say one thing about Reagan is he believed America was exceptional.
GUTFELD: Right.
PERINO: And that I think is what helped the world. He was a guiding force, right? He's the leader. You're looking to him.
I don't think people around the world are necessarily looking to President Obama to lead them out of this. That is not what he said he wanted to do, even.
Plus, Gorbachev and Putin, very different people. Gorbachev, open- minded, intelligent guy. Putin, intelligent guy and like a crazy maniac.
So, those are two different things.
Here's one thing, if you look at America and say, what could we do?
Why do we have interest there? There is one thing we could do.
And Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming introduced a bill in January of
2013 that still to this day has not had even a hearing in the banking committee, and it would allow of LNG, liquefied natural gas, exports to the Ukraine. Great for jobs in America. Can't get -- are you an environmental concernist?
BOLLING: No, I'm not. Listen, I love Barrasso, I get it. I love the idea of being able to. We have so much natural gas, but the problem is that's pretty unrealistic. I mean --
PERINO: Why not have a hearing, though? The Democrats won't even allow for there to be a hearing so they can have a discussion about it. I think that's at least worthwhile.
BECKEL: Why is it unrealistic?
BOLLING: The liquefied gas and then ship it is so expensive. It becomes a moot point. Granted, an option -- in my opinion, a better option is to solidify the Ukrainian pipelines, the Russian pipelines that run through Ukraine, and make sure that that continues to flow, and whatever it takes to do that, you make it happen because there are three major pipelines through Ukraine from Russia, to eastern -- to the other parts of Europe, to Poland, to Romania, the other parts of Europe.
If you secure those, you don't need to liquefy --
BECKEL: But how are you going to -- the head is in the Soviet Union.
The headlines there are. They could turn them off, right?
BOLING: Why would they do that, Bob? They turn them off, no one is going to pay their petro dollars --
(CROSSTALK)
BECKEL: I understand that. Let me get back to what Dana said. The ban -- there's been an existing ban on Europe getting both natural gas and oil from the United States. It seems to me now that we had these discoveries, additional oil discoveries, we now have over 50 percent of our oil is our own, why not send oil to them?
BOLLING: Oil?
BECKEL: Yes.
BOLLING: Crude oil?
BECKEL: Yes, because there's a ban on it.
BOLLING: Ship oil and oil products?
TANTAROS: The world already exports clean gas to places like China while we export dirty, expensive crude.
BOLLING: No.
TANTAROS: And as far as Ukraine goes, Ukraine is bye-bye. Ukraine is lost. There's no getting Ukraine to join the E.U. If Putin wants to take it, it's his to take and nobody is going to stop him.
PERINO: I don't think that's all lost. I actually think that both Ukraine and Georgia now, this might light a spark under Europe enough to allow a discussion to allow them into NATO, which would be an important message. Something, that the big concern is does anyone believe Putin is going to stop at Crimea?
GUTFELD: But also, what about the spark here? That's -- I just feel in the United States, there's such a balkanization due to the divisiveness created by a party in order to win an election. Is there such a thing as a patriotic fervor?
BOLLING: Can I point something out, guys? We're talking about Ukraine, right? We have almost no trade -- about a billion and a half dollars in trade with Ukraine. Import about a billion, $1.9 billion, I guess that way. The E.U. has $20 billion and $32 billion in and out.
This is the E.U.'s fight. This isn't our fight. There's nothing really in this for us other than trying to flex our muscle and say, hey, Vlad, listen, we're tired of you playing that game.
PERINO: I disagree.
GUTFELD: Muscle flexing isn't bad, though, because there are other tyrants around the world that pay attention to that.
PERINO: Our trade with Europe is important. And a world market crisis -- I was actually disturbed today. I know the Dow is important, but when we measure America's involvement based on the Dow fluctuations when Putin says he doesn't need at this point to go into eastern Ukraine, really
-- that really bothers me.
For those of us who think that Reagan did a lot of amazing things around the world, I sort of feel like we owe it to his legacy to at least see it through.
GUTFELD: Yes. He's provided inspiration for people who now want freedom, and I get it. It may not be in our best interest. But --
PERINO: Why isn't it in our best interest?
GUTFELD: I agree. There are other tyrants.
TANTAROS: He could say we stand with them. That could be something he says. But we haven't really made that strong commitment to show that we actually do stand with them.
I will say this, I think the last thing we want is the Ukraine to join NATO because then, then they have a treaty obligation to go to war with Russia. So I don't -- I don't know if that's the way to go.
PERINO: I think that's a deterrent to Putin.
TANTAROS: But I think the way to go is now. If he's going to do anything at all, which I doubt President Obama would do, because he's already cancelled the missile defense arguments. He would have to get back and reinvigorate them with the Poles and the Czech Republic.
The problem is, he already argued that they were a defense against Iran, which he said was not a threat. So, Obama's own words make it really tough for him to rally international support and community organize, which is something he should be good at on in international level.
BECKEL: Let's keep in mind, there is a U.S.-Ukraine treaty, which includes a defense component to it, and economic component. The United States does have some defensive agreements with the Ukraine. I don't think
-- I think Crimea is lost. I don't think they're ever going to pull out of there.
I doubt very sincerely they're going to try to go further than that.
PERINO: Why? Two years ago, he went into Georgia and he never left those two parts of Georgia. Now, he's in Crimea. Why do you think he would stop?
BECKEL: Because I think he will do there what he did in Georgia.
He's taken a very small percentage of Georgia, and I think he's not going to go further. They said he was going to take over the rest of Georgia.
PERINO: Wow.
GUTFELD: Can we invade anywhere? Just saying --
TANTAROS: Your house.
GUTFELD: What about defense? What -- should we be rethinking the fact we're gutting defense? We're cutting 10 percent of troops.
TANTAROS: Very bad timing for the Obama administration to announce a drawdown of our military two days before this --
GUTFELD: You think it's a coincidence? That that's the message we send?
BECKEL: I don't think --
PERINO: I don't think --
TANTAROS: A very bad, bad message.
PERINO: I don't think they think that far ahead.
BECKEL: The American people are the last group that are going to put troops on the ground in Europe.
PERINO: The only person recommending that is someone from the Carter administration.
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: -- actually recommend troops. But I'll take it one step further. President Obama offered, John Kerry argued a billion dollar loan guarantee to Ukraine, I think that's a mistake, too. It's not our fight.
Listen --
PERINO: How do you defend, though, the Reagan involvement and then say now that we have nothing to do with it?
BOLLING: What do you mean, the Reagan involvement?
PERINO: You gave a very robust and good defense of Ronald Reagan's work --
BOLLING: Right.
PERINO: -- to rid the world of communism and break down the wall. He thought it was in our interest to be there. Why now today in 2014 do you not defend our right to be involved? I don't understand.
BOLLING: No, I think the strategic defense initiative, right, defense initiative?
PERINO: No, I think it was more than that. It was economic freedom, property rights, the right to self government.
BOLLING: But the threat that they were proceeding, we called it a defense. You want to put something in the air --
BECKEL: If I buy into the argument just briefly, I know Reagan really did bring down the Soviet Union, which I don't, but Ukraine was part of that.
BOLLING: Let me point something out to answer Dana's point. We had a Cold War going on with Russia, right? That was us and Russia. This is Ukraine --
PERINO: It was a belief in democracy and self-governance and belief in freedom protects America's national security later on. That was actually the part -- anyway.
GUTFELD: I got to go. They're yelling at me.
PERINO: Don't yell at me.
GUTFELD: I'm tired of being yelled at. We're doing a whole segment on that later.
Straight ahead, we go to the Ukraine or to Ukraine, and talk to the Shep Smith. He'll have the latest from Kiev. Shep, next, "The Five."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PERINO: Welcome back to "The Five" and our continuing coverage of the crisis in Ukraine.
Shepard Smith is on the ground in Kiev and joins us now with the latest.
I know, Shep, that we have a little bit of a delay, so if people can bear with us, we're looking forward to hearing your update. Go ahead.
SHEPARD SMITH, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Well, I'm standing -- behind me is the square where all of this unraveled, beginning back in November, and then continued in a more fiery way in Independence Square here in Kiev.
They shut the lights off at 11:00 local time building by building and area by area. They all went down, we don't know if to save electricity or something else. It's pitch black on a very foggy and cold night. Yet, there's still people in Independence Square, an area that we took some pictures, some still pictures. I took pictures from my iPhone.
People are coming here to mourn those who died in this uprising.
Think of it, we -- I have been listening to your conversation and it's all politics and oil, but for so many people here, this is about we are Ukrainian. We heard that our president is going to align with the Russians, and we didn't like it. We protested in the streets, and eventually, the government came out and murdered our neighbors and our family members.
And after our government did that, our parliament threw the president out of office, the president took helicopters and went into Russia where he's now being protected by the former KGB man, Putin.
And at the same time, they learned $70 billion of their dollars are in offshore accounts. Their president is being secured by this man who has to hear from them at least, invaded Crimea, and for all intents and purposes, taking it over, and they come back to the square where they no longer protest, but they try to have some sense of national unity to the point they can, while wondering what their future is.
And this is all happened in a matter of months. An area that has been here and been allied with the Russians for hundreds of years.
So, for those people who are Ukrainian nationalists, and not to say everyone is, but for those who are, these are very trying, very disturbing, and, frankly, very sad times. We saw a lot of tears today and a lot of hushed mouths and somber faces as they really don't know what tomorrow brings and they're horrified by what yesterday was.
BECKEL: Shep --
PERINO: I'll start with Bob.
BECKEL: Shep, let's talk about the Crimea for a second.
There's a place where it's not as nationalistic about Ukraine because it is heavily ethnic Russian. I made a comment the first segment that I thought that Putin will not pull out, that the Crimea will go to the Russians.
And my question to you is, do you think Ukrainians, since it's already an autonomous state within the country, do you think they really care?
SMITH: I think they care for a number of reasons. I think everyone here cares, including Putin, for one thing, that's a warm water port to the Black Sea. And it has enormous strategic interest there, especially for Putin. It's the only warm water port for him. It's the only place where it doesn't freeze over in the winter.
You spoke of the oil pipelines as well, and I listened with interest as Bolling said you've got to secure those things. Saying that sort of thing and doing that sort of thing are two different things.
And as to the point of whether he would pull out of Crimea, look what he did in Georgia, as Dana was pointing out. He went in there and had to fire shots. In this case, he went in bloodless and then do you tip-toe out and just own it?
All of these things are very much unknown with what is left in the balance is one mistake away from a shooting confrontation, and a shooting confrontation changes all games.
TANTAROS: Hey, Shep, it's Andrea Tantaros.
We have seen oftentimes in these conflicts in different countries, protesters having different views on what the reaction of the United States should be and should the United States get involved. Iran was very different, obviously, when its protesters stormed.
Is there any sense on the ground from the protesters and the people in Ukraine that they want the United States to get involved? Do they even mention the United States? What's their perspective?
SMITH: You hear more about Europe, frankly. The Germans, of course, have an enormous interest in the markets in Russia because they are so heavily invested in Russian oil. It's Europe to which they want to be aligned. And you know, tangentially, that means the United States as well, but it's Europe that is right there. The western part of the country feels very much like a series of European cities where the east feels like the old USSR. It feels and looks and acts like two different places.
But it's certainly true that over a period of time, the east is much more closely aligned to Russia and the west more so to Europe. They're now caught in a place where it doesn't seem to much matter because they're all in a scattered limbo.
BOLLING: Hey, Shep. So, I hear you're headed over to Crimea next. I assume that's right. I know we're on a big delay, but let's just move forward.
Regarding Crimea, you know, the Russians, it's a very Russian -- it's a Russian-speaking part of Ukraine. They almost -- they're autonomous already, somehow autonomous already. Is it that -- do you think you'll see a different face of the people when you're in the Crimea region versus Ukraine and Kiev where you are now?
SMITH: Our people who are there tell us we absolutely will, that there are people there who wanted the help from the Russians, who are closely aligned with the Russians. When they saw from their perspective the West sort of taking over, that means their interests aren't as well supplied as they would have been in a nation where everyone was represented.
So, at least from their perspective, the Russians came in to help, and many there hold signs that insist they're happy to have the Russian ties.
They think more like Russians. They have grown up more like Russians.
Their familial ties are across that border.
So, it's a regional difference that's hard for Americans to understand. It's hard for me to understand. People who are here try to explain it to us.
And, Bolling, it's difficult because there's been so much turmoil and so much division for so long, that when they're able to unite under one Ukrainian flag and it worked for a while, the hope was it can continue.
And now, they're faced with so many unknowns and so many people to bury that I think heads are kind of scattered. I remember how so many of us felt after 9/11, and I don't want to, you know, maybe the analogy is imperfect, but the thing that works for me was all of a sudden, everything changed. You never really thought it would.
They were protesting something their government would do, and then suddenly, all these people are dead and in come the Russians. You just don't know how to process it anymore.
And from the looks of the faces here in Kiev, at least, it seems like they don't really yet know how to process it.
GUTFELD: Hey, Shep, it's Greg. I know you're in Kiev, but I have a question about Moscow. Do you have a sense that perhaps there might be a potential for protests or something that would happen in Moscow? Is Putin perhaps concerned about that as well, or does he feel his own population is largely ambivalent?
SMITH: It looks as if they're trying to ratchet up the population because they're reporting completely inaccurately. There's nothing to suggest the Russian state media reports that there's 650,000 people who are running for the border from Ukraine into Russia. That hasn't happened.
There are no TwitPics of it, there are no reports of it. The Russian media are reporting it as if it has happened.
They are ratcheting up a nationalistic "we must do this to help the Russians" sentiment, which is one thing until a shot is fired or a person dies, and it becomes a shooting conflict, and then with an agitated Russian population, who knows what you're going to get. That's what the analysts here in Ukraine are talking about a lot. Not that protests might arise there, but there might some action that creates a mistake that has an already inflamed Russian population based on propaganda turning violent in a different way.
PERINO: Shep, I get the last question. I wanted to ask you to follow up on that, understanding that the protesters are a little shell shocked about what's transpired since they started protesting a week ago in the square, what sort of access to a free media and the Internet, do they have now or has Russia tried to cut off their access to any sort of outside communication?
SMITH: Here in Kiev, is that what you meant?
PERINO: Yes.
SMITH: They have complete access. We can watch BBC, we can watch Euro News here. There's access to Sky News. All the news sources are available here.
The protests have ended. And what was this fiery series of demonstrations with thousands and thousands of people is now tires that you still smell and memorials with millions of flowers that are still here, and the same people who are protesting are walking around and I heard so many people say it today, looking shell shocked because what they were trying to do was make a government listen to them, and what they got instead was dead neighbors.
And they look around this burned out square, that was called Independence Square, and wondered what went wrong and how do we get back what we had?
PERINO: All right. Shep, thank you so much. We really appreciate you being there and reporting for us on "The Five."
Next, be prepared to kiss your insurance company good-bye forever.
That's not from us. Those are the exact words that a key architect of ObamaCare. Eric has got the details, up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLLING: Two major ObamaCare developments today, including yet another delay, and guess who that's going to help? The Democrats up for re-election in November.
But first, kiss your insurance company good-bye, that from a key architect of ObamaCare. Ezekiel Emanuel who happily predicts the demise of your health insurance as you know it. In his book, Emanuel writes, quote, "You won't have insurance companies to kick around much longer. The system is changing. The accountable care organizations and hospital systems will begin competing directly in the exchanges and for exclusive contracts with employers, they will cut out the insurance company middleman and keep the insurance company profits for themselves. So be prepared to kiss your insurance company good-bye forever."
Now, Bob, you know, at first blush, you say, OK, there's a middleman.
BECKEL: I say good riddance and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Health insurance companies have been exactly that, middle men who ripped off the money between the people who pay their premiums and the care they get. The idea that quality care and hospitals would join in with quality care physicians and they would deliver a system of health care and get the insurance companies out of it is exactly the right thing to do.
BOLLING: Dana, one of the issues, though, is the way it would work in the hospital systems. Maybe three or four hospitals in the system would provide health care and insurance to patients. What if there's not a specialist in that system?
PERINO: I'm sure it will work out perfectly well. I mean, I have no concerns at all.
What I really think is that Ezekiel Emanuel is dying to get on the "KELLY FILE" again. He wants to have another debate with Megyn Kelly because it got so much mileage out of it the last time.
President Obama is practically repealing ObamaCare by himself. He's doing it in order to help Democrats in the midterm elections. What I think will happen, what could happen, if you let the markets figure this out, then they're already trying to a little bit.
At some of the drugstores, you can go in now and you can get a strep throat test. You can get a flu shot. You can do a couple things you might need to do at a medical center. So, you might be able to do that without insurance.
But the people this really benefits are the very rich who can benefit from having -- write a check to their specialist for anything that they want, and you know who will be left behind? The 99 percent. That's what I think.
BECKEL: They can do that now, though.
GUTFELD: Oh, yes. Only an Obamacrat would rejoice in the death of an industry.
Let's not forget, the insurance industry is made up of people who make five-figure salaries. The nature of progressivism is eliminating something without ever having an idea for replacement.
So, these are people -- the left lives in a land of permanent adolescence, destroy, destroy, destroy, without thinking these are human beings with heart vessels and hearts, and they don't rip off people. The profit margins of insurance companies are nothing compared to what the media makes, the people that we work for.
BOLLING: Can I throw something, Ands?
I don't think this is a horrible idea. You look at some of the major industries. They get -- look at stock brokers, they're being weeded out because individual investors are smart and they're going directly to the companies and they're buying the stocks. I mean -- you know, you're going to hate me for this, but I see the beauty in this of eliminating all those profits.
TANTAROS: So, for all the ideas we heard, this is probably not the scariest. The scariest in my opinion is when there's an article in "New York Times" saying the United States is going to sponsor a health care plan, meaning the administration is going to sponsor its own health care plan and not hold itself accountable to any of the laws the insurance companies to hold themselves accountable to.
What does that mean? What do you think? They go out of business and we eventually get single-payer.
This is a little different. This is hospitals and docs working together to cut costs, right? It's very new, it's very untested, but I'm not so sure because it reminds me a lot of the managed care rhetoric of the '80s.
And Ezekiel wants nothing more to do than manage our care. And that's what makes me very nervous. So, instead of the insurance companies, you're going to have them saying they're going to do it smarter and cheaper, but it's going to be just like insurers with more limited networks.
I think higher co-pays, I think less quality benefits and the premise is this guy knows better than everybody else, we're all stupid.
BECKEL: How would the insurance companies help that? The insurance companies are not part of the free market enterprise here. They're in the middle of it, interrupting it.
TANTAROS: I don't think this is going to do what it says it's going to do. And Dana made a really good point about what should happen. People should pay for catastrophic care, and then for everything else, they should pay out of the pocket. It's the only way to get cost down, when people start to have to do it themselves.
BOLLING: This is a topic we could go on a long time with. We have to
-- because we told you we were going to talk about it, we have to talk about this also.
The president unveiled his $3.9 trillion budget proposal today. And surprise, surprise -- more of the same, over a trillion in new taxes on businesses and high earners and hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending.
Dana, this has a snowball's chance in that place --
PERINO: That place?
BOLLING: Of passing the house.
PERINO: I said that place before. I think -- well, a president's budget outlines his priorities, so he's telling us a lot with this priority, which is he's not worried about it getting through Congress.
He's happy to have another year long extension. But he can put on paper he wants to do all these things he thinks will help his Democratic buddies win the election in 2014.
GUTFELD: You know, one part of this is taxing the rich. There's a huge surprise. If only President Obama could envision our enemies around the globe as rich Americans, he would be the most feared leader on the planet.
BECKEL: I'm sorry, go ahead.
BOLLING: I was saving you for the last.
Go ahead, Ands.
TANTAROS: I think there's three quick traps. One is the federal minimum wage. They would love to get Republicans and blast. Deep defense cuts they're going to try to get in exchange for something, and I think they're desperately looking for Republicans to say no again and be against something in this election.
And I haven't heard Republicans on Capitol Hill fighting back and calling this what it is, which is job-killing, weakening America's military.
(CROSSTALK)
BECKEL: You know, maybe it's time for us to recognize something here which is it's not about his Democratic buddies. It's about what we believe in. We do not believe in an unfettered free market because we think it rewards wealthy people.
We do believe in government involvement. Now, that's a distinction.
We don't agree with each other and I understand that. But that is what we are about. We Democrats, this budget reflects what we concern ourselves with.
PERINO: You're concerning yourself with fantasy over practicality.
BECKEL: What is fantasy about building highways, roads, and schools?
PERINO: It's suggesting the federal minimum wage, there's never any cost to anything. There's never any downside. No, it's all upside for you people.
BECKEL: You guys believe --
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: Unemployment insurance is a leftist proposal. It takes $56 billion --
(CROSSTALK)
BECKEL: It's your position and our position is here. We don't agree.
So, let's agree to disagree.
TANTAROS: We caved last time -- we caved last time, though, and Republicans don't trust the GOP this time.
BECKEL: Let's take the agenda out and put them against ours and see who wins.
BOLLING: They're yelling at me, too.
(CROSSTAK)
BOLLING: Next up, are parents obligated -- obligated to pay their kids' college education? You're not going to believe this. One high school senior is actually suing her mom and dad over tuition money and a whole lot more. A crazy family feud, coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TANTAROS: So, are kids entitled to have college paid for by their parents?
One high school cheerleader is actually suing her mom and dad for college tuition money and other expenses. Her name is Rachel Canning and she appeared with her parents in court today in New Jersey.
Now, she says that they kicked her out of the house a few days before she turned 18, but her dad said that she left home on her own accord because she didn't want to abide by reasonable house rules, like being respectful, keeping a curfew and doing some chores.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN CANNING, BEING SUED BY DAUGHTER: Are there privileges to living in my house and living under rules? Yes, private school, new car, college education, that all come with living under our roof.
I think she's being enabled. I think she's being steered down the wrong area, and it's killing us. It really is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TANTAROS: There were breaking developments just moments ago. For now, the judge denied all relief Rachel requested, claiming that it set a dangerous precedent that parents cannot set limits for their children. A follow-up date is set for April 22nd.
So, what do you think about this, Greg? She left a couple days, her parents are saying, before she turned 18. They paid for her first semester of private high school. And now, she's saying, I want legal fees, I want all the money you set aside for me for college. It's your responsibility to take care of me.
GUTFELD: Well, if she wasn't so cute, I'd be really angry.
My -- the problem here is the initial reflex these days is no longer conversation. It's litigation. We sue instead of say -- our lawyers are literally now our mouth pieces. Why talk anymore?
PERINO: Yes.
TANTAROS: The parents are deeply distraught over this, Dana. They tried desperately to get this daughter, who seems like a total nightmare, by the way, if you really read into this, under control. They have no legal obligation to pay for her college, and they don't have to pay for the second semester, in my opinion.
PERINO: No, at least not yet. Give ObamaCare time to figure that out, because you can be on your parents' health insurance until you're 26.
So, it's not unusual for a young person to think, why at 18? Why the number 18, do I have to be on my own?
I wanted nothing more than to be financially independent when I was 18 so that I could make my own decisions. I wasn't until I was out of college.
But this bothers me in a few ways, because I think that even though she might be a nightmare, she's probably really desperately troubled inside. So I wish that we didn't have to deal with somebody's family thing on the front page of the paper.
GUTFELD: Cute and troubled.
TANTAROS: Well, she says she ran away. they don't like her boyfriend. She won't come home. It reminds me, Eric, I remember in high school, there was always that threat looming that, if I didn't abide by the rules, I wouldn't get my college paid for, which is why I walked a fairly straight line. And if I didn't when I was in college, I was getting sent home and back in the diner. So I was really, really good.
It sounds like the parents are doing the same thing. She just doesn't want to listen.
BOLLING: Let me tell you something. I look at that father, and my heart goes out to him; my heart bleeds for him, because I have a 15-year- old sophomore in high school, and if -- he has to be able to do that. He has to be able to say, "You either play by my rules or get out."
Otherwise, kids will just run rampant. They'll do crazy stuff. They'll spend -- they'll run up credit cards, do drugs. You just have to be able to do this.
Let me just tell you one other thing. If this judge rules in favor of the daughter, it will be the worst decision in the history of decisions, because can you imagine how many kids are going to sue their parents for a whole bunch of stuff?
BECKEL: Well, just very quickly, I think that the idea of the judge would even say that they had to keep the status quo of the money they put away is a mistake. I think you're exactly right. I agree with you completely. She just decided to leave home. She won't play by the rules.
That's fine. I'm sure she could probably find other ways to make a living.
TANTAROS: Well, she better learn how to waitress.
Rachel, some advice from me: Go home, be good, be respectful, don't ruin your life. And then you can go to college.
Still to come, is it OK for parents to yell at their kids, or is it as bad as spanking them? ""The Five"" debate continues when we return.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECKEL: Is yelling at your kids becoming as taboo as spanking them?
Researchers showing spanking can lead to aggressive behavior in children, so parents have moved to yelling as a form of discipline. But now some doctors have found too much yelling is potentially bad, leading the child to, quote, "shut down."
First no spanking, now no yelling. What other tools do parents have -
- Eric?
BOLLING: Well, I think yelling doesn't work, either. As soon as you start yelling, it just goes up. And you know, I never spanked my son.
Here's what really works. When you're really mad, stop talking to them.
They won't -- they'll find out -- they'll track you down to find out what they did wrong if you just give them the cold shoulder. They hate that.
PERINO: I think the only answer to this is to start withholding food.
GUTFELD: That's good. That's very smart.
PERINO: I was trying to be funny.
GUTFELD: You know what I would do, because I don't have kids, but you know what terrifies children, if they're being really obnoxious? You walk up to them and you get really close, and you go, "I know what you did."
Whispering is so much more powerful than yelling.
TANTAROS: Yes.
GUTFELD: Try whispering at a kid. They are terrified.
TANTAROS: That's true.
GUTFELD: They will give you their money.
BECKEL: Andrea, what about you? You were a good straight-laced kid because you got threatened, right?
TANTAROS: Not all the time. Because instead of yelling, she said, "Wait until your father gets home."
But it depends on what they're yelling. It's one thing to be Alec Baldwin and yell at his kid and say, "You're a selfish little pig." It's another if their hands are pounding on glass, they're yelling at them to stop, because they may cut themselves and fall through a window. So sometimes you have to yell, but...
PERINO: Did you mom ever tell your dad?
TANTAROS: My mom didn't yell at me.
PERINO: But Moms usually, they threaten that, but usually they didn't tell.
TANTAROS: She told.
BOLLING: I know we've got to go, but what happened when Dad came home? What's bad?
TANTAROS: In Greece, they have these giant wooden spoons.
PERINO: Ouch.
TANTAROS: Or the belt came out.
BECKEL: OK, that's -- yes, that's -- Let me tell you, my answer to this, having raised two kids, is simple right now. I would take away their phones so they can't text, they can't communicate. My brother took the TV sets out of the house. That was a real winner, and it worked.
And yelling, the problem with yelling is after a while, they shut out.
I mean, they don't pay any attention to it. And it's not as if this hurts them that much. They're just tuning out. You know, it's like Andrea does to me.
TANTAROS: I got spanked and yelled at.
BECKEL: "One More Thing" is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GUTFELD: It's time for "One More Thing" -- Dana.
PERINO: OK, so I saw this thing last night, thought it was very interesting.
GUTFELD: Yay!
PERINO: You can send an e-mail to your future self.
GUTFELD: I hate my future self.
PERINO: So if you go to m.futureme.org, you can send an e-mail that in the future, you can look back and find out what you were thinking or what you wanted to tell yourself in the future.
So I asked on Twitter, and I got a couple good responses. Rob Morris says, "Dear me, when you see that gorgeous brunette in the NCO Club, run."
Nicole Wallace, friend of mine and friend of ""The Five,"" said, "Dear me, if you haven't moved to California, you suck," which is probably a good one.
And then I like this one: "Dear self, told you it was worth bombarding Dana Perino. By the time I get this e-mail, I will finally have cooked for her.
Ha ha ha." Which I don't know whether that's a good thing or bad. And the last one was, "I'd say trust yourself, Jean. Love, honor, courage, trust and truth are your principles. You don't have to settle for less."
GUTFELD: Beautiful.
PERINO: Isn't that weird? What would you send to yourself? Think about it.
GUTFELD: I would say keep on being awesome -- Andrea.
TANTAROS: All right. So Rob Ford was on Jimmy Kimmel last night, and he did a little best of Rob Ford. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIMMY KIMMEL, LATE NIGHT TALK SHOW HOST: We're doing a Jamaican accent here.
ROB FORD, MAYOR OF TORONTO: It's called patois.
KIMMEL: It's called patois. Have you been to Jamaica?
FORD: No.
KIMMEL: I would love to take you there for spring break sometime.
This is you passing out candy canes and literally dumping them on the children as if -- as if you were feeding birds.
FORD: What's wrong with that?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TANTAROS: But what struck me the most was the mayor's outfit. It reminded me of someone very familiar.
PERINO: Yes, I thought that.
TANTAROS: The question now is like "Us Weekly," who wore it best, America? Tweet me. Who wore it best?
PERINO: Definitely Bob.
TANTAROS: Bob or Mayor Ford?
PERINO: Definitely Bob. I vote for you.
BECKEL: All right. All right. On this day in history, March 4, 1933, one of the greatest presidents in history, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was sworn in as president, and he had this to say, his memorable line.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:
Lift me up my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror, which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECKEL: All right, the other thing Franklin Roosevelt said in that speech is very important. His attack on Wall Street. "The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of civilization. We may now restore the temple to the ancient rules."
BOLLING: Oh, boy.
BECKEL: "The measure of..."
BOLLING: Come on.
BECKEL: You mind if I finish this? "The measure of restoration lies in the extent to which, A, we apply social values more noble than monetary profit." Good for you, Franklin.
GUTFELD: Eric.
BOLLING: OK. Very quickly, you know, President Obama, Vlad Putin going back and forth. Putin wrestles tigers. Obama rides bicycles with helmets on. Putin likes to hang out with his shirt off. Obama wears mom jeans. Putin tells the west, "If you mess with me, I'll kill you all."
Here's what President Obama does. He delivers his "Don't mess with us speech" from an ABC alphabet rug at DePaul (ph) Elementary School in D.C.
Folks, you just can't make that stuff up.
PERINO: You know something about that?
BOLLING: What?
PERINO: So that event has been on his schedule for a while. So it's not like it was an emergency and they didn't have any other option. I just think that they maybe weren't thinking ahead in advance.
BOLLING: Like the alphabet...
BECKEL: Could I request you not interrupt my "One More Thing" again?
GUTFELD: All right, it's time for...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Greg's Hero!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUTFELD: All right, so everybody must remember the first time they got a business card. It was the greatest feeling ever. It was like finally you were somebody.
So I came into work this morning and my booker, Nora, was so excited, so beyond herself, because she had her first business card. We blurred out everything, so you can't harass her. But she was the most excitable person on the planet because she got a business card.
Everybody needs to know what that feeling is to get a business card.
PERINO: Yes.
GUTFELD: Because it means you've arrived, and everybody should be proud of it. Congratulations, Nora. Set your DVRs.
PERINO: And she -- she's the best booker.
GUTFELD: Yes.
PERINO: She's great.
GUTFELD: Ooh, you just...
Content and Programming Copyright 2014 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox