Political lessons from big UAW defeat in Tennessee

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," February 19, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ANDREA TANTAROS, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Andrea Tantaros, along with Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, Dana Perino, and Greg Gutfeld.

It's 5 o'clock in New York City. And this is "The Five."


TANTAROS: On Friday, the united autoworkers suffered a crushing defeat as workers at a Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, voted against joining the union. The union fight was one of the closest watched in decades, even provoking a response from President Obama.

Senator Bob Corker, a major player in this fight, said today that the vote wasn't a result of anti-union sentiment but rather the anti-worker reputation of the UAW.


SEN. BOB CORKER (R), TENNESSEE: It was the right thing for our community and certainly the right thing for the employees at VW.

We just had concerns about the UAW. We know of their track record.
We know what's happened in communities where they have been located. We know they have been a job destroying entity through the years.


TANTAROS: Well, Bob, I know they say it's bad luck to open an umbrella inside, but the bad luck already happened for you, right? The UAW lost. This is a vote against your beloved labor union.

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: The bad luck is for that guy, the senator from Tennessee, who, by the way, I used to think Corker was a good guy. You know what this guy did? This son of a -- he went out and said before the vote that he had guarantees from Volkswagen that a new line of cars would be built there if the union was defeated. That's why it's going to the National Labor Relations Board, and he ought to be brought up on charges, number one.

Number two, if you got everyone around there. That whole part of the state is very Republican. And the Chamber of Commerce is going around saying we don't want you getting in a union at VW, been long here -- the United Auto Workers is a great union. They participated in every major battle for the civil rights movement and on forward.

And Corker could have kept his mouth shut. But he didn't, he had to do it, and he intruded in a labor vote, and that's chargeable.

So, Senator, I hope you get indicted.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Chargeable, it's really -- very interesting.

TANTAROS: Eric, wasn't it just about it wasn't a good deal for workers? I mean, they look at this and they said, look, VW is a really good company. We don't need the union to come in and take a part of our salaries. So, beat it.

BOLLING: Yes. And, Bob, I don't think Senator Corker did anything wrong. He simply said -- by the way, when VW -- when plants come -- when plants come into these states, they make deals saying, look, here's what we're willing to do. What are you willing to do?

So, a lot of these deals are done. And if VW brought the union in, right to work state, bringing the unions in, may have changed the deal, some of the tax incentives that VW was given prior to that. So, maybe Senator Corker was simply saying, look, if the tax rates are this, then they can continue to do business this way. And if they're not that, then they won't be able to do business --

BECKEL: You're right about tax rates.

BOLLING: Hold on. But let me just finish something else.

What you're not mentioning, Senator Corker had a comment, but Volkswagen brought the UAW in and said, here, our doors are open, UAW.

BECKEL: Exactly right.

BOLLING: Talk to `em. Go ahead and pitch your story to our workers.
If they want you, we're fine with it.

BECKEL: The VW plant in Tennessee, that's right. But Corker still said --

BOLLING: The point is the UAW had every opportunity to unionize the plant, and the autoworkers there decided against the UAW. They did nothing wrong. No one did anything wrong.


BECKEL: You don't think that bribe that Corker talked about -- it was a bribe, a flat out bride.

BOLLING: The unions are falling apart. The unions are now representing 11 percent of the work force.

BECKEL: You sit around and say all the time the unions are the death throe of this country.


TANTAROS: We have to get Dana and Greg in here.

Greg, isn't this a trend? Isn't this a trend that's happening? You see this in Wisconsin.


TANTAROS: You see this now in Tennessee. Workers are giving the option, and they opt out.

GUTFELD: That's the interesting fact. When workers are given the choice, it's always no. If you look at Walmart, if you look at the phony fast food protest, you remember we talked about that. What happened to that? Unions are like the drunk dude at the bar who doesn't understand no means no.

I don't know how you can call Corker an intruder when you're talking about the unions who are always intruding. It's a sign of desperation when you're looking at people in the other networks referring to this as a sign of racism, that it's the red neck South and German carmakers joining together to fight against this whatever.

It's kind of unfair to conservatives who don't have the rip cord of racism to pull in every debate. Instead, we are burdened with having to be persuasively correct about every single damn issue. We can't just go, "Oh, we lost, racist!"

TANTAROS: Isn't it tough for unions to make this argument under the backdrop of Detroit? And that's what workers are looking at, too. They're looking at almost every major company has fallen victim to the UAW and their tactics. It's really not a good deal for them.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: I think the media constantly underestimates the ability for people to weigh an issue and then decide for themselves. And I think they probably looked at it really hard and talked amongst themselves and decided this is how they wanted to vote. It wasn't a wipe out. But it wasn't really that close.

The union, I don't understand why they decided to go into that area, into that plant, anyway. Strategically, that's questionable. But I do wonder, and I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it's giving the Democrats a great talking point headed right into the 2014 elections because what does the UAW do? Ninety-nine percent of its contributions go to Democrats.
That's another reason why it's questionable.

I don't know whether what Corker said was wrong or not. I don't -- my gut instinct is no, but if people want to take a look at it, that's fine.

I was actually disturbed with what President Obama said, which is that if you did not support the union going in there, that you were for German shareholders. This is -- don't we want more companies to invest in America? And if they want to build -- if the Germans want to build their cars in America with American workers, we should encourage that and not try to force companies to make decisions based on geography.

Where are the best workers? We have them here in America.

TANTAROS: And, Bob, you said yesterday, you actually did believe this was because of racism.

BECKEL: No, not because of racism. It's a cultural value, a subliminal issue of racism.

But can I just address two things?

One, Volkswagen Germany is making a decision whether to open a new assembly plant either at that plant where they had the vote or in Mexico.
And Corker came out and said they'll open it here if you beat them. Now, that is intruding.

And the other thing about Volkswagen, you know why Volkswagen is good on labor issues? Because their board of directors in Germany are 50 percent union.

BOLLING: We know all of that.

BECKEL: You know why?

BOLLING: No, no, that's not right. They have a union rep on the board.

BECKEL: You know why? Because Volkswagen was so close to Hitler, they were --

TANTAROS: Bob, why you always -- it's like you're operating in a totally different era. Like a time warp.

BECKEL: I don't know. I usually stand up for American firms. I'm not usually in the bag for a bunch of foreigners.


GUTFELD: Poor VW, you're for Hitler, damn it!

TANTAROS: Blame it on Hitler?

BOLLING: Could have been better for the UAW to come in, unionize this Tennessee plant, and then that new plant, the SUV plant, goes to Mexico?
That's better for America? That's better for Tennessee? That's better for
-- it's better for the workers in Tennessee?

BECKEL: You believe the United States senator ought to get in the middle and say one vote --

TANTAROS: It's also kind of obvious. The president of the United States got involved.

BOLLING: That's what they do. They're talking about bringing jobs to Tennessee. Corker says, I want more jobs in Tennessee. If it means keeping the UAW out of auto plants in Tennessee, then -- so be it.

PERINO: And the workers in Tennessee know that they have a lot of competition around the world, and the Mexico plant, whether Corker had said that or not, obviously, there are choices to be made if you're a company, where are the best workers and where can you get the best deal? If Mexico offers them the best deal, maybe they'll make that decision.

GUTFELD: You know what else? I think the people down there looked over at Detroit and said, we don't want to be that, which is basically the Mona Lisa of union damage. That's all you have to look at and go, sorry, I think we'll just do it our way.

TANTAROS: Unions are getting pretty desperate. They're threatening now to sue based on this.

But we have --

BECKEL: They should sue. They should sue Corker and they should --

TANTAROS: They shouldn't sue and you should not allege there's racism when you don't have --

BECKEL: I did not. I said cultural -- you don't think somebody on that plant force said to somebody else, we want these northern labor guys coming down here who supported the civil rights movement?

TANTAROS: No, I don't.


BECKEL: Come on, you're naive, you're naive.

GUTFELD: There are better race relations now in the South than there
is in the North. Better integration --


TANTAROS: Bob, we've got to move on, but there is also some more bad news for the White House.

The Congressional Budget Office came out and said the president's proposal to up the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour would kill half a million jobs, 500,000 jobs.

Bob, any thoughts on this one?

BECKEL: Yes, it's very simple. I have begun to believe the CBO has either lost its mind -- look, there's 600 economists, labor economists, who believe it has no impact, in fact, it helps the economy. And six of those are Nobel laureates. Now, I'll put them up against the CBO any day.

The fact of the matter is every case where you raise the minimum wage, including New Jersey, nobody has lost their jobs. And, in fact, there's more money going around the economy. So, it's a crazy notion.

TANTAROS: Eric, you look like you don't want to knock over your coffee but maybe throw your coffee --

BOLLING: It's amazing how liberals and Bob, included in that group, will use the CBO when they score something in their favor but now when it's against them, it's the craziest group ever.

I took a pen to paper. Here's what this comes down to -- if you raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour, what they're proposing,
$2.85 per hour increase. CBO tells you there are 16 million workers who are going to be affected by it. Not all of them at the lower end, not all at the upper end, if you take it halfway through, the midpoint.

So, $1.42 average raise from of those 16 million people. You're talking $50 billion per year tax to small businesses, $50 billion. That's what it's going to cost small businesses.

BECKEL: Which will go to the economy, won't it?

BOLLING: No, no, Bob. It will -- actually, what it does and the CBO is right in this, they'll eliminate some hiring. They'll cut jobs and the problem is you're not going to cut high-earning wage job earners. You're going to take the bottom end.

So, the people you're trying to help you're actually wiping out
500,000 to a million jobs.

TANTAROS: That's actually, Dana, what Charles Krauthammer's point was. He said, you're basically taking from people who are on the lower end of the spectrum, they're poor, and you're giving it to other poor people.

BECKEL: I bet we've got a Charles Krauthammer SOT, don't we?

TANTAROS: We actually don't.

PERINO: We don't have it, but I read it, and I read it this morning.

The White House increasingly to me sounds like -- and I know that you could accuse other White Houses of this as well, is that when you look like you're so out of touch with just being able to say, yes, there are tradeoffs, there are policy decisions that we're making, and it can't possibly be that every financial and economic decision they're making is good for everybody. Not everybody is going to win in every situation.

So, when CBO comes out, which I thought was a fairly measured report, there is a little bit of a silver lining in it for President Obama, which is 900,000 people come -- raise up above the poverty line. But if you're of the persuasion that thinks that losing 500,000 jobs is a problem, you actually now, Republicans and Democrats, are at a draw. And may the best, most persuasive person win in 2014.

TANTAROS: And why not maybe just increase it moderately? Why does President Obama have to go to $10.10?

And back to Dana's point, isn't this, Greg, about the bigger point of liberalism. They believe they know better. They don't trust workers to their own devices in Tennessee and they don't trust business owners to make the right decisions in their own --

GUTFELD: The one thing they don't trust is math. If you raise minimum wage dramatically, you've got to raise it for the guy above and so on. It's a reverse pyramid scheme.

Also, if you believe that raising this will lift every family out of poverty, then why not do that to every family? But then what happens is, you reestablish poverty at a different level because the wage becomes worthless.

So, you become -- the money becomes as meaningless as pesos in Germany because you keep raising it. Poverty doesn't go away. It's established.

BECKEL: It's -- I'm sorry. Go ahead.

GUTFELD: I'm saying this -- the steps for success in a company is low wages for entry level creates more employees. You create more products.
You can pay more and hire more.

They believe that you just create more low wages and you can skip to step five. That's idiotic.

BECKEL: Did you listen to what Dana said the report said -- 900,000 people lifted out of poverty, and a tax on small businesses. You give me that choice, no question at all.

Screw small business when it comes to that.


BOLLING: The CBO report said 500,000, but it could be a lot higher.

Greg, you touched on something very important. When you put that
$10.10 wage on, you know who else you're helping? You're helping the unions because a lot of union jobs are based on minimum wage plus X. If you bring the whole thing up, that has a hand off directly to the unions, and that has lot to do with it.

TANTAROS: And what about --

BECKEL: That's great.

TANTAROS: just good, old-fashioned hard work? That's something that Mike Rowe, host of "Dirty Jobs", came out and said where is that being pushed from Washington and beyond?


MIKE ROWE, "DIRTY JOBS" HOST: Everywhere I went on dirty jobs, I mean everywhere, "help wanted" signs, in all 50 states. I heard the same thing again and again. If you're willing to learn a useful skill, and really no kidding, work your butt off, you're still OK.

I feel like there are two separate conversations going on in the country. One conversation is about workers and parity and how we can improve conditions. The other conversation really talks about the definition of a good job, the meaning of work.


ROWE: The willingness to see what a lot of people might call a bad job --


ROWE: -- and only see an opportunity.


TANTAROS: And, Greg, isn't that the quickest and best way to get out of poverty, is just simply to work your butt off?

GUTFELD: Mike Rowe is the anti-Obama. He understands the science of making not the weakness of taking. He should run for politics. But he probably won't because they won't allow him to wear the baseball cap during the swearing in.

But he speaks the language of most Americans. And people should start listening.

BECKEL: He speaks the language of most Americans? This guy?

GUTFELD: Yes, Mike Rowe.

BECKEL: OK, let me -- Mike Rowe may be a very accomplished guy, but to listen to him talk about this, if you have an opportunity, low wage jobs, you have to -- there are not a lot of opportunities in these poor -- in the areas of the cities where there are no jobs.

GUTFELD: You know what, but he's one of the few people trying to create opportunities.

BOLLING: The point he was making right there, and he said if there's a job you may not like but you see as an opportunity, a stepping stone to a better job, that's what you want to go after. And when you do things like raise the minimum wage, you take all those stepping stones and you ship them overseas.

BECKEL: If you're --


BECKEL: Go ahead.

PERINO: The other thing happening is technology advances. I don't know if you have been to the airport lately. But, for example, at LaGuardia, if you're going to fly out of there and want to order a drink, you don't -- there are no more waitresses there. You do it all from an iPad.

Technology is actually encroaching on some of these low-wage jobs.
So, I think there is no good solution coming from either the Democrats or the Republicans at this point in time that would say, we want you to get to that first rung of the ladder, but we want you to be able to get to step five, and here are ways that America is going to actually deal with the fact that our economy is radically changing and competition is increasing so much around the world.

How are we actually going to help people not just get above the poverty line and settle there? How do you get them above that? And that's a longer policy --

BECKEL: One thing, somebody has to explain at some point why states have raised the minimum wage and nobody has lost a job?

TANTAROS: You know what?

PERINO: How do you know that no one has lost a job?


TANTAROS: -- Dana, at the airport, I used it the other day, I got an omelet and a bloody Mary and it worked tremendously.

PERINO: I know.

TANTAROS: Next, breaking news in the Ukraine where dozens of protesters have been killed as the government violently cracks down on their peaceful demonstration. We'll tell you about the developments, up next.


PERINO: There is breaking news tonight in Ukraine where the government has been violently cracking down on protesters. More than two dozen people have been killed and more than 240 injured over the last 48 hours.

Just a short while ago, the country's president said he agreed to a truce with opposition leaders. President Obama addressed the unrest earlier today.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The United States condemns in strongest terms the violence that's taking place. We hold the Ukrainian government primarily responsible for making sure that it is dealing with peaceful protesters in an appropriate way. We expect the Ukrainian government to show restraint. There will be consequences if people step over the line.


PERINO: The U.S. and the European Union have threatened sanctions to help stop the bloodshed, and, Bob, this happened in the middle of the Olympics. And we have obviously -- President Putin, who is very proud of the Olympics in Sochi. Meanwhile, a lot of people wonder what sort of hand he has played in trying to start this unrest because he said that the worst thing that happened in the 20th century was the collapse of the USSR.

What do you think?

BECKEL: Well, first of all, you're exactly right. They couldn't do this, that little twerp, that he gets positive press on one screen, and now, he shows what his thugs are doing in Ukraine. Russia has done over the centuries to Ukraine, particularly Joe Stalin, where they actually murdered a generation of people there, and it's the bread basket of that area, it's a very fertile agricultural area.

What they have done over the years is absolutely horrendous. And what Putin is doing to them now -- this is no more than Putin -- Ukraine is critical to putting the USSR back together again. If they don't have the Ukraine, they don't have the rest of them.

What has he got for influence? He's got 40 percent of the gas in the world going to Europe. And that's a big stick and he's played it. He proves he's willing to play it, but he's nothing more than a mafia thug.

PERINO: Doesn't it prove, Eric, that -- in that area, all of Europe and also the former Caucasus, that they should be developing their own energy so they're not reliant in having to deal with President Putin?

BOLLING: Yes, Bob is right about that. That Putin definitely uses the gas delivery to the other parts of Europe as a stick, as a lot of the gas travels through some of the countries, and they're like, hey, it's traveling through us, but we have no -- they're not paying them to do it, and also, he's using it.

I think President Obama was smart in saying exactly what he said, in the strongest terms possible. We condemn the violence. You got to stop.

Consequences, I'm curious on what that will be. Sanctions, fine.
Meaning, we won't do business with you. Whichever, I guess we're backing the rebels.

PERINO: Yes, the rebels, the opposition.

BOLLING: So, we won't do business with you, leader of Ukraine.

Here's my issue, though. Then stop. Don't -- no military support whatsoever. No aid, don't spend any money over there.

Don't back the rebels at all, because then you're getting into issues that -- as libertarian as I'm trying to be here, we have enough problems here. We have poverty we talked just about in the first block, we have issues. We have enough problems. We don't need to spend money trying to help and decide --

PERINO: That's not what Ronald Reagan said. I mean, Ronald Reagan, Andrea, was for a Europe that was whole and free. And now, we're in a situation where in Ukraine you have freedom fighters, opposition, dealing with a horrible president in Yanukovych, and President Obama having to try to manage multiple foreign policy developments and concerns.

But to Eric's point, America is like, can't we just focus on our own problems here at home?

A concern I have, and I wonder what you think, how this will play in
2014 or even in 2016, is we have shown that if we, over time, if you don't participate, then things come back to haunt you.

Is that a concern now or maybe have we gotten past that and we should let them fight it out?

TANTAROS: I think it's a little bit too late. I'm not sure what cards we have to play. I don't agree with sanctions because I believe that would weaken the Ukraine and make them even further more reliant on Russia and Vladimir Putin.

My take on this is -- I really don't want President Obama messing around in countries where there's real armies that can march. I would rather have him sucking his thumb in the White House. Let them work it out. Let them deal with it.

Look, Putin's main goal was to disarm the E.U. and disarm NATO, and he's accomplishing that goal. And we have sent a message to all these thuggish countries out there that we're sissies over here and we drew a red line with Syria. So, a red line now in the Ukraine probably means nothing.

The keeper of the world order wears a bicycle helmet, rides around the vineyard, and hard men in world capitals have take notice.

PERINO: Let me get Greg in here. He hasn't spoken yet at all. And actually, he knows a lot about this and has a lot of reason to know about it. I mean, Ukrainians have worked really hard, I think, over the past --

GUTFELD: They are our allies. They truly are. These are people that left the USSR because of dreams of the West. And I feel, you know, terrible when I see this.

Obama's red line right now means as much as my mom's clothing line.
Nobody respects it when you think about Iran. You think about Syria.
Putin, Putin -- Putin is basically -- what am I thinking? He's Kevin Spacey in "House of Cards." He's the smart, conniving vice president.

And Obama is the bumbling, clueless President Walker that he's just playing him.

And right now, the United States is going to be seen as a wimpy bystander who loves to help you change the tire but doesn't want to get his hands dirty, and Putin knows that and he senses that Obama isn't that worthy of a foe to deal with it. I mean, freedom is an ideal, but it means nothing if you aren't willing to fight for it.

By the way, I'm not a hawk, but I'm saying the Ukraine is one of the -
- these are people that did this because they look to us.

BECKEL: What do you expect them to do? I listen to that Hugh Hewitt (ph), who I actually like personally, but he's a right-wing jerk, and then the other way.

GUTFELD: What if you didn't like him?

BECKEL: He said Obama was responsible for losing the Eastern Europe, come on. And, by the way, NATO, and the military is much higher --

TANTAROS: Bob, it's very clear. I know you don't like Vladimir Putin, but Putin is winning and Obama and the E.U. are losing.

Let me finish. As much as we would want the Ukraine to join the E.U., they are a western state --


TANTAROS: -- Western type of country. They deserve this. It doesn't seem a reality, and I'm telling you, other countries, hard men in capital cities around the world have taken notice. It doesn't mean anything.

BECKEL: Putin is weaker now than he's been for the last --

TANTAROS: We had Joe Biden call -- wait, we had Joe Biden call the Ukrainian president. Why don't we have Ronald McDonald do it?

BECKEL: Oh, come on. That's a cheap shot.

PERINO: In their defense, I didn't speak to the White House, but I would imagine in a way because Yanukovych is such a bad person, they didn't want to dignify his situation with a call from the president of the United States. And had the president speak publicly instead.

I don't know if that was their decision, but it might have been.

GUTFELD: I have a feeling Putin's favorite American president of all time is President Obama. Yes.


PERINO: OK, before they yell at me again -- coming up, President Obama likes to talk a lot about income inequality across America. But not in all parts of America. He seems to have left out Hollywood. Greg is going to tell you why when "The Five" returns.


GUTFELD: As the debate over income equality blossoms like a flower of failure, how come no one ever targets Hollywood? A left wing actor might make $20 million a flick as the on-set caterer makes only 100 bucks a day.

Shouldn't Obama and his envoy of envy focus their punitive pupils on that? Of course not because those are O's buds and they're famous, cool, and rich.

As Gregory Mankiw in "The New York Times" reports, in 2012, Robert Downey Jr. raked in $50 million, ten times what the top 1 percent of the top 1 percent make.

Yet, no outrage from class warriors in the White House. Why is that?
Afraid to lose the votes? Or the famous friends?

Mankiw says actors like Downey do more than act. They pay millions in taxes which funds schools, police, and military and they employ a lot of people. Even if their motivation is money, the by-product helps everyone.
It's the opposite of socialism where the motivation is to help but the by- product is misery.

It's something the left rarely if ever understands. There's nothing more helpful than making and nothing less altruistic than taking. One should never attack Downey or anyone for their success. If the market can bear it, only the losers will whine.

Which is why I ask the White House to respect others who aren't as glamorous but just as hard working. After all, Downey plays a maverick CEO. Why pamper the famous who pretend to be achievers, while punishing the real achievers themselves? Maybe that's what President Obama really wants, to play the president instead of being one.

Why -- Eric, why is it that like somehow, Tinseltown is immune to this kind of argument of income inequality?

BOLLING: It's great. I literally wrote down, replace Hollywood heartthrob with CEO. It's the same thing.

GUTFELD: And it is.

BOLLING: So, you should be OK with the CEO making a lot because they employ a lot of people, they pay a lot of taxes.

Look, the free market -- I'm all for Hollywood heartthrobs making $20 million, and the on-set cater making $20 an hour or 200 bucks a day, because that's what the market can bear.


BOLLING: The caterer can't make you cry, and the heartthrob can't probably cook very well.


BOLLING: So, their jobs are separate, let the free market dictate the price. I'm just -- the hypocrisy that comes -- this is in "The New York Times"?


BOLLING: It's ridiculous, the massive amount of hypocrisy. It's OK -
- I guess using the left side of the brain, but use the right side of your brain.

GUTFELD: Yes, creativity, you can sell a piece of art for $50 million. What about you, Bob? Should salaries in Hollywood be capped?
So, to those rich B words be punished?

BECKEL: I'm all for your free market capitalists. And this is what the market will bear. At least Downey entertains people as opposed to the Wall Street people who punish people and they get all this money. I think they should be taxed. But I don't think, you know, you're going to pay $50 million for a guy who had a movie that made $1.5 billion worldwide.

PERINO: But the Wall Street people actually they have a responsibility for a lot of things.

BECKEL: A lot of empty houses.

GUTFELD: Well, the government, too, Community Reinvestment Act.


TANTAROS: I think the most telling line of the piece is when Gregory Mankiw writes, "A lot of people aren't appalled by Downey's income because the reason seems to be they understand how he earned it."

GUTFELD: Right. That's what Bob said.

TANTAROS: And it's very telling. They don't understand, the elitists over at the "New York Times," how the CEO or the small business owner earned their money. Never was a truer statement uttered than that. And that was very telling.

I mean, they don't -- they'd love to pick winners and losers. The CEO who takes the risks, bad. Who cares whoever makes $50 million? I don't care. Not a big deal.

GUTFELD: You know, Dana, the writer actually worked for Bush and Romney. I don't know which Bush, though.

PERINO: Forty-three.

GUTFELD: Wasn't he basically trying to point out to "The New York Times" that all high achievers should -- are the same? They are benefit society and "New York Times" didn't know it?

PERINO: Yes. Like being an economist who is making a really good point and the left can't stand it. That's why they would attack somebody, a great economist and smart man, Greg Mankiw.

GUTFELD: Yes, all right. OK. Hey, ahead, the Tea Party turned five today. I didn't even bring a cake. Where the movement stands five years later, next.


BOLLING: All right. Monday, this past Monday marked the five-year anniversary of President O signing over almost a trillion of your tax dollars for shovel-ready jobs that, quote, "weren't quite as shovel-ready"
as we thought they would be.

We the people gave the president a trillion slush fund. He in turn gave our money to his cronies, political supporters and union thugs.

But at the same time, small groups of patriots were sprouting grassroots, and then this happened, Rick Santelli, a CNBC commentator, went off on the thugs like this.


RICK SANTELLI, CNBC: How about this, president new administration?
Why don't you put up a website to have people vote on the Internet as a referendum to see if we really want to subsidize the losers' mortgages.
How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor's mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can't pay their bills? Raise your hand. How about we all --


President Obama, are you listening? We're thinking of having a Chicago Tea Party in July. All you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I'm going to start organizing.


BOLLING: So, it was a perfect storm of events and the Tea Party movement coalesced around a simple idea for America -- small government, less taxation, and proper representation.

Greg, so some say that was the sounding bell. Others say it was in the works because of all the things Obama was doing.

Your thoughts on where we are five years later?

GUTFELD: I think it was important because it wasn't planned and it was real. It was an actual, authentic outburst based on real inspired anger, unlike Occupy Wall Street, which was the mirror of this, which the media embraced all their crap even as they were crapping on the street.

And also the great thing about the Tea Party is it exposed the naked hate for most of America. The fact they were branded as extremists and racists for finally speaking their mind. The worst thing that a Tea Partier did was probably provide spoiled egg salad at a picnic.

BOLLING: Bob, what's wrong? I mean, look, we turned over a trillion bucks and people weren't happy.


BECKEL: I have to ask this, is Santelli first generation? Sorry.

TANTAROS: What does it matter?

BECKEL: What does it matter? Because he sounds like an idiot.
That's why. He did then, and in fact, they let him go on like that, come on.

But anyway, look, what -- he may have spewed this, but I said to you before, you have scoffed at me. The Tea Party now is a political liability, 50 percent of the American people view it unfavorably, only 30 percent view it favorably. And those 30 percent are Tea Party people.

It is -- it's a drag on the Republican Party. We've seen it already.
They have cost the Republican Party the Senate, probably once, twice maybe, and this next time as well.

So, I mean, these people -- it's become a political joke.

BOLLING: Let's be fair. Dana --

GUTFELD: Unlike ObamaCare.

BOLLING: -- didn't they, in fact -- didn't they, in fact, help gain the House for the Republican Party?

PERINO: It's been like the saving grace for anybody who wanted to stop the administration's agenda. There's a Republican House.

GUTFELD: Almost at the screen now, I'm sorry. People have listened to them about ObamaCare, this world would be different, sorry.

PERINO: Yes, this is true. Good point. I think the Tea Party gets too much credit and too much blame for everything.

But I will say, Charlie Rangel when I saw him on the airplane one day, he said if they want to raise $100 million like that at a breakfast, all they've got to do is say the Tea Party could win and the Democrats give them money because the hatred of the party is so strong. But that -- you know, money talks. They're effective.

The Tea Party, whether or not it can find like one leader to get behind, I think it will still have an impact, but not as much as it did in 2012.


TANTAROS: Think about the races we won because of the Tea Party -- Virginia, Massachusetts, New Jersey. I mean, that was all because of the Tea Party.

I know, Bob, they have a bad image because the Democrats call them manufactured and racist and everything else. And they do have a PR problem.

But I bet you there are a lot of people out there who wouldn't necessarily call themselves Tea Partiers, but if you ask them what the Tea Party stands for, especially ones who have had bad experiences with ObamaCare, they would say, oh, yes, I agree with that. The Tea Party needs to learn the words, "I told you so", and they're not good at saying "I told you so" because they --


BECKEL: They should learn the words "I should go home." Any Republican who wants to line themselves with this group of people are going to hurt themselves politically, plain and simple.

BOLLING: All right. We're going to leave it there.

Coming up --

GUTFELD: I hate speaking truth to power.

BOLLING: Coming up, lawmakers in Kansas may be considering a bill to legalize harsh spankings for kids. That's going to be hard.

By the way, hard enough to leave bruises, and, of course, causing a lot of controversy. Our thoughts, coming up next.


BECKEL: Is it OK to spank your kids? What about their teachers? And how much is too much? The debate has been renewed after Kansas, yes, that progressive state, lawmakers just proposed a Bill to allow parents to spank their kids hard enough to leave bruises. Now, that also goes for their teachers and caregivers.

Now, as much as I looked at the enlightened legislation out of the Kansas legislature over the years, this one is beyond belief. I mean, I don't know what's happened to these people. But too much corn or something, but I mean, that's crazy. Now, you agree with this?

BOLLING: Who is this person that proposed this?

BECKEL: It was a Democrat.

BOLLING: Why didn't you say that?

BECKEL: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) a trillion dollars...

BOLLING: What's that letter next to Gail Finney's name? "D,"
Democrat. Here's what...

GUTFELD: And Dominic.

BOLLING: ... I think. I think -- and I have a 15-year-old who is now becoming the most rambunctious S.O.B. on the planet. I think -- I think parents should have the authority and right to do that without getting in trouble. If they want to give it to the teacher, I guess that's OK, but make sure you get parental permission first.

BECKEL: OK, Darth Vader. Thank you. Go ahead. What about you?

PERINO: I'm for letting Kansas decide what Kansas needs and wants to do. She then clarified today and said that this has always been a part of the law, but they'd never had guidelines, and so now they're doing guidelines. And I don't want to get involved in Kansas's business.

BECKEL: Mm-hmm.

TANTAROS: Bob. The entire show, Bob has been huffing and puffing.
I'm sure you can't see it at home, but he's sitting here going, ugh.

BECKEL: This is one of the most stacked shows I've been involved in.
That's OK.

GUTFELD: You can't spell Kansas without "kan." I know. So you can hit that. See what I did there? The whole country needs a spanking. And I think it's good to spank, and even better if whoever is spanking you is dressed as a French maid.

BECKEL: That's one where we might not have a disagreement with.

TANTAROS: That's the first time you and Bob agreed this entire program.

BECKEL: Go ahead. What about you?

TANTAROS: No, I am -- I'm pro-spanking for parents. This one, though, I don't know if I can get behind it, because I foresee a lot of problems. A parent accusing a teacher of acting out too harshly. Maybe potential lawsuits, but I also think sometimes cops tend to lose it a little bit, and you see these videos of police brutality. Who's to say that the teacher doesn't take it out on the kid too harshly? And then the parent, you know, has to deal with that issue? I think -- hate to use the term, because it's banned. So it's a very...

GUTFELD: Slippery slope?


BECKEL: But you know, wait a second. You know, if you do -- it's one thing for parents to do this. But why do they have to have teachers -- because you're right; there's going to be lawsuits on this, and there should be.

TANTAROS: Spoken like a true conservative. Why does it take a village, bob, to raise our kids?

BECKEL: It takes a village except for the Kansas state legislature.

BOLLING: Can I ask? Can I ask? If New Jersey doesn't have this -- I don't know if it does or not -- but certainly, in public schools you can't do it. But if -- if my kid was acting out in school and someone wanted to give him a smack, I'd be all right with it.

BECKEL: If he came home with a bruised butt, you wouldn't be upset?

BOLLING: Not at all.

PERINO: You know what worked with me? Is when they threatened to take away my citizenship award. Cleaned me right up.

BECKEL: Please.

BOLLING: That's hilarious.

BECKEL: That is -- that's beyond -- beyond anything.

TANTAROS: You can be -- I'm not behind (ph) a teacher spanking my child. I'm just nervous about the potential problems that it could have.
And I don't think it's really the teacher's job.

BECKEL: I don't want a teacher spanking my child. Spank me but not the child.

"One More Thing" is up next.

GUTFELD: Saw that coming.


TANTAROS: Oh, my gosh.

It's time for "One More Thing" -- Gutfeld.

GUTFELD: Anybody who watches "Red Eye," they know Tommy Shillue is a very talented person. Here he is on Jimmy Kimmel -- Fallon, Jimmy Fallon last night.


GUTFELD: Barbershopping an R. Kelly song. Check it out. He's spotlighted.




GUTFELD: Further proof that anything done by barber shop just gets worse. That was an R. Kelly song, "Ignition."

BECKEL: That looks like Joss's jacket.

TANTAROS: And who knew Tom had those pipes.

GUTFELD: Yes. Among other things.

TANTAROS: We know.

PERINO: OK. I heard today from the George W. Bush Institute, and I thought this was worth talking about. They had a military service initiative summit that they called Empowering Our Nation's Warriors.
Here's President Bush earlier.


GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Going to use our platform to make clear that veterans receiving treatment for posttraumatic stress are not damaged goods. They are not mentally shattered. They are people who got hurt defending our country and are now overcoming wounds. Employers would not hesitate to hire an employee getting treated for a medical condition like diabetes or high blood pressure, and they should not hesitate to hire veterans getting treated for posttraumatic stress.


PERINO: We'll have on our Web site, and on "The Five" Facebook page you can go, and there's a great infographic that they put together that gives you a lot of stats and helpful information if you want to hire a vet, how you can do that.

TANTAROS: Very good. Eric.

BOLLING: OK. So last night, remember when this happened?


GUILFOYLE: It's 5 in New York City, and this is "The Five."

BOLLING: Look at this.

How can I talk without my notes?

BECKEL: Eric, in his exuberance, as he usually is, went to wave and he knocked a cup of coffee all over.

BOLLING: All over Dana's lap.

PERINO: Can I survive a full immersion in coffee?


BOLLING: So Twitter lit up; Facebook lit up after that. I spilled the coffee on everybody, Greg and Dana mostly. Twitter said -- Paul Knight says, "You need a sippy cup, Bolling." Also on Twitter, Matt Campbell, "By the way, I thought Dana saw a mouse the way she jumped. I love her."

Also on Twitter, Timothy Abrams said, "You missed Beckel. Focus, Bolling, focus." And on Facebook, Kay Lawson said, "That's why I like 'The Five'. You never know what's going to happen."

PERINO: I didn't know what's going to happen. Hilarious.

GUTFELD: I want to throw up on Dana.

BECKEL: Yes, yes, yes. Well, the infamous Samuel Wurzelbacher, also known as Joe the Plumber, the hero of the Republican Party, who said he was a plumber. He didn't like unions, and he was overtaxed. He complained to then-presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Well, it turns out Joe never had a license to practice plumbing.
Secondly, he never made enough money to pay the income taxes. But third, today Joe has got a job. Joe, congratulations. Now he's a union member with the United Auto Workers. Good. You finally see where you get your bread buttered, and that's on our side, pal.

BOLLING: Is that true?

BECKEL: It's a true story. I don't if you believe it. It's from "The Huffington Post."

TANTAROS: The Beckel Institute?

BECKEL: No. It's in the Price Report. And...

TANTAROS: All right, Bob. I'm a dog person...

BECKEL: I'll shut up.

TANTAROS: We only have a couple seconds left. I'm a dog person, and now I know why. According to a new "TIME" magazine survey, the reason that liberals like cats is because they're liberal. Yes, a survey found that pets or particular kinds of foods can accurately predict your partisanship, and loving cats may not make you liberal, but it usually means that you are liberal. Aha!

So don't forget to set your DVR so you never miss an episode of "The Five." We'll see you back here tomorrow, everyone.

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.