Recap of Saturday, March 14


Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on FOX | Cashin' In

Bulls & Bears

This past week’s Bulls & Bears: Gary B. Smith, Exemplar Capital; Tobin Smith, ChangeWave Research; Eric Bolling, Fox Business News; Pat Dorsey,; Nancy Skinner, Radio Talk Show Host

Dow Rockets Up 9% This Past Week (March 9-13); Market Telling Us Worst Is Over?

Eric Bolling, Fox Business Network: We've got to embrace this rally. It was a great week. Banks are making money again, GM might not need additional government money—there was a lot of good news. Whether it's long-lived or not, embrace it. Tech and major consumer stocks have remained relatively strong. There could be another leg to this rally.

Gary B. Smith, Exemplar Capital: My greatest concern isn't that we had a great week. My primary concern is that the markets rose straight up this past week. Often, this is what we see in a bear market rally. These V-shaped rallies in a bear market usually just peter out.

Pat Dorsey, My position is that stocks are cheap right now. If you buy stocks now, three years down the road you'll be doing great. In the short run, emotions rule. There were a lot of people covering their short bets this week, which helped push up the markets. Like Gary, I think these V-shaped rallies are not sustainable. We could go lower again. My bet is that this recession will be more W-shaped by the time we get through it.

Tobin Smith, Changewave Research: By definition, this is a bear market rally. Bear market rallies are infamously fast and furious. This last week, a lot of people who wanted to sell stocks already had, so buyers pushed the markets up. I think the Dow will probably get to 8,000 or so. But more bad news about the nation's banks is coming down the pike, and the markets will head back down. A bump is not an "investible" event.

Dems Launch War on Secret Ballot; Wal-Mart Fights Back!

Tobin Smith: If this bill is passed and if businesses want to fire someone, they'd have to use an arbitrator. This will destroy jobs and investment. Research shows that companies that get unionized invest 15% to 20% less in their company due to higher costs. This is the wrong time for a bad idea.

Nancy Skinner, Radio Talk Show Host: This bill does not eliminate use of the secret ballot. It simply provides another option for workers to form a union. If workers are able to earn more as union members, they can buy more stuff from Wal-mart. They can buy more cars from Detroit. It helps the economy get back on its feet. This is exactly what we need, and the economic logic for it is perfect.

Eric Bolling: Just look to the American automotive industry. If you go to Detroit, workers there get paid $78 an hour including benefits. You go down to South Carolina, to a BMW plant, and they get paid $43 an hour and actually help return a profit for the company. Many companies are on the brink right now. If you allow workers to organize, you'll put many of these companies over the edge.

Tobin Smith: There's no question this is a pro-union bill. It's true that union workers do make about 15% more than non-union workers. The problem is the artificial cost levels in place in unionized industries. That's why unionized industry slowly but surely goes out of business. It's not a coincidence that this country experienced its highest rate of growth in the late 1800s and early 1900s when a very small percentage of the country was unionized. Since then, we moved toward the ways of Europe with overly high wages, bloated infrastructure, and less efficiency.

Pat Dorsey: I don't want to simply say unions are bad, non-unions are good. There are some very successful unionized companies like Southwest and UPS. That said, there are provisions in the bill that are mistaken in terms of a mandatory arbitration clause. It's a horrible idea to bring in someone who's not involved with the business to make employment decisions. And frankly, we have bigger economic fish to fry right now. Fixing the economy and financial system should be our concern, not stuffing through every hopeful social program that Congress can come up with.

Congress Keeps Automatic Pay Hikes Forever! What?

Gary B. Smith: Congress keeping its automatic pay hikes just shows how out of touch it is with reality. With a simple stroke of the pen, they could have shown that we're all in this together. It sort of says screw you to the American public, we're getting our money. It's idiotic.

Nancy Skinner: This year, Congress is not giving itself a pay increase. But what's funny about this argument is that the same people who say bank executives should receive massive bonuses to attract good talent don't want to raise the salary of Congressional members. If Congress had to vote every year on a pay raise, it'd never happen because it'd almost always be a political hot potato.

Eric Bolling: If we actually had good talent in Congress, I'd want to pay them more. Congress iced its salary increase this year, but still took tens of thousands of additional dollars for each member towards office discretionary spending.

Tobin Smith: This shows every Congress is an equal opportunity spender. It takes a lot of gall for Congress to demand financial institutions taking TARP money to cap their executive pay, and yet Congress itself continues its practice of automatic pay raises.


Video: Click here to watch the guests make their stock predictions

Tobin Smith: Believe in the bank rally! "FAS " ups 50% if 50 days.

Gary B. Smith: Cheap eats are money! "MCD" up 30% by 2010.

Pat Dorsey: Bye-bye Bernie! Buy this safe fund FPA Crescent, "FPACX".

Eric Bolling: Don't be sour on Apple; "AAPL" up 30% by 2010.

Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on FOX | Cashin' In

Cavuto on Business

This past week, Neil was joined by: Ben Stein, Author, "How to Ruin the United States of America"; Charles Payne,; Dagan McDowell, Fox Business News; Adam Lashinsky, Editor-at-Large, Fortune Magazine; Jared Levy, Financial Markets Education

Message to Pres Obama: "Economy" First?

Charles Payne, What bothers me about President Obama is how he speaks to us as if we're little children or wayward disciples. We know the President can chew gum and walk at the same time, but what he's really doing is cramming a social agenda down our throat under the guise of economic recovery. But this is a social welfare agenda, hidden by the smoke screen of the economic crisis.

Ben Stein, Author, "How to Ruin the United States of America": The level of reform the administration keeps talking about is extremely unsophisticated and immature. It shows very little understanding of history and economics, not to mention liberty and freedom. I'm very worried about the freedoms he's taking away in the name of global warming, reform, etc. Obama is losing sight of freedom being more important than entitlement.

Dagan McDowell, Fox Business News: President Obama's priority should be fixing the economy and the financial mess. We're not hearing that from the administration. He's failing to communicate, and the problem gets worse and worse. He hasn't made clear to the American people which way is up. The new cap and trade proposal can be looked at as one big tax raise on businesses and consumers. Reducing the deductions on mortgages and charitable contributions for higher income Americans was a sneaky back door tax increase. These tactics undermine confidence and clarity for businesses and individuals.

Adam Lashinsky, Editor-at-Large, Fortune Magazine: I disagree with the assumption that Obama hasn't made the economy the number one issue. I think he has, and he has put a tremendous amount of energy into it. He's consulted a wide spectrum of people, including his political opposition. He has made overtures that the economic crisis is something we should figure out together. But we can't forget Obama is addressing the issues he campaigned on and got elected for—like healthcare, social security, etc.

Jared Levy, Financial Markets Education: I think Obama's intentions are good. But I think he may have bit off a little more than he can chew. He's made a lot of promises. Yet at the end of the day, he's baking a cake he hasn't baked before, and isn't really sure what the ingredients are. Right now, the cake doesn’t taste good. He needs to focus on getting American credit flowing again and getting the economic system to stabilize. Obama is addressing these issues, but he's not providing any real solutions. The administration needs to focus on putting in place the procedures and methods to solve these major economic problems.

Dems Talking Stimulus Part 2: Do We Really Need It?

Charles Payne: I think the country needs a stimulus, but we didn't get one the first time. We got spending on social programs. Let's give American businesses a break. This past week, Obama dangled corporate tax breaks out there, but only if corporations gave up their tax loopholes. He's holding corporations hostage with it. It's messed up. We need something that's going to spur real activity.

Ben Stein: We don't need more stimulus, we need to fix banks. We don't need tax breaks for everyone, or broadband in rural areas. The financial system has to be fixed. Obama is not doing that.

Dagan McDowell: Congress put the stimulus together, and now we have to sit back and wait for it to work. My central question is, how do you know the market rally wasn’t helped along by the fact the stimulus is now in place? I think a lot of investors think the administration is just hoping the economy rebounds and they won't have to go in and do a big bank rescue.

Jared Levy: I work with traders every day. Right now, people are looking to buy. I do think we need to let the stimulus shake out before we start throwing more money at it. What we saw this past week was a short rally. We could be on the road to recovery, but before we can make that call we have to see how these varying issues shake out. Any stimulus has to be precisely targeted at the consumer and lender level.

Adam Lashinsky: The daily gyrations of the stock market are not the most important thing. They're too confusing. The issue to focus on is whether banks have enough capital or not. That's why I was a fan of the TARP to begin with, and really any program that strengthens the banks. We don't need another stimulus plan right now. The solid banks have to be rock solid, and the weak banks must go away without harming depositors.

U.N. Chief Calls Us "Deadbeats"; Cut U.N. Off?

Charles Payne: The U.S. should cut its relationship with the U.N. once and for all. Tell them to get the hell out of New York. What has the U.N. done? Look at Darfur, wars, poverty. They just take our money and criticize us. I'm so sick of the rest of the world blaming America.

Dagan McDowell: Despite the U.N.'s problems, it does do good work. Maybe we're sending a message to the U.N. with our late payments that they'll stop altogether if it keeps up the criticism.

Ben Stein: Barry Goldwater use to say the U.S. should get out of the U.N. and the U.N. out of the U.S. It's not a bad idea. The U.N. has been directly involved in only one major war — the Korean War. The U.S. put up the vast majority of the money and lives to fight that war. We've been very good to the U.N. over the years. The secretary-general is a loose cannon. But the U.N. has done good work for starving people, and widening access to clean water, not to mention peacekeeping work in countries we haven't heard of. Unfortunately, it has a number of nut cases working for it.

Adam Lashinsky: We can take the criticism and still support the U.N. It seems like the issue is not whether we should pay our bills on time, but get out of the organization all together.

"Pork Up" Your Bottom Line!

Video: Click here to watch the segment

Adam Lashinsky: Archer-Daniels-Midland (ADM)

Charles Payne: Teck Cominco (TCK)

Jared Levy: Cemex (CX)

Ben Stein: S&P SPRDs (SPY)

Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on FOX | Cashin' In

Forbes on FOX

On Saturday, March 14, 2009, David Asman was joined by Steve Forbes, Bill Baldwin, Neil Weinberg, Mike Ozanian, Quentin Hardy, Victoria Barret, Jack Gage, Evelyn Rusli, Lacey Rose, John Rutledge, and Elizabeth MacDonald.


SOUNDBITE: PRESIDENT OBAMA: Done right, earmarks give legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their district, and that's why I have opposed their outright elimination.

David Asman: He once pledged to ban all earmarks. Now, the president says they’re not all bad! And someone here says the president is right! Jack Gage, of all the people in the world, I would not have expected you to spend earmarks!

Jack Gage: Look, I think we have to separate two things. One is Barack Obama’s contradiction of what he said before about how he feels about earmarks. The second thing, I believe, is there is a fundamental case to be made for earmarks as apart of the fabric of representative government. Congress is to voters what lobbyists are to business. They are paid to represent their interest in DC and to get a piece of the federal funding for their local constituents. I believe it’s a small government, local government issue, not a federal government issue.

David Asman: I thought they were paid to be re-elected. That’s what they claim. But what about earmarks? Are they good or bad?

Steve Forbes: The way they do it is bad. There is a difference between earmarks and traditional pork. In the old days, you had to go through a legislative process, and make sure the requests were on the up and up. Earmarks are hidden. Earmarks are something they don’t want anyone looking at. It’s a huge source of corruption. If you want the old kind of horse trading they used to do, fine. But earmarks are a whole different thing.

David Asman: Neil, are earmarks good or bad?

Neil Weinberg: They are good. First of all, you have a to have a little bit of perspective here. We’re talking about $7.7 million. That’s less than 0.5% of what the government is spending on the bank bailout and the stimulus. Second, you have to realize that while this is a rounding error, it’s also a target for demagogues like John McCain. There are good earmarks and bad earmarks. What I would consider sort of a bad earmark would be something like the $24,000 for an “A+ for Abstinence” program or the $238,000 for the Polynesian Voyage Society. Those, I would call bad earmarks. There are also good ones like small arms repair and runway repair at Luke Air Force base.

David Asman: Elizabeth, I would not call John McCain a demagogue on this issue. He has been consistent on it all along. He has never had an earmark. Are they good or bad?

Elizabeth MacDonald: They are bad. Talk about the audacity of pork. Both sides, Democrats and Republicans – they have been horrible about pork. What we’re talking about… am I ever going to visit the Las Vegas Natural History Museum or the Buffalo Bill Museum in Cody, Wyoming? No. That’s our tax dollars going to that. They argue for term limits, balanced budget amendment, and a presidential line-item veto. We have yet to see those things. The earmark process is out of control. It’s corruption. It’s used to buy votes.

David Asman: Bill, good or bad?

Bill Baldwin: I think they will be harmless under the proposed congressional dual reform amendment. Everybody gets two votes. One in your home district or state. One in any district or state you choose. Senator “Grabbucks” gets a $10 million appropriation for the largest prairie dog museum. He gets lots of votes in Kansas, but then I’m going to vote against him.

David Asman: All right. There is a proposal, Victoria! So earmarks as we now see them. Forget Bill proposal for a second… earmarks as they are now, are they good or bad?

Victoria Barret: I think they are bad. It goes back to what Steve said. It’s because they are hidden. Especially in the past couple of months, when our nation has been in such crisis and we get these massive spending bills, and then tucked inside is all this junk that has nothing to do with the crisis that we’re facing. I consider that a tragedy. I think earmarks… and I don’t want to call them that… but yes, Congress men and women need to have ways to bring spending to their districts, but lets do it once a year. Out in the open. Don’t throw it with crisis situations, which is what we have done in the past couple of months.

In Focus


DAVID ASMAN: If you were allowed to speak to Madoff face to face, what would you say?

CYNTHIA FRIEDMAN: I think the only thing that would reach him, the only-he'd get a fraction of the pain we feel, is if they stripped his wife and family of all their assets and threw them in jail with him. That's what I wish for Bernie Madoff.

David Asman: You think Bernie’s $65 billion Ponzi scheme is the biggest scam ever? Think again. Steve Forbes says president Obama and his friends in Congress are ripping you off more than Madoff ever could.

Steve Forbes: Bernie Madoff is a criminal. He will spend the rest of his life in jail. His family will go with him. That’s good. In terms of what the administration is doing, their cost to the economy, hitting small businesses with new taxes, taxing capital, wasting tens of hundreds of billions of dollars, that’s going to do more economic harm than Bernie Madoff could ever dream of doing.

David Asman: Quentin, who is worse for the market? Bernie Madoff or the folks in DC?

Quentin Hardy: Did we just have somebody on the air saying how terrible cynicism is? Comparing the American government to an on-going criminal enterprise is silly and wrong and more cynicism than I can imagine. Now look, the government is spending a lot of money. The roots of his whole conflicts, the depression we are in now, is a banking crisis. You forget what happened in September and October when the biggest interest rate in the world tripled, when companies couldn’t fund themselves overnight. You have to throw a lot of money at that problem. Companies are still scared and not spending. They need a long work-though, the banks need a long work-through. People need jobs in the meantime.

David Asman: Michael, just one stat. Medicare alone, wastes $50 billion a year. One government program wastes as much as Bernie Madoff?

Mike Ozanian: As my editor pointed out, the Madoff scam is about $20 billion. Barack Obama’s “Ponzi scheme” is $2 trillion. If you look at how they did the schemes, they’re pretty similar. Obama has over-inflated the GDP. Even the Congressional Budget Office has said Obama’s numbers are way inflated. To pay for that, he has to bring in a lot of other scamsters, which in this care are taxpayers.

David Asman: The winner of this debate, and I’m going to be the sole judge, by the way, gets one of these. ::Zoom in to the “Sleaze Ball”:: This is called a “sleaze ball.” That’s Bernie Madoff’s face on there. Anybody who wants can get a chance to hit this golf ball and smash Bernie Madoff in the head.

Evelyn, who’s worse? Bernie Madoff or Washington?

Evelyn Rusli: You cannot equate outright stealing and government spending. Even if there is pork in the stimulus bill, fine. But the bulk of government spending has gone toward Medicaid, tax breaks, and other things. And that is a good thing!

David Asman: Medicare has $50 billion in waste and fraud every year.

Evelyn Rusli: If we just allowed ourselves to turn our backs and allow the financial system to go the way of Lehman Brothers, we could see a true depression on our hands where unemployment could climb up to 20% and the taxpayers would truly pay.

Elizabeth MacDonald: Madoff is a sociopath. A greedy sociopath. But now we’re bailing out reckless greed on Wall Street as well. When you think about it, look, the deficit really started to beer out of control under Bush, under what we thought was the conservative. He kept the Iraq War off the budget. The GAO tried to reconcile the government’s books. They found $50 billion missing. They cannot sign off on the government’s own books! Both Republicans and Democrats have been at fault here. Term limits once and for all! We’re blowing money out the back door like never before. $9.7 trillion to bail out bad debts on Wall Street by banks. That’s outrageous!

David Asman: Mr. Weinberg. Who is worse?

Neil Weinberg: Madoff. You cannot compare the two. They are not in the same league. Yes, there are problems with President Obama’s spending. I don’t like it. It’s too much. We can always doubt the things he is spending the money on. But, this is the government that we elected. If you don’t like it, then vote for somebody else. Madoff broke the law. He stole from people. He misrepresented himself. It’s a completely different thing.

Forbes on FOX - Debate

David Asman: Thousands of buyers flocking to foreclosure auctions across the country, as the foreclosure rate shot up 30% last month. Some homes are now going for less than $1000!

Vickie says this is investment opportunity of a lifetime.

Victoria Barret: It sure is! These are bargain-basement deals. I have talked with investors going into some of these markets. They figure they can make their money back in just a few years based on what they can get in rent. Like anything, you should invest in what you know and what you’re comfortable with. You should go into markets, probably locally, where you know the good areas, the bad areas, and make sure there are jobs, make sure there is great transportation, make sure there is pride of ownership in the neighborhood. But long-term, there is going to be a lot of people who will make a lot of money in housing.

David Asman: And Lacey, it’s not just the cheap prices, it’s the cheap interest rates right now.

Lacey Rose: Look, there are some good deals to be had out there, absolutely. But this is really, really risky. Look at what happened this fall. You had blue chip debt trading at $0.80 on the dollar. You had plenty of people saying “What a steal!” Right now, that same debt is paying $0.40 on the dollar. You could see the same thing happen to housing prices. Just because something is inexpensive doesn’t mean it’s undervalued.

David Asman: But John, a thousand bucks for a house, how can you beat it?

John Rutledge: There are 6,000 foreclosures in my zip code in Las Vegas. There are plenty of things for sale out there. New York is a little behind. But Lacey, I want you to buy a house in the next year. Maybe not this month, but later. I have five kids. If I allow those kids to get out of this recession without owning a house for 3% down payment and no interest rate at cheap prices, I made a big mistake. You have to buy a house!

David Asman: Quentin, what do you say? Is this the time?

Quentin Hardy: Wait a minute. We should buy houses when there are nine months of overhang and banks are dumping it like it’s crazy, and whole neighborhoods are falling apart. Oh. Wait a minute. It wore off.

There are months of overhang. Banks are dumping them like crazy. Municipalities will have to raise property taxes on those. How can you own your house? I would not call this a time to go in.

Steve Forbes: Depending on location, the answer is definitely yes! Just as long as you’re prepared for months where you will have to do maintenance, pay taxes, guard against vandalism, and the like. If you know the neighborhood and did your homework, then absolutely.

David Asman: Lacey, did anybody talk you into it?

Lacey Rose: No, not yet. This is really, really risky. You have to do your homework. You could still lose your shirt. It’s a case of buyer beware.

Stocks That are Sizzling!

Video: Want to see what the guests said about their stock picks? Click here

David Asman: There they are! The world’s wealthiest people on the cover of the latest Forbes magazine. Here with the stocks that made a few billionaires sizzle while most fizzled in the market… the Informers!

Bill Baldwin: Autozone (AZO)

Mike Ozanian: Netease (NTES)

Evelyn Rusli: Thoratec (THOR)

Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on FOX | Cashin' In

Cashin' In

This weekend, on "Cashin' In," Terry Kennan was joined by Wayne Rogers, Jonathan Hoenig, Tracey Byrnes, Jonas Max Ferris, Damon Vickers and Rob Stein.

Good Market & Economic News, Time to Stop Gov't Spending?

Jonathan Hoenig: Yes, Terry. It's nice to see the market up a little bit, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking it's up because of government spending. When allowed to function, free markets work. They are wealth-creating institutions. I don't think the president believes that. Regardless of what happens to the economy, I think we're going to see bigger entitlement programs, bigger government spending. None of that is good for the economy long term.

Rob Stein: I don't know that there is a correlation between the spending and the little bits of good news. I the retail sales figure was quite surprising. Consumer spending had dried up a bit in the fourth quarter. People are getting a little more confident. They are starting to spend themselves, combined with the government spending; I don't think we should put the brakes on just yet. Let's keep it pushing forward, Terry.

Tracey Byrnes: And the fact that these guys said they don't need any more money, they got a lot of money already. The government spending is part of the reason why we even had those comments from those guys in the first place. As far as the retail sales, a big chunk of that jump, it wasn't a jump by any stretch was the fact that social security checks got a cost of living adjustment. Retail is still in the toilet. The economy is still in the toilet. Yes, the government should back out and let everyone handle things on their own.

Wayne Rogers: No, I don't see any end of it. This doesn't have anything to do with the stock market. The stock market and what government spending is doing are totally unrelated. It depends on where it is. If the spending is in infrastructure where you are making an actual investment, that's something. If you're going to spend it in A.I.G., You're just pouring it down the drain. I don't see any connection.

Damon Vickers: Not a chance. It's hopeful. We broke support a couple of weeks ago. It's normal to get a little bit of a tap maybe from the other side. The rally could continue. We could have a rally that could take u s up to 8,000. It wouldn't change the fact that we were still in a bear market and that the trend was still down. The government spending i suppose is going to continue. I wish Obama had more creativity in the manner in which he was spending the money, so that we were actually getting this country moving forward. It's a tragedy on an epic scale, that the money is being wasted as it is.

Jonas Max Ferris: Sure we're all mad that our taxpayer money is going to bail out losers like general electric and their employees through the various owned entity. However, some of this money is actually helping the markets, particularly the bond markets. These bond prices have improved dramatically. They will get windfall money with this. They will not get a lot of tax increases because of money going to states to fix the huge, gaping holes in their budget. Is it wasteful with a bad stimulus plan? Some of it is helping markets.

China's Tax Cuts Boost Its Econ; Proof U.S. Should Slash Taxes

Tracey Byrnes: Terry, we have seen based on the 2000 tax cuts, tax revenues increased. When they cut t he capital gains tax in 2003, capital gains tax revenue doubled, because there is no incentive to dodge taxes. If your taxes are up, the first thing you want to do is try not to pay them. It's total counterintuitive. We have seen it work before here. Yet for some reason they are missing the point this time around.

Jonas Max Ferris: When a temporary tax cut passes, you want to sell long-term gains. That's a whole another story. China went into this global slowdown in a lot better financial position than the United States of America, unfortunately. But I will say we're looking at this country like what they do so well. They own everything practically. People here criticize our minor behavior involved in banks. China is great, because why? They do stuff that makes our government look the most free market you can imagine. Yet people out of their same mouth who hate our government love the Chinese government which is absurd.

Wayne Rodgers: Yes, they are. If you will recall, and this is a historical fact in the nine quarters preceding the bush tax cuts, the economy grew at a rate of 1% per year. In the three years following the Bush tax cuts, it grew at 4% per year. If that's not proof and that's not all you need about tax cutting, then you're not reading the numbers and you don't know what the hell you're talking about. All due respect, in the case of china, where china is cutting taxes and cutting it at the consumer level, which i s even more important than cutting it at a corporate level, if you can call it a corporate level in china, that's even better because the consumer will buy stuff.

Rob Stein: I will not get in the debate of whether tax cuts are good or bad. Sometimes they are good, sometimes they are bad. Cash out refinancing supporting G.D.P. Almost half of G.D.P. Growth in 2004-2005. It was because of the problems that we now have that was growing G.D.P., not because of the tax cuts. Tax cuts are not necessarily a good thing.

Jonathan Hoenig: Not a lot, terry. We should know for ourselves that tax cuts are moral and they are practical. We all want to create wealth. Wealth doesn't come from a bailout program, a stimulus package. It comes from private entrepreneurship and capitalism. Tax cuts promote that. It's also moral. People work for their money. Whether you area billionaire or busboy. They have every right to keep it. It's not Chris Dodd's or Nancy Pelosi's or Barack Obama's to redistribute it at will. It works on both fronts.

Pelosi's Pricey Jet Perks: Waste of Taxpayers Money?

Wayne Rogers: Well, I -- I actually said something much worse than that about it, but I can't repeat it here on television. This is outrageous what she is doing. She is taking your money, you, the taxpayer, out there, and taking that money, $30,000 a week and spending it on a private jet to go somewhere and demanding of the air force that they provide it for her. Now, I know this came down during the Bush administration because of 9/11 and they were trying to protect the speaker of the house. That is no longer a problem. There is no reason in the world why she shouldn't be catching a jet or any other kind of airplane just like I do or you do. It's outrageous that we have to pay for it.

Tracey Byrnes: That's ridiculous. She doesn't need the bigger plane. The fact she has a plane a t all she should be pretty grateful for. She stands up there in front of congress and speaks about how the economy is drowning, yet she has the nerve to ask for this. Take your jet, keep it quietly. I understand you have to conduct business on it, but don't be obnoxious and ask for a bigger one with develop our or velvet seats or whatever else she is asking for, too.

Damon Vickers: There is so much Prada and so little time. But I think that in the Obama administration, in the Obama mindset, spending is spending and it's good for the economy. And if Nancy can get out there and she can go to the spas and she can go get the Prada and she can jet all around the world that she is spending and doing a patriotic act.

Rob Stein: It's such an irrelevant amount of money in the scope of spending and the budget. If they are suggesting that she needs -- not only because it's bigger. I think it has more safety features on it as well. I don't know that it's a point worth even talking about. If congress has decided it, so be it.

Wayne Rogers: It may be irrelevant for you, but that's a lot of money for a lot of people in this country who have to make money just to put food on their table. I think that's an arrogant remark from you, by the way. I don't think you should be making that kind of remark. About being so cavalier about somebody else's taxes.

Tracey Byrnes: What kind of sign is that sending to the rest of the people? I can take the private jet but you should probably drop your cable bill because you don't have enough money to make ends meet because your paycheck has shrunk dramatically.

Jonathan Hoenig: The hypocrisy comes in the fact that she holds herself out to be a great environmentalist. She is always talking about carbon emissions. Think green and global warming. Does she really need a gulf stream again and again and again? It's another example of do as I say, not as I do with your money.

Stocks Set for Takeoff!

Here are some stocks that appear to be on their way up!

Video: Click here to watch the segment

Jonas' stock: Southwest Airlines (LUV) Fridays close: $5.72

Jonathan's stock: The TJX Companies (TJX) Fridays close: $24.84

Wayne's stock: Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries (TEVA) Friday's close: $45.39

Damon's stock: PowerSharesDB Gold Double Long (DGB) Friday's close: $20.20