tv Varney Company FOX Business September 6, 2013 9:20am-11:01am EDT
stuart: let's go straight atñr . i will call this morning's job report a single weakness.xd listen to this, only 104,000 in july, that is because the july number was revised downx:etqi m downwardi] revision. 35,000 yearçi]35,000 low. let's go back to paul conway and liz macdonald.ñi i am digging these numbersçó ani
see retail employmen+gñ up 44,0. brief employment of 27,000.r low-paid jobs.r 312,000 peoplexd÷ót-i dropped of the labor force.q that is why the participation rate is soçó low. you are calling this lousy.çófá i'm saying president obama and his policies have changednke structure ofq the workforce in america.xdxd >> yout( redefinet(ñi a 30 hourd so the 40 hours, that is a fundamental shift.q sustained long-term dropping out of the workforce.t(xd
let's start driving the policies to let business owners create the jobs that employ people. stuart: again, i am digging inside this report and icy unemployment moving up above r up from 12.6%. african americans with a key constituency group which really helped propel president obama's reelection. that group of people is clearly not doing- well.! inx% some reports has7j that grp been cheated by this? >> i don't think it has been cheated by thisgu president. it is an american problem. i think what we need to see or what we should have seen from this congress starting two years ago was invested in the american worker and invested in the american people. that is what got our economy back on track and that has to move the economy forward.
one thing i want to put on the labor report that was very interesting to me, the average time worked employees increased, meaning a lot of rumors and speculation about the fact obamacare causing folks to increase their hours. businesses are adjusting well to the fact the obamacare is coming into place. this sort of says to us, stuart, the business market is adjusting to the health care law. >> you have the federal reserve district reporting, they are saying the federal reserveúkúcz district is saying yes, companies are saying the report is a factor in the hiring. atlanta, philadelphia, richmond, cleveland, those of the company's reporting in. 1 in 10 company names are saying health reform is an issue with súúp
to absorb new workers. i) don't see the economic recovery the president wants to talk about and less to do with putting lipstick on a pig every month, just as not happen. charles: that was cruel, and you know what. thank you for the honesty and thank you for being with us on a big day. stocks are going to open higher at the opening bell coming up after a short break because again this is a week jobs report and then they will likely keep onsk printing.íó before we get to that, this. peyton manning throwing seven touchdown passes last night in denver. what a way to open the season. the broncos shu blew out the ra. even i know that is good. >> the guy who lines up offsides and formatting, seven touchdown
passes, he is the six man in nfl history to throw seven in a game. with the spark miles card from capital one, bjorn earns unlimited rewas for his small business take theseags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjors small busiss earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth why settle for less? ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses deserve limited reward here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ] now where's the snooze button? [ crows ] if you've got it, you know how hard it can be to breathe and man, you know how that feels. copd includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis. spiriva is a once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that helps open my obstructed airways for a full 24 hours.
you know, spiriva helps me breathe easier. spiriva handihaler tiotropium bromide inhalation powder does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? don't wait to ask your doctor about spiriva.
gain for the dow, i say it is÷j, week jobscñi report for the fed keeps printing. where am i wrong?xdc >>÷ñdqñiqxd you are not wrong. the issue is a lot of people wguód've liked to see a worse job number, volatility in the market. unfortunately it isn't going to ;iwpen. we will go up slowly as we do when the fed prints. 'wxdr soon. stuart:w3 i am shocked, larry, i really am. >> you have ar doing it as well. t( stuart: that is true.+ a week jobs report implies a weakfáñiñr economy, the fed pri, up wegg? not as much as we thought.ñi i look at the 10-year treasury, thefá yield atxdxd 2ó]0%. remember yesterday it went above 3%.ñi
now a weak economy, week jobs report, down goes the yield. two points 90 as we speak. would you like the ip( more?fáe1jfe1lpñaáxd give me apple stock.lp nicole: it has come off of the earlier highs of the with the up arrow,w3 larger scrn and you are absolutely right, even thei]ñi analystxd saying mf the same, larger apple iphone boosting china sales and theyñiñ firmlyxd kept $7.77 price target with by ratings so i certainly think there is a lot of upside potential. stuart: a federal judge has grantedñi a permanent injunction in the]-:r e-bookt( case. maybe that is why.ñi we will follow it. thank yu;very much indeed.ñr
mcdonald's, can they roll out a reworked version of the dolla1 menu as early as this year includingt( items at $5? why?lp why?uccessful attempt lasted to get customers to switch from thec dollar menu to a pricier extra value meurm=3 prices.4÷ñh keeping an eye on netflix closing in on $300 per share. the stock isok upñixd $200. would you let facebook use a picture of you in an ad for free?jfçóóom slam on the social network over proposed changes. nicole, facebook stock please. runningxd up.fá using stuart varney's picture td sell something in some ad.i] it is an interesting concept but i don't know if they can legally get away with that. stuart: you think mylp picturefá
would sell anything?jfçó john deere tractors may be so. stay right there, nicole, a lot of work fo $=u to do.qq we did not gow3r points on the opening bell. we areñi at 30.ñi remember, we÷ have a presidentil press conference comingñi up within onet( hour. he will probably mentiont( a lot ÷z'p%obs and what he says about syria is holdingñixd investors , just maybe. here is liz macdonald. i want to talkfá aboutfb the juy revision because that is huge. >> that isi] huge. down theq initial 162.çg7ç starling,t( eye-opening. we this economyt(r hospitality,fá saying we want ti
big mackt( truck jobs, manufacturing jobsq higher paid than the burger flippers. you are absolutezght, the labor force is beingq restructured. stuart:ñilp 16-19-year-oldsxd md q a little but it went up, now over 20%.ñrçó another key obama voting block, which is not doing very well in the obamat(i] economy.eunç iúápáe "=lt up 13.3%jfñr from 1e they dropped out of the workforce, that is why participation rate went down to 63-point something or other%.r
>> let me giveé@!u you this eye-openingjf number. we haveñiqññi beenq moving the l reserve given forward guidance they will continue moneyq printing, looking out toward september 18 meeting,myq that s is expected to make an announcement to taper back the money printing. >ñistuart: where showing of the ford motor company. they say the president and ceo will remainñi through 2014 atp,d least.çóxd least.çóxd ould leave hisq cont early and also speculation he could become theñi next top guyt microsoft. a lot of3w speculation. coqzer)y john3w layfieldxdñrt(r
she joins us right now in new york city. welcome to the program. >> i brought the mini buns. stuart: you are 32 years old. >> i am 35, started as president when i was 32. stuart: you went to college, but you did not finish because you had been promoted so far up the food chain at hooters, is that correct? >> had terrific opportunities to help in restaurants all over the world at a very young age. what is unusual is moving up quickly to lead the teams because i was traveling so much, i was leaving college so i dropped out. stuart: do you see yourself as a new generation of business executives whether you are male or female, going places, driving
for profit. are you the newcomer? >> it definitely see a trend of people not afraid to take a nontraditional path. stuart: you are a woman. do you object when people like me say you are a woman, you got there because you are a woman? >> i think if i got there because i am a woman that was a lot about the lack of leadership abilities people who promoted me and put me in those positions. i definitely got there because of the great teams i work with. stuart: does it bug you? >> it is a ridiculous statement. it says more about the people who say it than me. stuart: how do you feel about selling a highly fattening product loaded with calories and sugar? i can smell it 5 feet away. >> disturbingly delicious. stuart: how do you feel are selling something that will fatten up america?
>> i am proud of it. i am so proud of cinnabon. it is incredibly delicious. people will treat themselves. stuart: for every dollars worth of cinnabon, whatever you call them, what is your net, net, net, net profit margin? are you allowed to tell me? >> i am not allowed to tell you, but it is an incredibly profitable product. more than $0.20 on the dollar. stuart: more than $0.30 on the dollar? >> i am stopping there. stuart: thank you for the gift to the crew. we thank you so much for taking time out to be with us. i think you are the new generation. we're very happy to have you with us. >> thank you very much. stuart: wait a minute, now the dow is up 8 points, only seven points. when i started this interview we
were up 45, what did you do? your profit margin, it should be up with a profit margin like that. people are giving up hope looking for jobs, the participation rate is at a 35 year low and young people are some of the worst off. are they finally giving up on president obama? they were the big backers of the president and the democrats, are they giving up on them? that is next. (announcer) scottrade knows our clients trade and invest their own way. with scottrade's smart text, i can quickly
understand my charts, and spend more time trading. their quick trade bar lets my account follow me online so i can react in real-time. plus, my local scottrade office is there to help. because they know i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade. voted "best investment services company."
stuart: just look at this, down 79 points. in other words we have gone down about 120 points in about seven minutes and now fallen. coming up with a reason for the stock's movements rank at this moment i don't have a reason for it. >> chicago fed president is saying after the jobs report even after the jobs poor numbers he was still support tapering so that is maybe having an impact, they would stop renting to buy bonds. stuart: down 86 points, and we do know president putin of russia and president obama held a face-to-face meeting earlier this morning. i don't know they've has come out of that meeting. i am speculating that might be another partial reason for what is going on here. the price of oil no doubt what is going on there is up 109.56 as we speak. what about gold? up $16 per ounce, $16.89. is this what young people had in
mind when they voted for obama? living with their parents because they can't find a job? what young democrats abandon their party in 2014? that is a good question. we're going to bring in author of "the kennedy chronicles," kennedy herself. the question stands, our young people going to desert the president and the democrat in the polls next year because of the performance of the economy now? >> it depends on their choices. if you look at the 2012 presidential election, who do they have to choose? mitt romney was not really an appetizing option for people who have for most of their lives known conflict and economic pressures. stuart: the 2012 election was not really held on the economy, it was held or on social issues
and they like the social approach of president obama. is the economy bad enough to swing them back to have the economy as full front center issue in 2014? >> i think life is more interesting than young people assume. they don't segmented as though y social issues matter. that is not a perspective when you enter the job market. if this is the job market is not improving and it is tough even for college graduates to find work now. in 2014 you will look around and try to find other options. by the way, republican democrats are not the only two options out there for young people and they are broadening their horizons and it tends to be pollsters who wants to group them into these two narrow parties. stuart: you are grinding your ax because your libertarian, aren't you? >> i am a registered republican
here in california. i don't consider myself to be a republican. i am a libertarian, i have been for a long time. stuart: i have just gotten the two-minute warning meeting president obama will start his news conference approximately. >> i thought i already offended you. stuart: stop it, no. i want your take on the job report. i say the employment situation in america is very weak. what is your take? >> i don't know who is trying to convince us the jobs are improving when look at small business owners, they can tell you it is really difficult to borrow money. sales are tough and they cannot afford to employ people. it will be worse with obamacare. there will be a season where it is almost impossible for small businesses to grow. stuart: thank you for joining us, i'm sorry to have to cut
this short but i hope you can join us soon. what you're looking at the other side of the screen is a podium in russia where president obama is going to begin a news conference about a minute from now, that is a warning we have received. my position is this comment will be one of the most important news conferences of his entire presidency. he is going to have to lobby hard to get a yes vote on attacking syria from the united states congress, she is going to have the lobby hard to get some sort of support from leaders and he is meeting with them right now. and america's moral authority is at stake. if he is rejected, if the attack is rejected by congress and foreign leaders, what does he do? do we have the might to go out there, the will to attack when everybody else says don't do it. what are we going to do about the poison gas attacks? coming up in about a half minute
as we go into that meeting and ggoing to the press conference let me tell you now the dow jones industrial average is 94, 95 points lower. the price of oil is sharply higher, $109 per barrel and the price of gold is up about $12 per ounce. we will follow the market for you as we go through this press conference. what the president says may have an impact on the market. i'm still looking for a reason why the dow is down so sharply in the last 15 minutes. haven't got a reason for you. we will check its progress as the president speaks and answers questions. i am not sure he will answer directly and forcefully, bu thas not president obama style. he often runs out the clock in these news conferences. i suspect he should not do that today, he has to be forceful and we will see how it all turns out.
have you come up with another reason yet why the dow was down so much in the last 15 minutes? i cannot find it. liz: their reporting charles evans comments of fed money printing that he would still be open minding to the scaling back of money printing in september at the meeting, whether or not that happens remains to be seen, stuart. stuart: president putin of russia has said that a conflict in syria would have a bad impact on the global economy. that is what the world leaders are discussing right now, they're discussing the state of the global economy. that could be one more factor that has pushed the dow down. now down exactly 100, 96 points, let's say down 100 as a
president is about to start this news conference. we got the two-minute warning four minutes ago. the president has not yet appeared, but he will. i want to recap the market. i want to recap the jobless numbers for you as well, that may come up in the news conference we are about to see. the unemployment rate went down 7.3%, the lowest rate since december 2008. why did it go down? because the labor force shrank 300,000 people. the smaller the labor force, creating some new jobs, unemployment rate comes down. and now this. vladimir putin says he will continue arms sales to syria even if there is a strike. i think president obama is now speaking, let's listen. president obama: i want to thank the people of russia for hosting the g20.
the city has a long and storied history including historic resistance and extraordinary sacrifices during the second world war. i want to take this opportunity to slip the people of st. petersburg and express our gratitude for their outstanding hospitality. this summit marks another milestone in the world's recovery from the financial crisis that erupted five years ago this month. instead of the looming threat of another financial meltdown, where focus for the first time in many years on building upon the gains that we have made. for the first time in three years, urgent discussion to address the european financial crisis, we see a europe that has emerged from a recession. moreover the united states is a source of strength in the global economy. manufacturing sector is rebounding, new rules to strengthen the bangs and reduce the chance of another crisis
reducing our addiction to foreign oil and producing more clean energy. as we learned today our businesses have created seven and a half million new jobs, a pace of 2 million jobs each year. we put more people back to work, we have cleared away the crisis and led the way for more durable economic growth. we're also making progress in putting our fiscal house in order. our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years, as congress takes up important decisions in coming months i will keep making the case for the smart investments and fiscal responsibility that keeps our economy growing, creates jobs and keeps us competitive including making sure we don't risk a u.s. default paying bills we've already racked up. determine the world has confidence in the full faith and credit of the united states.
as world's largest economy our economy is growing. and there is a recognition that a strong u.s. economy is good for their economy. yet we came to st. petersburg mindful of the challenges that were made. as it emerges from recession europe has opportunity to focus on boosting demand and unemployment. as well as making structural changes that can increase long-term growth. both emerging economies. so we need to make sure that we're working with them he had managing this process, i am pleased over the past two days we reached a consensus on how to proceed. our focus has to be on creating jobs and growth to put people back to work. we agreed on ways to encourage investment and interest two infrastructure to keep it
competitive. addressing tax avoidance which undermines budgets and shift the tax burden on other taxpayers. we're moving ahead with our development agenda to focus on issues like security and combative construction. i am pleased the g20 nations are making progress facing a greenhouse gases a priority. during my trip we continued advance on trade initiatives. the transpacific partnership and i believe if we continue to move forward on all the fronts i described we can keep the global economy growing and keep jobs for our people. even as we focus on our shared prosperity in the primary task of the g20, it is a focus on efforts to boost the global
economy. we discussed a grave threat to our shared economies, the use of chemical weapons. what i have been emphasizing and continue to stress is assad's regime is not just a tragedy, it is a threat to global peace and security. syrians as quitting use of chemical weapons threatens his neighbors. turkey, jordan, lebanon, iraq, israel, it threatens to further destabilize the middle east and increases the risk of these weapons will fall in the hands of terrorist groups, more broadly the international norm against chemical weapons embraced the 189 nations and those nations represent 98% of the world's people. failing to respond to this breach of this international
norm would send a signal to rogue nations from authoritarian nations that they can develop and use weapons of mass destruction and not pay a consequence. that is not the world we want to live in. that is why they have condemned syria for this attack and called for action, i have been encouraged by deceptions of leaders this week there's a growing recognition o recognitid cannot stand idly by. here in st. petersburg readers in europe, the middle east have come together to send international norm against the use of chemical weapons must be controlled and assad regime used these weapons on their own people. as a consequence or has to be a strong response. they have said assad is possible calling for unnecessary measures against the culprits of this crime. the organization islamic cooperation general secretary called the attack a blatant
front to all religious values and disregard of laws and norms which requires a decisive action. in the coming days i will continue to consult with my fellow leaders around the world and i will consult with congress and i will make best case that i can to the american people as well as to the international community for taking necessary and appropriate action. and i intend to address american people from the white house on tuesday. the kind of world we live in and our ability to deter this kind of outrageous behavior is going to depend on the decisions we make in the days ahead. i am confident if we deliberate carefully and choose wisely and embrace our responsibilities we can meet the challenges of this moment as well as those in the days ahead. so with that let me take some questions. i have my handy list.
>> thank you, mr. president. you mentioned number of countries that have condemned the use of chemical weapons but advisors that you're leaving the summit with a strong number of countries backing your call for military action. president putin indicated it may only be a handful of countries including france, turkey and saudi arabia. can you tell us publicly what countries are backing your call for military action, and did you change any alliances here? can you tell us how the meeting came about and did you discuss syria and edwards noted? president obama: i believe there will be a statement issued late this evening possibly in time for you guys to fly back home to indicate additional countries that are making public statements. last night we had a good discussion and i want to give president putin credits for
airing issues. and here's how i would describe it. without giving details for betraying the confidence of those who were speaking within the confines of the dinner. it was unanimous that chemical weapons were used. a unanimous conclusion chemical weapons were used in syria. there was unanimous view that the norm against using chemical weapons has to be maintained. that these weapons were banned for a reason and that the international community has to take those norms seriously. i would say that the majority of the room is comfortable with our conclusion that assad, the assad
government was responsible for their use. obviously this is dispute by president putin, but if you polled the leaders last night, i'm confident you get a majority who said it is most likely we're pretty confident the assad regime used it. where there is a division has to do with the united nations. there are a number of countries that just as a matter of principle believe that military action is made, it has to go through the u.n. security council. there are others, and i put myself in this camp, somebody who is a strong supporter of the united nations and appreciated the courage of the investigators who have gone in and looks forward to seeing the u.n.
report because nick we should get more information, not less in this situation. it is my view and a view that was shared by number of people in the room that given the paralysis on this issue, if we are serious about upholding a ban on chemical weapons use, and international response is required and that will not come through security council action. i respect those who are concerned about setting precedents of action outside of a u.n. security council resolution. working through the multi
multi-unilateral connections to get that done. but ultimately what i believe in even more deeply because i think the security of the world and my particular task looking out for the national security of the united states requires that when there is a breach of a norm this important, and the international community is paralyzed and frozen and does not act, then that's norm begins to unravel. and that norm unravels, other norms and prohibitions begin unraveling. and that makes for a more dangerous world and that requires even more difficult choices and more difficult responses in the future. you know, over 1400 people were
gassed. over 400 of them were children. this is not something we have fabricated, this is not something that we are looking or using as an excuse for military action as i said last night i was elected to end wars, not start them. i have spent the last four and half years doing everything i can to reduce our reliance on military power as a means of meeting our international obligations and protecting the american people. but what i also know is there are times where we have to make
hard choices if we're going to stand up for the things we care about. i believe this is one of those times. if we end up using the u.n. security council not as a means of enforcing international norms and international law, but rather as a barrier to acting on behalf of international norms and international law, then i think people rightly are going to be skeptical about the system. and whether it can work to protect those children that we saw on those videos. and sometimes the further we get from the horrors of that, the easier it is to rationalize not making such choices. and i understand that. this is not convenient, this is not something that i think a lot
of folks around the world, you know, find an appetizing set of choices. but the question is do these norms need something? if we are not acting, what does that say? if we just issuing condemnation passing resolutions saying wasn't that terrible, if people who decry in action in rwanda and say how terrible it is there are these human rights violations taking place around the world and why aren't we doing something about it and they always look to the united stat
united states, why isn't the united states doing something about this, the most powerful nation on earth, why are you alone is terrible things to happen, and then if international community turned around when we are saying it is time to take responsibility and says well, hold on a second, we are not sure. that erodes our ability to maintain the kind of norms we are looking at. i know that was a lengthy answer. the conversation i had with president putin was the planetary recession, it was a candid and constructive conversation which characterizes my relationship with him. i said before everybody is always trying to look for body
language and all that but the truth of the matter is that my interactions with him tend to be very straightforward. we discussed syria, that was summarily the topic of conversation. mr. snowden did not come up beyond me re-emphasizing where e have common interest is important for the two of us to work together. and on syria, so don't expect us to agree on this issue of chemical weapons use. after the u.n. inspectors report it may be more difficult for mr. putin to maintain his current positions about the evidence. what i did say is we both agree the underlining conflict can only be resolved through a
political transition as envisioned by the geneva one and geneva to process. we had to move together even if u.s. and russia and other countries disagree on this specific issue of how to respond to chemical weapons use it remains important for us to remain working together to urge all parties in the conflict to try and resolve it because we have 4 million people internally displaced, we have millions of people in turkey, jordan, lebanon who are desperate and the situation is only getting worse. that is not in anybody's interest. not in america's interest, not in russia's interest, not in the interest of people in the region or in the interest of the syrians have seen their lives
completely disrupted. that will continue to be a project of hours and that speaks to an issue that has been raised back home around this whole issue. you've heard some people say we think if you're going to do something you have to do something big, maybe it isn't big enough or maybe it is too late, other responses like that. what i have tried to explain is we may not solve the whole problem, but this particular problem using chemical weapons on children, this one may have an impact on. that is important to us. what i have also said is as far as the underlining concerns, unless they're willing to put massive numbers of troops on the
ground, and i know nobody is signing up for that, we will not get a long-term military solution, and that is something that can only come about i believe as different as our perspectives may be, myself, mr. putin and others are willing to set aside those differences and put pressures on the parties on the ground. >> on the resolution to authorize th force, one of the big challenges right now is the public in but from some of your loyal democrats it seems the more they hear from classified briefings the less likely they are to support you. is the full congress doesn't pass this, we go ahead with a strike and senator susan collins, one of the few
republicans who give you support at times says what if you execute this strike and then he decide to use chemical weapons again, do we strike again and many democrats are asking that as well, how do you answer that question? >president obama: first ball in regards to the votes and congress, i knew this was going to be a heavy lift. i said that on saturday when i said we would take it to congress. our operations are pretty good. i tend to have a pretty good sense of what current popular opinion is. for the american people who have been through over a decade of war now with enormous sacrifice, any hint of further military entanglement in the middle east will be viewed with suspicion.
that suspicion will probably be even stronger in my party than in the republican party. since a lot of people who supported me remember i opposed the war in iraq. what is also true is that experience with the war in iraq with how people view this situation not just back home in america but also around the world. that is the prism through which a lot of people are analyzing the situation. so i understand skepticism. it is very important therefore for us to work through systematically making the case to every senator and every member of congress, and that is what we are doing. the dispute a little bit the notion people come out of classified briefings and are less in favor of it.
they feel pretty confident in fact, could weapons were used and the assad or jean use them. where you will see resistance is people being worried about a slippery slope and how effective the limited action might be. our response based on my discussions with our military is that we can have a response that is limited, disproportional that when i say limited is both in time and in scope but is meaningful on the ability to pick chemical weapons. not only this time but also in the future. serves as a strong deterrent. now, is it possible that assad doubles down in the face of our action and uses chemical weapons more widely?
i suppose anything is possible. but it wouldn't be wise. i think at that point mobilizing international community would be easier, not harder. i think it would be pretty hard for the u.n. security council at that point to continue to resist the requirement for action and we would gladly join with an international coalition to make sure it stops. one of the biggest concerns of the american people, certain members of congress may have different concerns, different numbers of congress who say we have to do even more or claim to have previously criticized me for not hitting assad saying they will vote no who like to
ask how they support that, but for the american people at least the concern really has to do with what we are describing would be limited. and this fortunate. addressing this problem of chemical weapons use, and norm that helps keep all of us safe. that is going to be the case i tried to make not just in congress but the market people in the coming days. >> in the senate and house does not, would you go ahead with it? president obama: it would be inappropriate for me to jump the gun and speculate because right now i am working to get as much support as possible out of congress, but i will repeat something i said in sweden when
i was asked a similar question. i did not put this before congress just as a political ploy. i put it before congress because i could not honestly claim that the threat posed by assad's use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians and women and children posed a direct threat to the united states in that situation obviously i don't worry about congress, we do what we had to do to keep the american people safe. i could not say it was immediately directly going to have an impact on our allies. again in those situations i would act right away. this wasn't even a situation like libya where you have troops rolling toward benghazi and you
have a concern about time in terms of saving somebody right away. this was an event that happened, the military assured me we could act today, tomorrow, a month from now that we could do so proportionally but meaningfully, and in that situation i think it is important for us to have a serious debate in the united states about these issues because these are going to be the kind of national security threats that are most likely to recur. over the next five, 10 years. there are very few countries who will go at us directly. we have to be vigilant, but our military is unmatched. those countries that are large
and powerful like russia or china, we have the kind of relationships with them that we are not getting in conflicts of that sort. at least over the last several decades has been a recognition of benighted country assets from that kind of great power conflict. so we kind of national security threats we will face our security threats, the proliferation of deadly weapons and in those circumstances, a president will have to make a series of decisions about which one of these threats over the long term starts making us less and less safe and where we can work internationally, we should reedit there will be times where as it is true here, international community stops for a whole variety of lyrical
reasons and if that is the case, people will look to the united states and say what are you going to do about it? that is not a responsibility that we always enjoy. there was a leader of a smaller country who i have spoken to over the last several days who said i do not envy you because nobody's expecting me to do anything about chemical weapons around the world. i don't have the capacity to do something. it is tough because people look to the united states and the question the american people is with that responsibility, but have a limited string like this, not putting boots on the ground, not long drawnout affair, not without any risks, but with
manageable risks, we should be able to bear that is possibility. >> thank you, mr. president. good evening. i think still good morning for back home. >>president obama: by tonight it will be tonight when we get back home. >> it seems these members of congress are simply responding to their constituents and you are seeing a lot of these town hall, and the more you press your case, the more john kerry presses the case on your behalf, the more the opposition grows and may be more the opposition becomes vocal, why do you think you struggled with that? we have a report that indicates you actually asked for an expanded list of targets in syria and one military official told nbc news characterized it as mission creep. can you elaborate on that?
president obama: that report is elaborate inaccurate. i will not comment on issues that are sourced by some military official. one thing i have a pretty clear idea about is with the chairman joint chief of staff about. and what we have consistently talked about is something limited and proportional that would degrade assad's capabilities. in terms of opposition, chuck, i expected this. this is hard, and i was under no illusions when i embarked on this task. but i think it is the right thing to do. good for our democracy, we will
be more effective if we are unified going forward, part of what we knew was there the politics interjected themselves. i said some. what i have also said is the american people have gone through a lot. going to the military last decade or so. i understand that. talk about chemical weapons, those images of those bodies can sometimes be forgotten pretty quickly. news cycle moves on. frankly they were not talking about the need for international response right now, this wouldn't be where everybody would be asking about.
there would be some resolutions for the united nations and hocus-pocus, but the world and the country has moved on. so trying to impart a sense of urgency about this why we can't have an environment of which over time people started thinking we can get away with chemical weapons use, it is a hard sell, but as i explained in this context, making sure the american people understand it before i take action. >> thank you, mr. president. one of her closest allies in the
house said yesterday when you have 95% of their constituents say it is hard to say yes, why should members of congress go against the will of their constituents support your decision on this? i still have not heard a direct response to the question, if congress fails to authorize this, will you go forward with an attack on syria? president obama: you're not getting a direct spots. she asked the question very we well. >> it is a pretty direct question. president obama: i will repeat, i put this before congress for a reason. i think we will be more effective and stronger if in fact congress authorizes this action. i am not going to engage right now whether or not it will pass.
when i'm talking substantively to congress about why this is important in talking to the american people about why this is important. now, with respect to congress and how they should respond to constituency concerns, i do consider it part of my job to help make the case and to explain the american people exactly why i think this is the right thing to do. it is conceivable at the end of the day i don't persuade a majority of the american people that it is the right thing to do. they will have to decide if i think it is the right thing to do for america's national security and the world's national security, how do i vote? that is what you're supposed to do as member of congress. you also have to make some
decisions about what you believe is right for america. that is the same for me as president of the united states. a bunch of decisions i make, as you well know, by do so because they are the right thing to do. i trust my constituents want me to offer my best judgment, that is why they elected me, that is why they reelected me even after there were some decisions made that they disagree with and i would hope members of congress would end up feeling the same way. last point i will make, governor. these kind of interventions, these kinds of actions are always unpopular. because they seem distant and removed. i want to make sure being clear i am not drawing an analogy to
world war ii other than to say when london was getting bombed, it was profoundly unpopular both in congress and around the country to help. it does not mean it wasn't the right thing to do, it just means people are struggling with jobs and bills to pay, they don't want their sons or daughters put in harms way. these entanglements for underway are dangerous and different. to bring the analogy closer to home, very unpopular. it was the right thing to do.
they should be glad they came together to do it. when people say it is a terrible stain on all of us that hundreds of thousands of people were slaughtered in rwanda, imagine if rwanda was going on right now and we asked if we should intervene in rwanda, i think it is fair to say it probably would not poll very well. when it is popular it is because i think there has been a very direct clear threat to us, 9/11. or an administration uses various folks to suggest
american efforts were directly threatened like panama or nato, sometimes those folks are more persuasive than others but typically they are not put before congress. we just went through something with respect to iraq, so all that provides context for why we might expect people to be resistant. >> the deputy national committee advises that it is not your intention to attack if congress does not approve it, is he right? president obama: i don't think that is exactly what he said but i think i have answered the question. major garrett. >> thank you, mr. president. those of us remember covering the campaign remember when the military acts it is not important what it does but how it goes about doing. even when america sets its course it is important to engage in the community and listen to
different ideas as pursuing that action. i wanted to leave here and return to washington scene skepticism there and here, any different ideas that might delay military action, for example some in congress have suggested giving the regime 45 days to sign the chemical weapons convention, get rid of the chemical stockpiles, do something that would enhance international sense of accountability for syria but delay military action. are you, mr. president, looking at any of these ideas, or are we on a fast-track military action as soon as congress renders judgment one way or the other? president obama: i'm listening to all these ideas, and some of them are constructive. i'm listening to ideas in congress, i'm listening to ideas here. but i want to repeat here, my goal is to maintain international norms on banning chemical weapons. i want that enforcement to be
real. i want is to be serious, i want people to understand that gassing innocent people, delivering chemical weapons against children is not something we do. it is prohibited to active wars between countries. we certainly don't do it against kids, and we have to stand up for that principle. if there are tools that we can use to ensure that, obviously my preference would be again to act internationally in a serious way and to make sure that mr. assad gets the message. i'm not issuing military action. recall i have been criticized the last couple of years by some
of the folks who are now saying they would oppose these strikes for not striking and i think i have a well-deserved levitation for taking very seriously soberly the idea of military engagement. so we will look at these ideas. so far i have not seen ideas presented that as a practical manner i think would do the job. this is a situation where part of the reason i want to foster debate is because everybody thought about what the ramifications of action. >> the only way to enforce the international norm is militarily and given the regime extra time would not achieve your goals? president obama: what i am saying, major, so for what we have seen is escalation
by the assad regime of chemical weapons use. you will recall several months ago i said we now say with some confidence a small level three has used chemical weapons. level assad has used chemical weapons. we not only sent warnings to assad but we send a strong message to countries that have relationships, that he should not be doing this. rather than total line we sell what we saw on august 21st. we haven't tested the proposition that the guy or at least generals under his charge show strength when it comes to this stuff and then have one of
the largest stockpiles in the world, but i want to emphasize that we continue to consult with international partners, of am listening to congress and if there are good ideas that are worth pursuing i will be open to them. i will take the last question, thank you. >> thank you, mr. president. yesterday night you had two unscheduled meetings with the mexican counterparts, strong concerns about allegedly targeted by the nsa. what was your message to them? after this summer, making it harder to build confidence with your partners in international forums such as this one.
>> i did meet with president u youssef and the president of brazil and mexico respectively to discuss these allegations. i won't share with you all the details of the conversation, but what i said was consistent with what i said publicly. the united states has an intelligence agency and our intelligence agencies job is to gather information that is not available through public sources. if they were available through public sources then they wouldn't be an intelligence agency. in that sense, what we do is similar to what countries around world do with their intelligence services but what is true is we
are bigger, we have greater capabilities, the difference between our capabilities and other countries, probably tracks the differences in military capabilities between countries, and what i have said is because technology is changing so rapidly, because these capabilities are growing it is important for us to step back and review what it is that we are doing, just because we can get information doesn't always mean that we should. there maybe costs and benefits to doing certain things and we have to weigh those. traditionally what has happened over decades is the general assumption was whatever you get you just pull in and sift
through later and try to figure out what is useful. the nature of technology and the legitimate concerns of privacy and civil liberties means it is important on the front end to say we will get useful information here and if not, how useful is that? if it is not that important should we be more constrained in all we use certain technical capabilities. more specifically on brazil and mexico eyes said i would look into the allegations. one problem is we get these through the press, go back and find out what is going on with respect to these particular allegations, i don't subscribe to all these newspapers although i think the nsa does.
and then i assured the presidents that they should take -- i take these allegations very seriously, and i understand their concerns, and i understand the concerns of the mexican and brazilian people and that we will work with their teams to resolve the source of tension. the last thing i would say about this, just because they are attentions doesn't mean it overrides all of the incredibly wide-ranging interests that we share with so many of these countries and there is a reason
why i went to brazil, there's a reason why i invited the president to the united states, brazil is an incredibly important country, it is an amazing success story in terms of a transition from authoritarianism to democracy, it is one of the most dynamic economies in the world and obviously for the two largest nations in the hemisphere, to have a strong relationship, that can only be good for the people about two countries as well as the region. the same is true with mexico. one of my closest friends, allies and neighbors. we will work through this particular issue. it does not detract from the larger concerns that we have and the opportunities we both want to take advantage of. thank you very much, everybody, thank you, st. petersburg.
stuart: news conference from st. petersburg, russia, dominated by a syria. it appeared to me the president is fully committed to a strike. he was trying to persuade members of congress back home and foreign leaders in russia to back him. how persuasive he was we did not know at this point. the stock market started out with a 95 point loss as the president began speaking. we are now down 60 points. the price of oil started at $109 when the president was speaking, now is 110 and the price of gold was up $12, now it is up 14. first reaction, monica, to this event? >> i kept thinking stop talking. whenever the president rambles he gets himself in trouble. this is how the got in trouble in drawing the red line to begin with. he was rambling during the press conference about syria. he rambled throughout this
entire pressor today and what he did was go pretty far out on a limb. i agree with you, in claiming that military action was absolutely necessitated by the use of chemical weapons. he has now it looks like committed himself so that is why you saw a series of questions from the press corps that congress decides to vote no against military action i use still committed to taking action? he refused to answer that which was a smart way of doing it but by continuing to drop his answers in questions of war and peace one thing i learned from my old boss was american commanders in chief should always keep their answers very tight, very focused and very brief. you never want to ramble and you never wanted to pure hand to the enemy as to what you are willing to do and what you are not willing to do. is president was all over the map. stuart: do you think the president was sufficiently persuasive to change minds at home? >> no i do not. don: stuart: going into this press
conference we had a vote count from abc news which says he does not have the votes in congress and another vote count from an organization on the left called think progress where he definitely does not. >> i don't believe he has the votes in the house. in a in the senate. i don't think he was persuasive enough. he has to persuade the american public about its international interests. i haven't heard anybody make a case for that including the president because i am not sure there's a case. cheese said quite the opposite. he said there is no american direct threat to the american public with respect to what is going on in syria today. stuart: do you think the president would act if congress says don't? >> very hard to do. i would urge him not to because -- stuart: he sounded very committed. >> leading up to the vote in the house especially geared towards the house, not so much the senate. he does what he has to do. >> he will address the nation tuesday night. you don't address the nation if you are not going to do anything
and when that was announced in the middle of the press conference that they would address the nation tuesday night, it was at that point the dow industrial average dropped to-145. >> so much has been unconventional. i don't recall ever having a president go to congress on matters of war and peace. it may have happened, i can't recall it happening. normally i think you are right but you are reading more into it because of the way it has been going on. it is not tight or constructive. i am not clear what is going on. stuart: vladimir putin of russia had bigger impact on the market because before the press conference began he said he is going to continue selling arms to syria in the event of a strike. >> there was a big chart going around the street the showed the russian ships already in the mediterranean, then news out today, another destroyer out there, their best flag ship in
the baltic sea heading out there. there is the chart, you can see where we are and where the russians are so when vladimir putin said i will assist syria, first thing, seldom arms or would it be more than that because this could mean a lot of things? the market plummeted, we lost 250 points before the press conference even began. stuart: sandra smith is in the marketplace. who will have the bigger influence on the markets today? was it vladimir putin before the press conference or president obama during a press conference? >> these markets never like when the president is talking. we always season sellout. that is playing into the picture but it was certainly vladimir putin when we turned on a dime, we have been higher on the jobs report this morning. vladimir putin said they will stand by syria in case of a strike, we pulled off 100 points in the dow, oil prices spiked sitting near their highs of the session, oil prices are back above $110 a barrel right now
and there's a flight to safety going on. people are jumping back into the bond market, yielding the ten year coming back down so arguably we saw everything turn around when vladimir putin said he was going to stand by syria but most of the traders we talked to when the unemployment report came out this morning was worse than expected and we got a rally on that most of them said expect the rally to be short-lived, you can't expect a stock market to sustain a rally on bad news so that is playing into the picture. stuart: many thanks. we now have the dow jones average down 32 points. when the press conference started we were down 95 or-145 at one stage. why have we come back? i put it to you that although the president seems committed to a strike he seems committed to a very limited targeted strike, maybe the market can deal with that. worse. if you indicate weakness through
limited strike that has no defect on assad or will degrade assad's ability to exercise chemical weapons and the use of those things and it doesn't and he strikes again with chemical weapons it ends up making the united states look weaker and worse off than if he never struck at all. it seems he put himself in yet another box. he is like a houdini character. he believes he can keep slipping and he can't. stuart: y address the nation tuesday night? charles: why have the summer for all summer long to give the president doesn't talk to his colleagues in washington d.c.. he tries to get the american public to go at them. she talked-about my constituents, my belief, my military. stuart: i got to take a commercial break. where's market in one minute. stay there please. g break thanks to her double miles from the capital one venture card. now what was mrs. davis teaching? spelling. that's not a subject, right? i mean, spell check. that's a program.
algebra. okay. persons a and b are flying to the bahamas. don't you need distance, rate and... no, all it takes is double miles. [ all ] whoa. yeah. [ male announcer ] get away fast with unlimited double miles from the capital one venture card. you're the world's best teacher. this is so unexpected. what's in your wallet?
stuart: the president's press conference tried to persuade people back home to support a strike and foreign leaders to support a strike. rich edson at the white house with a count of heads of foreign leaders with us or against us. rich: he has nine. this is a response from australia, canada, france, italy, japan, south korea, saudi arabia, spain and turkey saying
we call for a strong international response to the grave violation of the world's rules and conscience that will send a clear message that this kind of atrocity can never be repeated. stuart: did you say that the u.k. is on the list? britain? rich: they are not on the list. stuart: parliament voted against it so he has nine. thank you very much. let's bring this back home. what is the vote counting congress? >> steep uphill battle according to abc and some left-wing organizations like think progress, it looks bad for the president particularly in the house of representatives of words of 200 in the house leaning or a solid no. you only need 218 in the house to form a majority. in the senate, that is a closer run but in our house that looks like the house will vote no. stuart: we don't know how persuasive or otherwise -- >> doesn't look like he changed any minds. stuart: got to ask about the
markets. we dropped 145 points in the middle of the press conference and we are down 32. explained that. charles: the markets as the president rambled on began to think more about what the newsmen from the jobs report. and the fed will probably caper, and they will start to remove some accommodation before the year's over. stuart: you use the word rambles. the answer to the first question took thirteen minutes. and then run out the clock to the end of the show. >> he is treating serious as if it is libya which was not strategically important to the united states, didn't really matter. and syria, provoking russia, and also in iran. and maybe even world crisis. stuart: a question he would not answer is will we go, collapses, i thought -- he couldn't say
yes. charles: the american people to understand it before i take action. stuart: we will have more varney in a moment. arkets, a lot can happen in a second. with fidelity's guaranteed one-second trade execution, we route your order to up to 75 market centers to look for the best possible price -- maybe even better than you expected. it's all part of our goal to execute your trade in one second. i'm derrick chan of fidelity investments. our one-second trade execution is one more innovative reason serious investors are choosing fidelity. now get 200 free trades when you open an account. ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions...
stuart: he intonation backing the united states connection against syria, the u.k. on the list even of parliament said don't do it. the new job market today, big news. the unemployment rate came down to 7.3% but only because 300,000 people dropped out of the work force. a lot more low-paid jobs in retailing and leisure. a lot more of them and the number of new jobs created at 169,000. i am going to call that all week report. i say ben bernanke will keep printing a lot of money and that is why this market may turn around and go positive in the
next couple minutes. >> labour participation rate the lowest since august of 1978 when jimmy carter was president, if the labour participation rate went january of 2009 levels when obama became president the unemployment rate would be 10.8%. charles: i agree. we have a real crisis among young people, particularly among young white males. no one is talking about it. they have given up on this economy and the american dream in droves. the same month, august of 1978, white participation rate for teenagers in the job market was 62.7%. this report, 35% from 62%. stuart: unemployment went up 20%. our time is up but it was a very big day and dagen mcdowell, is yours. dagen: held much of this can we blame on baby boomers retiring? you never know. etna and the baby boomer and not retiring yet.
dagen: nothing about you and your work ethic. it is dollar. thank you so much. stuart varney. mean time president obama saying assad's use of chemical weapons friends global peace but the next move for the white house, the president is taking to the airways come tuesday. 169,000 jobs added last month and more bad news as labor force participation rate hits the 35 year low. and incredible way to kickoff the nfl season. peyton manning and the denver broncos get major revenge on the baltimore ravens for knocking them out of the playoffs last year. we look at the whole season ahead and we are talking about it this hour, markets now. ♪ the only bad thing about the game last night was ryan ccrest. they opened