It's becoming clearer than ever that the Democrat party is only interested in supporting certain kinds of successful women who happen to hold progressive values, says Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Like speaking in tongues, I have no intention of meeting with Judge Barrett her catholic faith, a core value and central to questions on how she would rule on issues like abortion. The whole process has been illegitimate. I will not meet with her Ainsley. This leaves our next guest asking what happened to Democrats supporting women here now Fox NEWS, contributor and author of the book, assault and flattery, the truth about the left and heir war on women, Katie Pavlich, hey Katie Good Morning, good, to see you Ainsley good to see you too, I read your article in the hill and excellently written. Tell me why you chose to do that. Well, we have heard for decades that Democrats are the party that are supportive of women and as Amy Coney Barrett Judge Barrett goes around Capitol Hill trying to meet with senators to show her record and qualifications, not because she is a woman but based on her history in the judicial system
and as a professor, you know we are seeing that they have no interest in supporting her either as a candidate for the Supreme Court or as a woman who is breaking a glass ceiling. There have only been five women nominated to become Supreme Court justices and its becoming clearer than ever that the Democratic Party is only interested in supporting certain kinds of ambitious and successful women and those kinds of women happen to hold progressive leftist values. Now Judge Barrett is the opposite. When she gave her speech at the White House accepting the nomination from President Trump to be the next Supreme Court Justice should she be confirmed. She gave credit to justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for leading the way and being a pioneer for women in the legal field, and yet we are not seeing the same coming from Democrats on Capitol Hill, who constantly claim that they are the Party for women Ainsley. I know that is shocking. You are absolutely right: Ruth Bader Ginsburg we wouldnt
be able to have a create card katie without our husbands signature. She changed so many laws for women. You have this b dot. U, professor, that called her a colonizer and saying she is using her two adopted haitian kids as props contribute writer for Vanity Fair, how Barrett could be a loving mom and a judge if the shoe were on the other foot. If this were a right professor, at b dot? U what would happen if this were a progressive or leftist judge? Who was up for the nomination sob, the next Supreme Court Justice and the fifth woman to ever be on the court? There would be extensive, think pieces about sexism and systematic sexism in the american system and how we need to change as a country. The reason I mentioned Justice, Ruth Bader, Ginsburg and the reason justice or judge- excuse me Barrett, mentioned Her- is that they didnt they have very different policies
positions when it comes to things like abortion and the constitution, and yet they were able to come to some kind of intellectual agreement about promoting women. Yet here we are with Democrats on Capitol Hill, like Senator Dianne, Feinstein or Senator Chuck Schumer saying they are just not going to neat with her, although she is making history, and so if the shoe were on the other foot, there would be glowing profiles of this woman cover of vogue cover of Time magazine as woman of the year. Yet we are seeing the opposite. We are seeing disgusting vicious attacks on her decision to adopt two children from Haiti. We are seeing attacks on her faith. We would not be seeing that coming from Republicans on the other side, who have a history of voting for Supreme Court nominees that are put up by democratic presidents Ainsley you write in your article. Our children obviously make our lives very full. Then she goes on to say, while she is at home, she is a room parent, a carpool driver and a birthday party planner.
Transcript generated on 2020-10-17.