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.