republican to vote no voted present as a favor to senator steve daines who is in his home state for daughter's wedding. final vote 50 to 48 and the president tweeting out after that vote, i aclaude and congratulate the u.s. senate for confirming jom knee brett kavanaugh to supreme court. later today i will sign his commission of appointment and he will be officially sworn in very exciting said the president and that commission is a formal legal document making the justice's appointment official, he will be signing that on the road because the president is on his way to kansas to campaign for candidates there this evening, the supreme court putting out this statement that the honorable brett kavanaugh will be sworn at 102nd associate justice on october 6th, later today. chief justice john roberts will administer constitutional oath

and kennedy will administer judicial oath in private ceremony. both oaths will be administered so they begin in the court immediately. we want to get to your reaction to votes today. here are the democrats 202-74-8920, 202-74-8912 and independents, 202-74-8922. richard wolf covers supreme court, both the constitutional and judicial oath will be administered today in a private court ceremony roberts does one and kennedy does the other, same for gorsuch. latter in the rose garden. watch for white house ceremony likely on monday for judge kavanaugh and then the judge will be sitting on the court as early as tuesday, the court not

in session on monday, he could be sitting -- hearing oral arguments as early as tuesday, jeff who covers the wall street journal tweeting out, justice kavanaugh will be sworn in today allowing him in his four law clerks all women to begin work at once. john who covers, who writes for the pew research centers fact blog tweeted this out, the narrowest confirmation to supreme court senate expanded to 100 members, since senate expand today 100 members. 50-48, clarence thomas 52-48. nile sorry guch, -- neil gorsuch while 62 senators voted in favor of elena kagan.

we are will go to michael what is in springfield, new jersey, michael, good afternoon, what's your reaction to this vote, michael? >> i couldn't be any happier. >> host: tell us why? >> caller: democrats reached a new low and thank god for president trump who stood behind them. he made it through. i mean, what they did to this poor man and his family and if anybody that has any normal sense doesn't know that this was a complete scam on the liberal side they need to stop drinking the kool-aid, i couldn't be any happier, if i knew where he lived i would go over and shake his hand brett kavanaugh, i should say supreme court brett kavanaugh. >> we just heard mcconnell shortly after the senate went out and he said that he talked to a couple of his pollsters,

political strategists and they told him this is turning our base on fire, are you motivated to vote in the midterm elections, 31 days away because of this? >> caller: absolutely. we need to keep -- it would be nice to have the congress at least if we keep the senate, the next appointment again will be picked by president trump and hopefully it'll be ginsburg would be next so absolutely. >> host: okay, let's hear from joe who is in california, democrat, joe, you're on the air? >> caller: yeah, i don't understand why all of these republicans are so ashamed by being taken by a con man that runs this country now, straight up con man, not enough people brought up merrick garland and how long they held him up. was he associated with sexual assault or what about neil gorsuch, everyone knows he came from the same school, same area

but was he, you know, convicted or even -- the whole sexual assault thing, it's unbelievable. donald trump talks about the democrats and a con, takes one to know one, takes one to know one. you know, merrick garland thing, that's just unbelievable how it's just unbelievable. >> host: joe, as a democrat do you blame your party for brett kavanaugh getting the votes? >> caller: no. i do not blame democratic party. i'm glad -- i live in california and i wish i could go to other states and travel. i have to work every day but i wish i could go to other states and travel and talk to some of these republicans. i have three sons, i don't have any daughters, i tell my sons, if you don't do anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.

i don't -- i don't get it. if you're -- if brett kavanaugh was so innocent -- >> host: okay, you know what, joe, i'm going to stop you right there. we are going to brett kavanaugh's house, he's making his way to the suv's that are parked outside of his door, presumably on his way to the supreme court to be sworn in by the chief justice. >> caller: that's a shame, that's a shame. >> host: we are watching here, we saw him just make his way out of the house, the suv door is opening, let's just watch and see if we can get a glimpse of the next supreme court justice.

>> host: brett kavanaugh leaving his home with his daughters and looked like his wife we assume on on his way to the supreme court where the court tells us they'll be private swearing in ceremony, delivering of two oaths, one by the chief justice john roberts and the other by retired justice anthony kennedy. look at the scene outside of the court right now.

we understand hundreds of protestors blocking the road as you can see. they've been up on the capitol grounds for days. hundreds arrested the other day and we understand dozens and dozens arrested today as well. as you heard during the vote, the protestors were in the gallery disrupted the vote at least 5 times, one woman taken out by her hands and legs. listen in on the protests at the supreme court for a little bit as we wait for more of your calls to come in. your reaction to the final vote, 50 to 48 in confirming judge brett kavanaugh. >> i want to remind you dr. king's work? [cheers and applause] >> we have to vote and make it

do so. [cheers and applause] >> that's what we have to do. we have a next step. that next step is coming up in november. [cheers and applause] >> invite you to stay with us to make sure -- [inaudible conversations] >> are you with me? [cheers and applause] >> i've got you, we've got each other. y'all, we are going to stick around tonight? >> host: seen outside of the supreme court after the u.s. senate voted to confirm judge brett kavanaugh to the supreme court, he could be sitting as --

looks like he will be sitting as early as tuesday when the court resumes this term, oral arguments and we are getting your reaction to that this afternoon, democrats (202)748-8920. republicans (202)748-8921 and independents (202)748-8922. hi, elizabeth. >> caller: hello. >> host: what's your reaction. >> caller: my reaction is it would have been a different outcome if dianne feinstein would have let the republicans know when they received the letter so they could have worked together and started an fbi investigation right then and there and they would have had months to go through it all instead of making a big spectacle on tv and causing all of this. oh, my god, all of this trouble because i think the democrats

made it worse for themselves and they thought they had an acn the pocket and let this be a lesson to them. the next time they better take a closer look. >> host: elizabeth, could i just ask you, what does this -- how does this impact your view of washington, d.c., the whole process? >> caller: i'm brand new to politics, i have never really been involved so i'm infant to all of this, from my point of view, i think that the democrats are just digging a whole deeper and deeper for their party because of the way they act on tv, the way they act in the congressional hearings, the things they say say especially attacking the republicans and doing these paid protestings with everybody all over the place getting paid to protest and they're just -- they have to stop, if they want people to come back to their party, they

need to stop all of this, they really need to stop because nobody thinks that that's -- that it's acceptable for their behavior. attacking people in restaurants when they are eating, they, you know, everybody has a right to go to a restaurant or eat, you can't get in their faces and run them out of places like maxine waters, cory booker, talking about getting in people's faces. >> host: can i ask you in a scale 1 to 10 how motivated are you to vote in november? >> caller: i wouldn't miss it for the world. >> host: are you going to vote republican? >> caller: yes. >> host: okay. shannon bream tweeting from fox news, will administered constitutional by justice roberts and kennedy for whom kavanaugh clerked today so he

can get to work immediately. let's go next to mark in florida, republican, hi, mark. >> caller: hey, good afternoon. thanks for what you do for our nation with c-span. awesome job, by the way. >> host: you bet, mark, you're on the air, tell us your reaction. marks, you there -- mark, are you there? >> caller: can you hear me? >> host: yes. >> caller: unique irony of having for the first time in our nation's history a majority of supreme court justices, 5 of the 9 being roman catholics, i think it's a point that has not been -- enough, i think it's a counterpoint of a really dark day in nation's history. 1978 with passage of affirmation of roe v. wade where only one

catholic served on the court. i think personally this is a turning point for human rights in the nation and the world, life, god will be the choice and the direction of our nation in the future. so it's a great day to be american and it's a great day in history. >> host: okay, all right, mark, derrick mueller, associate professor of law tweets out this, the current make-up of the court, current active supreme court justices, one appointed by george w. bush, one by clinton and two during george w. bush and two from obamas and so far president trump two justices sitting on the court as well. craig kaplin with c-span tweeting now, i had a quote from the majority leader during news conference. i had a chance to talk to kavanaugh and congratulate him on victory and also the president.

this is a good day for america and important day for the senate. we are getting your reaction to what happened in the senate this afternoon. missouri, texas, a democrat, you're on the air. >> caller: well, i don't agree with the previous person that made the comment. i think it's a very, very dark day for americans to have elected brett kavanaugh as supreme court justice. i no longer any respect for the supreme court. i think any cases that are taken to the supreme court, none of them -- none of them will be identified to be in the affirmative. everything is going to be negative. now the democrats did a wonderful job in trying to let them know who and what we were going to put on the supreme court, but the people were more to want to believe what the

republicans wanted to do. the republicans don't stand for women and they don't stand for democracy. .. ..

until to end and she decided to vote no against the judge. they will both appear on 60 minutes, duane in pair a kansas, a republican, hi dwrien, gj. >> what's your reaction here? >> okay, first off, i have three daughters, two of them were raped at a concert: those two girls both prosecuted they're attackingers, they remember everything that happened that

day. even though they had a little bit to drink. but, to say that ford had forgotten everything is ridiculous. she may have been raped, but it wasn't kavanaugh. two. the supreme court is not elected as your texas person said. they are appointed by the president. if the democrats cannot get together enough to pass legislation, and have to go to the court system to get their laws passed then they better start figuring out a better way of getting people to vote for them. that's pretty much it. >> guest: okay. robert barns tweeting out supreme court

reporters, they so no press at kavanaugh swearing in. similar to samuel let o's swearing in. others have been teleadvised. frank in north an dover, massachusetts, independent caller frank, hi. >> caller: how you doing? >> guest: tell us what you think of the vote and the whole prost >> caller: i think this is upsetting. i'm an independent. i voted republican but that president who is a clown. i don't think this is good for the country. i think democrats or republicans -- not going to help us. with this keep going forward. it's sad. i hope that both parties can come together and this president doesn't help it. thank you. >> guest: all right frank. sherry in new york, democrat, hi

sherry. >> caller: hi, i was raised republican, and i generally vote democratic because i vote for who i think is best. whether or not you believe dr. ford is kind of irrelevant because the way he behaved at the hearing was inexcusable. they should never have allowed somebody like that to be on the supreme court. >> guest: and what specifically sheary? >> caller: treating people like they don't -- he's much better than them. the supreme court is supposed to be there to help the a americans. it's not supposed to be there to stomp on somebody politically and unfortunately the supreme court has become very political. >> guest: is there anything that soon to be justice kavanaugh or the justice's or the chief

justice john roberts could do to change your mind? >> caller: he could behave himself. but i doubt it. you've got an alcoholic on the supreme court. it's like you want -- he goes i like beer. yeah i like beer too but i don't sit there and drink like he said to have drunk in college and high school. that's just wrong if he can't even own up to it, then he needs to behave himself and he needs to follow the law which he seems to think is up to him to make up. >> guest: okay. sherry in new york, a democrat caller. we're going to take more called coming up but we want to show you what the majority leader had to say. he answered questions from reporters. here it is we'll come back after and take more of your called. >> i always thought -- were boring

imaiz. i had a chance to talk to justice kavanaugh and congratulate him on his victory and also the president. this is a good day for america, and an important day for the senate. we stood up for the presumption of innocence. we refused to be intimidated by the mob of people that were coming after republican members at their homes and in the halls. i couldn't be prouder of the senate republican conference. we also want to thank senator magneticsen for helping us, and with that i'll be happy to take a few questions. >> you talked about this has been a dark period and you hope after this vote you can turn the page to a brighter day. i'm interested based on what we've seen from both parties -- how

did you get to that point. >> sorry to interrupt you. we've seen both sides of the senate during the same period. during the same period we were having a huge argument of the supreme court. we passed an opioid bill, and a five-year faa extension we completed doing. the best job on apropriations in 20 years. so we were both able to have a big robust fight over something both sides felt deeply about and still work together on other issues at the very same time. >> you have had concerns and -- they were really mad. >> these things always blow over, and i think even though there was anger expressed during this fight, as i just said at the very same time, not very newsworthy for you guys because they won by big margins, we were doing important things together that hadn't been done in a long

time. >> how two questions for you. how do you view what in texas is going to have on the -- >> i called on the woman behind you. >> do you have any concerns about democrat -- from the time white house and the senate that they can confirm a more partisan to support us in the future? >> well, a little historiy lesson. i've given this to you guys before, but the executive calendar was done on a majority basis until bush 43 got elected always. even though it was possible to filibuster, it wasn't done. so this notion of filibustering executive branch points is a relatively new thing. and invented ironically by my counterpart, the democrat

leader of the senate who began to encourage the democrats to use fill busters against circuit court appointments during bush 43's first term. you saw this evolve through different phases over the next 15 years, leading us right back to where we were before. and there were plenty of contentious nominations when the filibuster was possible. the best example of that, clarence thomas's confirmation. came out of committee with a negative vote, went to the floor, was confirmed 52 to 48, and all of you know it only takes one senator to make us get 60 votes. nobody did. so we are simply back to dealing with the executive calendar on a simple majority basis as we did for 230 years down to bush. and i don't think this is going -- and you know it will advantage

the other side at some point as it always did down through history. >> what do you think the impact of this will be on the -- and going forward do you think this has long or short-term ramifications for the party? >> it certainly had a good impact for us. our base is fired up, we finally discovered the one thing that would fire up the republican base and we didn't think of it. the other side did it. the tactics that have been deployed by democrat senators judiciary committee, and the virtual mob that's assaulted all of us in the court of this process, has turned our base on fire. i was talking to two of my political advisers yesterday about the avenge these guys by their tactics have begin to us going into red state competitive raise. wee pret excited. they managed to

deliver the only thing we had not been able to do which was get our folks fired up. the other side is already fired up. >> do you think there's any long-term ramifications, and women who view the party, and women -- >> sen. mcconnell: you mean women like senator collins, and fisher, and height smith, and senator earnings? this was about treating someone fairly. this was about evidence being relevant. not about unsubstangsiated charges. >> senator we heard several of your colleagues say that the country needs to heal, the senate needs to heal, do you think that the country and the senate need to heal after this and if so, what are you going to do to make that happen. >> sen. mcconnell: i'm finished reading john meech m's latest

book, a trip through history and the challenging periods we've had. this is nowhere near as challenging as some of the experiences we've hadnist past throughout our history. the senate and the country will get past this. we always do. the geniuses who put together this constitution knew what they were doing, and we've had plenty of low points in our history and i think this is nowhere near the lowest points we've experienced the mccarthy era. the rise of the clan in the 20's after woodrow wilson premiered birth of a nation. in the white house. we've had other low points, we always get past them >> you mentioned senator collins, democrats are saying she is their top target for the -- what can you say about. >> sen. mcconnell: she's my top priority too.

>> lindsey graham had an interesting when he said setting the standard he himself would not consider the supreme court nominee once to 2020 presidential primaries would begun. would you take the same? >> sen. mcconnell: let's talk about 2016 i'm glad you brought it up. you'd have to be back to 1888. to finden the last time a senate controlled by different party than the president filled a vacancy created during a presidential election year. i knew full well based upon what joe biden had volunteered in 1992, and chuck schumer and harry read had volunteered in 2007 that who controls the senate when you have a vacancy that close to the election makes a big difference. it's not a doubt in anybody's mind i'm sure that if the shoe was on the other food in 2016, and there

had been a republican president making a nomination to a democratic senate it would not have been affiliated. we'll see what it looks like in 2020, first do we have a vacancy, second who's in charge of the senate? >> if there was another vacancy, if ruth bader ginsburg were to leave the court, would you -- >> sen. mcconnell: of course. >> will you try to encourage more of the female republican women to join the judiciary committee? >> sen. mcconnell: that's a good question. we've encouraged our women senators to go on the committee, and i intended to do that again at the beginning of the next session. their particular priorities have not -- there's been no effort to avoid it. i've tried to encourage them to do it. obviously without success and we'd love to have one of women senators on judiciary, hopefully that will be the case next year.

thanks a lot. >> that was the majority leader from earlier today after all of the republicans except for two voted for judge brett kavanaugh the two that didn't vote for him, one was senator lisa murkowski of alaska who who opposed the nomination voted president, and then steve danes who was in montana for his daughters wedding. this is what senator steve daines tweeted out earlier today. does this count? >> mr. deigns, aye, mr. deigns, aye, mr. donnelly. >> so senator danes there in montana at his daughters wedding. standing before the tv, and watching the vote take place. he voted yes. he wasn't there, senator lisa murkowski

paired their votes together. that allowed lisa murkowski to vote present. she is on the record opposing the nomination of brett kavanaugh. we saw the judge leaving his home on the way to the supreme court. he will be given the scowgzal oath, a second oath administered by retired justice anthony kennedy this is the second clerk of kennedy's according to richard wolf to serve on the supreme court. we're getting your reaction to all of this this afternoon. and we were earlier showing you the protesters that have left the court and they went over to the -- they left the capital grounds. they have been outside the supreme court today, and you can see that hundreds of people over there, according to -- 164 people arrested during demonstrations,

including 14 in the senate gallery, according to capital police, and many of those arrested disrupted the vote several times this afternoon, when the vice president was prez-iegd over the court. lynn, in los angeles, an independent. hi lynn. >> caller: you have a nice show you do a good job. >> guest: what's your reaction to this vote? >> caller: i've been watching cable news network at cnn, and for the last three hours. the whole thing is just a dam circus. my one question is, and maybe you can help me with this if witnesses for dr. ford were

offered and presented to the fbi to pursue within that one week they were allotted by the one senator who suggested they follow-up on judge kavanaugh's past and behavior with -- well ms. fod before she became doctor. what were the fiive men doing? >> guest: i don't know the answer to why those people were not questioned by the fbi. why do you think -- and lynn why do you brink it up? and. >> caller: it just disturbs me because people with the fbi you

think would if they were handed a lead on a silver platter as the fbi men were, they would have gotten on it in person by phone, by any method they could choose. and apparently none of the witnesses who offered to corroborate at the time ms. ford's assault alleged assault, by mr. kavanaugh the then mr. kavanaugh, why was nothing done about it? why weren't these leads followed up on? that is the one thing that was mentioned that really disturbs me, and in closing i will continue to vote independent.

>> guest: all right lin, chris, in hawaii, democrat. chris what the do you think. >> caller: first of all i'd like to address the issue of the fairness of this whole process. the republicans and general public of this country cannot see that the republicans continue to be blamed. the democrats were a scwarys or a sham. procedure. people seem to forget that. when obama had a nominee available for 10-12 months they refused to give him a hearing. that aside, the american people should be ashamed on both sides for republicans and democrats. secondly, it's sad to say that this country is only going backwards in the past two years,

set us back 100 years, and they're sitting amongst us, as citizens and it's sad, and as a vet to defend the democracy that i did makes me wonder was it all worth it. right now we have no democracy in this country whatsoever. >> guest: you heard majority leader mitch mcconnell say it will blow over. >> caller: blow over, i don't think so. i think it's time for a constitution amendment -- that's going to take. the diversity amongst us has been driven to our hearts from day one after the current administration -- >> guest: okay chris. well kevin daily with daily caller tweeting out the current ages of supreme court justices. ruth

bader gins bugger, 85, clarence thomas, 70 years old, samuel let o, 68, the chuj john roberts, 63 years old, brett kavanaugh, 5 3 neil gorsuch, the youngest justice there, 51 years old. st tweets this out. this is new, the president in phone interview this afternoon with the newspaper said lisa murkowski will never recover for voting no on kavanaugh. the people from alaska will never forgive her for what she did. some of you might have seen this yesterday, the hill news reporting on it. sarah palin tweeting out after murkowski opposed brett kavanaugh i can see 2022 from my house. >> caller: hi. i would like to bring forward the couple of facts. can you hear me?

>> guest: we're listening. >> caller: i have tweeted every senator and asked them why when they have a letter from two people that claim that they were the ones that accosted ms. ford, why that letter was never brought forth or those two witnesses. also the other thing is, i have also asked them several times why it is that ms, and lost her home in judge kavanaugh's mother's court why that has not been brought frd. >> guest: that's been fact-checked. i encourage you to go to the washington post page and look that up, let's go to john, california, independent.

>> caller: hello. thank you very much. first and foremost, i'm a very fierce independent. i'm ex-military, i'm retired navy. i have a young daughter who is a prosecutor in california. in the appellate division. i'm a fierce independent. i first and foremost listen to what people are saying and i think this country is going to serve. mr. mcconnell, say the things that happen in the past were worth reflection. i lived through the 60s. this is more political than anything else. do i think mr. kavanaugh should have been nominated or approved? yes i do. because the facts as they were presented didn't meet the burden of proof, and what happened here is i feel the democrats freetd political theater, the actions acyou educations in the democrat eyes took on relevance as fact.

when you look at sexual victims and sexual crime victims stereo typically it's a single person saying a man did this to me, something happened. what was unique in this case dr. ford said that but said here's four witnesses that backed me up. she treuvd the witnesses. yet when they went to every one of the witnesses none of the witnesses could back her up. i thought in the simple a matter of law and that you're innocent until proven guilty, i didn't think judge kavanaugh should be put to that standard of being guilty -- i didn't think it was good at all. i think the democrats have created a lot of political -- and unfortunate that they were willing to sacrifice principles of the constitution. sacrifice principles of law to which have their infinite goal which was not to let the court turn right i don't have an opinion on it.

y but the fact of it is the sitting president enjoys a privilege of nominating supreme court justice. and they ran a candidate, hillary, the candidate was not popular. the campaign choices she made, she didn't win the nomination. she didn't win the presidency. she lost. the privileges of republicans. i don't think the democrats did on any good legs, and i one last comment i'd like to make. i rarely here this in the press: we hear the democrats constantly talk about supreme court. the republicans are doing this, and doing that. if we look at mr. trump's administration and he does many things i'm not crazy about. but if we look at what the outcome to me the most valiant, significant, long-lasting outcome of the trump administration, if i'm a democrat i'm looking there

negatives is going to be a 26 federal judge he's appointed and more are to come. now as i said i don't have -- i want to answer a question to the democrats. why did that happen? that happened because when the democrats were in the minority in 2013, and they were the majority excuse me. and couldn't stand to play fair, and couldn't stand the republican minority would not cooperate with him. they changed the filibuster rule. so already we don't need approval. when the democrats lost the power of the senate before they went out of office they forgot to go back and change that rule. so the consequence of the democrats, they're complaining about the consequences. that the democrat party is suffering today are the results of their own actions. >> guest: o got it. will you vote for diane feinstein in

november? >> caller: the answer is most likely no, and it historics on going back to rule of law. i am extremely disappointed that she held the letter for 60 days. she's a very stat revving woman, a politician above the fray but i don't see how when she's participating as a democrat in the political theater that she didn't knowingly understand what the consequences of a, not putting the letter out in time for a investigation, and b, mentioning it late in the campaign as a last-ditch way to throw rocks in the gears, so to speak. >> caller: john in california. a voter, and diane feinstein's state. she is up for reelection in november. she tweeted out confirming brett kavanaugh in the face of credible allegations of sexual assault that were not thoroughly investigated and his belligerent partisan performance undermines the legitimacy of the

supreme court. lipsy gram a member of the the judiciary committee. republican of south carolina, tweeting i just spoke with judge judge kavanaugh congratulating him to serve on associate justice on the supreme court. i told judge kavanaugh i was happy he was recognized for the good man he is, but sad the process was so despicable. rita in nebraska, democrat, we're getting your reaction to the vote, and the process what do you think? >> caller: well, for an instant i'm embarrassed by our nebraska senator who are republican they voted for judge kavanaugh. i thought they would be more indiscriminal ninety eight. and i think it's a sad time in the history of our country to have a shoddy limited fbi investigation which the president reluctantly ordered after repeatedly being asked. i resent the crooked hi-income people who feel imiementd, entitled. and this is the quote i want to say. where there is smoke, there is fire. this judge kavanaugh will be found out.

things will come out about him, and they will be proven that he is guilty as charged. >> guest: mark in anoaca minnesota, what do you think? >> caller: i watched the whole thing. can you hear me? thanks for taking my call. i watched the whole thing today and i'm really excited. i'm glad that kavanaugh got confirmed. i'll tell you why i'm excited because this is if you want to look at the long run, this is a step in healing our nation. for the last several many years, we've been -- had nothing but separation thrown in our face. separating democrats, separating republicans, separating people by color, by religion, by sexual orientation, whatever. there's

been so much talk about separating the people. and unfortunately, it started a lot with that beard thing and the professor and the cop by president obama. and i'm sorry to say this, but ever since that there's been nothing but a pole to separate people. republicans have been blamed. the white american christian man has been blamed for misogyny, for racism, for this, and that and the other. so much by the media. and by democrats. and you know what? i'm a white american christian male man that works real hard to take care of his children and his grandchildren who happen to be mixed babies, and and love their daddy very much. the problem of it is that the democrats want to blame other people for what they have

actually done. or what they believed is what's right to be done. and the shameful thing about it is that they don't look at the evidence. you can't sit there and accuse somebody of doing something that they didn't do, have no preponderance of the evidence to prove anything. everything proves opposite of what kavanaugh was accused of, but yet you're still going to believe he did this to this woman. >> guest: i will leave it at that point. we will be taking your calls tomorrow morning on the washington journal as well. the this evening the president is on his way to kansas. he will be campaigning for house candidates there, as well as gubernatorial candidate crisco bach for governor there. he'll be rallying at 7:00 p.m. we'll have coverage on c-span, c-span.org, and then after will be showing you floor speechgz frump earlier today. thank you all for your calls

this afternoon. thank you for watching. >> you're watching book tv on c-span # it. with pop books and authors every weekend. book tv, television for serious readers. >> this year book tv marks our 20th year of bringing you the country's top non-fiction authors and their latest books. find us everything weekend on c-span 2 or online at book tv.org. . the c-span made the long journey to hawaii for the 39th stop of our 50 capitals tour. join us all weekend to watch our visit to hawaii on c-span, book tv and american history tv. we'll feature stops across the

hawaiian islands, showcasing the beauty and literary culture of the 50th state. >> pulletser pride winning author is our guest on in-depth at noon eastern on sunday. the most recent book the seek retcord. the other novels are march, people of the book, and the year of wonders. watch in-depth fiction edition with author geraldine brooks on book tv. be sure to watch in-depth fiction with author jody pekoe, and author brad meltser will be our guest in december. on book tv on c-span 2. >> sunday night on afterwards, new york magazines rebecca on her book good and mad, the

revolutionary power of women's anger. she's moverred by it author of eloquent rage. >> i'm a feminist journalists part of my work as long as i be been doing it has obviously been rooted in anger. you wouldn't be a journalist writing about inequity. about racial inequity if you weren't mad about it from this perspective. so obviously there's been anger undergirding my work for a long time. when i decided i was going to write this book on anger and i thought about how it played into my work, one of the things i could do when i look back was see the pains that i had taken early in my career to on secure that anger. because i had absorbed the notion if i was too angry i wouldn't be heard clearly. i wouldn't be taken seriouslily, i would sound hysterical, radical, even the rr most baby feminist

writing i did was not very good most mild pop-theminism. when i think about the if comments i got back then. a lot of them were rooted in you sound like a crazy, sex-starved woman who's mad because men don't like you. when i was writing pop commentary about paris hiltedden. what the response was you're too angry for me to take your seriously. even when i was covering up the anger with jokes, and slyness and a general good cheer. >> watch afterwards sunday night at 9:00 eastern on book tv. >> that's all this weekend on c-span # 2's book tv. for a complete schedule visit booktv.org.