>> this week on "q&a," our guest is conservative commentator and author katie pavlich, the news editor of townhall.com. she talks about current issues and her most recent book, "assault and flattery: the truth about the left and their war on women." >> katie pavlich, a couple of weeks ago, the president of turkey said the following -- "you cannot put women and men on an equal footing.

it is against nature. they were created differently, their nature is different, their constitution is different." >> i think the president of turkey has some interesting thoughts when it comes to women and he certainly doesn't think they are equal in turkish society. in the united states we have a different standard for what equality means for women that isn't that comparable to that in the middle east. >> what is your sense of the balance between men and women? >> i think he has a point in the sense that men and women are created differently, in the sense of their biology, the way they think and do things, the careers they go into, the things they are drawn to -- but in terms of what men and women can do, i believe that women can do the same jobs as men and that we are not created unequally when it comes to the opportunities that we can pursue, and the kind of work that we can do. >> how is it that someone who is 26 has already written two books?

>> i moved to d.c. fresh out of college, and i really got my feet wet and worked really hard and said yes to a lot of things. i have been very blessed with lots of opportunities that have come my way. politics is my passion. i have done a lot since i have been here on presidential campaigns, i have covered scandals, lots of different things inside the media. it has really been a good time to be in d.c., to be a journalist and writer. i always joke with people about living in washington because i say it is dog years. you pack so much information into a day, not to mention a year. you get to learn a whole lot. my favorite part about my job is really seeing history in the making. >> in late summer, your book came out, "assault and flattery." where did you get that title? >> it was a brainstorming session. i came up with it myself. after a lot of different

changes, that was the last one i came up with and the one that stuck. we had a couple of names before that but they weren't as powerful as that one. the reason it is "assault and flattery" -- there's literal assaults that happen to women, but also flattery, because that is false praise and compliments for one's personal gain. that describes a lot of what's in the book and how women are treated by the left. >> you dedicate your book to mary pavlich robie? >> she was my great aunt. she passed away about 2 years ago. she was really a pioneer in her own right. she was the associate athletic director at the university of arizona, in a time when women weren't held and high positions. she was a feminist of her time and a pioneer in the sense that she did things women hadn't done before.

she took on the athletics department, and she did it all by maintaining her lady status and being a lady and she always had so much class. i looked up to her and she played a big role in my college career. she was there throughout my whole life as a strong, prominent female figure. i miss her and i thought a lot of what was in this book she would relate to. >> you went to the university of arizona? >> i did. >> here is the second person you dedicated the book to. >> i detest every single one of the domestic policies. >> i think that the honorable gentleman knows that i have the same contempt for his socialist policies as the people of east europe who have experienced it. i think i must have hit the right nail on the head, when i pointed out that the logic of the policies -- they would

rather that the gap was that. [shouting] down here. not there. so long as the gap is smaller, they would rather have the poor poorer. you do not create welfare and opportunities that way, you do not create democracy that way. >> why margaret thatcher? >> i think her words speak for themselves. she was a pioneer in her day. she did phenomenal things for the freedom of not only her country but for the world as a whole. she took on people with grace and class. even people she disagreed with were laughing with her. she had a sense of humor and she really was an amazing role model of women everywhere, a perfect

example of strong leadership and a strong woman, who was very good at making arguments, and was very good at taking on the evils of the world and evil men of the world. i think we saw that with the cold war. she definitely played a big role in my political perspective and i think she left a big mark on history as a strong, powerful woman. >> you have a warning at the front of your book -- i will read it. "due to the vulgarity of many democratic leaders, as well as the so-called women's rights groups that defend them, this book contains language suitable for mature audiences only, or at least those with strong stomachs." why did you feel the need to put that out front? >> there are plenty of examples and stories in the book about democratic men from top to bottom, engaged in sexually explicit activities with women against their will, sexual abuse and sexual assault, and the

women's groups who claim to be the ones that represent all women, who do things like dress up in costumes that are inappropriate and display things that aren't necessarily the best way to make an argument. a lot of that is detailed. i wanted people to know that i talk about things that are very straightforward way. i am not going to sugarcoat it like the media has and i am not going to make excuses for the kind of behavior and the kind of language that is used. it is not me saying these things, it is me quoting women's rights groups and activists and detailing stories about sexual abuse inside public office. >> your chapter titles, among other things, you have "inside the real war against women," "profiles and liberal misogyny," "the women they don't want to know," and then you have "the c-word." how much of that was calculated to get people's attention? >> it was to get peoples' attention and also draw attention to the language and tactics these groups were using. the reason i decided to write

this book came after being on the 2012 campaign trail. i was following both the romney and obama campaigns, in the reason this book into light was because i was sitting at the 2012 dnc convention, and at that time we had already seen the left take on this war on women argument, accusing republicans of hating women, and yet at this convention, after sitting there listening to speech after speech of war on women, not only did you have sandra fluke speak that night, and then bill clinton, but in between the commercial breaks and newscasts, they played a seven minute long tribute video to ted kennedy, and have the words "women's rights champion." at that point i figured the war on women argument had gone on long enough, and had been monopolized long enough, and

someone needed to do something to point out that ted kennedy was anything but a women's rights champion, considering his history with women. that was something that spurred this book. >> terry mcauliffe is a close friend of bill clinton, the governor of the state of virginia -- here he is in 2014. we are running this so you can pick up from what he says. >> there cannot be a starker contrast between the two candidates running for governor. [applause] i want everybody to know where i stand on the issues -- i'm going to fight for women every single day. a woman who works the same job gets $.78 for a dollar that a man makes. you work the same job, you are going to get paid the same

amount. [applause] i will not let them shut down women's health centers and take away their rights. i am not going to stand for it. you help me for the next six months and i will promise you i will be there every day for you. >> your reaction? >> terry mcauliffe, yes, now the governor of the state of virginia. the statistics that he quoted in his speech was the $.78 on the dollar -- it has been thoroughly debunked by many economic studies. even women's rights groups look at the studies on women's pay. the pay gap is a myth. it is something that the white house used to get barack obama elected. it is something that terry mcauliffe used to get himself elected. that plays on this idea that women are somehow discriminated against in the workplace and they are not paid the same amount as men when they don't explain that the $.78 on the dollar figure actually comes from a lifetime of work, not comparing one job that a woman

is doing and an equal job that a man is doing. it comes after a lifelong of work. when you look at the details, women tend to work less over a period of a lifetime because they make different choices. because they are working less over a lifetime, they make less money. but instead the left has successfully taken that argument and been very dishonest about where that figure comes from and try to tell women that they are discriminated against, and that the government is going to step in and make things equal for them. really, we have come a long way since things were unequal in the workplace. women are getting paid as much as men are, in the workforce. they are not being discriminated against based on the fact that they are female. >> what is your full-time job? >> my full-time job as a news editor for townhall.com. >> do they pay you equally? >> yes. >> what is townhall.com? >> townhall.com is a conservative media outlet.

we have a columnist page that is filled out everyday. my role as editor is to make sure we cover stories that people are interested in. i have also done a lot of different work, including columns, reporting, and investigative work. we have a team of about 10 and we have expanded over the past couple years. our main focus is writing and reporting, and analysis. >> you used to be owned by the heritage foundation. what can you tell us about your new owner, salem communications? >> they are a large company that bought us. we were started in the 90's at the heritage foundation and was turned into a for-profit is this when salem purchased it. it is a christian company they own lots of media outlets. there are a lot of big radio hosts, and they have the website spectrum.

now we have a publishing company, which published my first book. salem is a big media company and it has expanded from radio to online in the past couple years. >> one of the questions i have is that this book is published by threshold. but it is owned by simon & schuster. are you surprised they would publish a conservative book like this? >> they are actually very tolerant and the kinds of books they publish. the people were great to work with and my editor -- it was fun to work with him on some of the issues and the challenges that we went through and that he brought to my attention. the arguments and counter arguments that were made.

was happy to work with them and i thought the process went really well. they have different divisions for different kinds of books. the spectrum of material is wide there. >> let's go to chapter four. "cretins of camelot." who were the cretins? >> the men of the kennedy family. you look at the history of the kennedy family and the men, and it is not just one generation of disrespecting women, not only within their family but as a whole. i think joe kennedy set the stage with his treatment of his wife. you look at the consequences for the behavior of the kennedy men, and they have very severe

consequences on the women in their lives -- many committed suicide or were depressed. then you have the women who were abused outside of the kennedy family, including mary jo. she was killed in a car crash. she was loyal to them and willing to help them and yet he left her to cover his own tracks. if you take a hard look at the kennedy family, they have a long history of domestic abuse. i think that is something that is upheld as an example of american politics and something to be celebrated, as they still do. i think we should still be talking about them in looking at their history.

hundreds of affairs, lovers on the side, abusing women as if they are disposable. it is something we should take a hard look at and discuss. >> cretin #1 is the patriarch, who you write was not comfortable. the man who gifted the world with america's family and always had higher ambitions. most consistently, in bed with anyone other than his long-suffering wife. you weren't even around when he was alive -- how do you know all this? >> there is plenty of extensive research to be done on the kennedys. through a lot of research, you can find out a lot about the diaries that have been released, some of the stories that were told about jfk inside the white

house. stories that are told by aides close to the kennedys. they are still upheld as this family that should be celebrated and glorified, and they had a very heavy influence in american policy. i wasn't around but i still think it matters, especially as a young woman in politics. when i see the left glorifying these people, you have to take a look at their history. >> cretin #2 is john fitzgerald kennedy. "if and i don't have sex every day, i get a headache," he was told a member of his cabinet, so he decided not to take any chances. >> jfk was consistently running

around on his wife, including inside the white house while she was there. the disrespect and level of arrogance and shameless behavior, and yet we can take a look at jfk's policies outside that, but he is held up as this perfect figure, and that is the same party that has been championing women's rights and women's equality and women's dignity, and yet this is the kind of person that is glorified. he set the stage for that kind of behavior. >> you do mention the media -- the book that was written by -- she had an affair with jfk. how much coverage did this get in the country when her book came out? do the media pay attention to it? >> they paid a decent amount of attention to it, but there weren't really consequences when it came to stupid decisions that

democrats made. i am not -- the kennedys do get a lot of attention from the media, even though they have these discrepancies. the question is not at this is being covered, the question is that democrats will continue to uphold the family that really has a bad history when it comes to the treatment of women. >> ethel kennedy got the middle of freedom. freedom. cretin #3 is her husband, said to be more timid and family oriented. it is a shame that robert f kennedy joined a long list of unfaithful men. you suggest that he had an affair with jackie kennedy. >> that was done outside of my research.

>> do you believe it? >> i reported on it, so i do believe it based on the history of the kennedy family. i certainly believe it was a possibility and it has been reported multiple times by significant sources, put forward by people who were close to the kennedy family. it has been reported in multiple outlets. there is plenty of evidence to show that that was a possibility. >> you thank your editor over the issue of the kennedys. was a difficult of his standpoint to include all this? >> i don't think so. i don't think it was necessarily difficult. i think we had some disagreements about what is fair game and what isn't. but my editor was very excited about the book and thought it was a good idea. he thought it was important to get out there.

>> cretin #4 is ted kennedy. >> i was doing research for this book and decided that if i'm going to do research, i need to do a lot of reporting. i wanted to attend the national organization for women conference in chicago. the only way you can do that is to become a member or go through the press. i e-mailed and tried to get in as a member of the press, and considering i've done all this work in washington -- and they denied my credentials as a member of the press, despite being a female member of the press interested in learning more about the con rents and the people involved in their organization. i got the e-mail the day before and i decided to go anyway. i discovered that the only way to attend the national organization for women

conference is to become a member. so i became a member. i have been a member since 2013. i have been a member ever since. >> i they are nonprofit? >> i believe it is a 501c3. they certainly act like they are in politics. they heavily endorsed certain political positions, that feel like candidates. there are the details of what you can and cannot do, but they always certainly happen to fall on the last, endorsing women who have a different perspective. >> what is your problem with ted kennedy? >> it goes back to the idea of where this book came from, the

dnc convention where they were showing distribute video. him as a women's rights champion, when he left a young woman to drown in his car. if he had not gone back, and try save his own behind, she would have probably survived. you can do an entire video at a --can't do an entire video at a convention claiming to be preaching and fighting about the war on women, and glorify someone like that while not including that part of his life in a video about his women's rights record. i think that is something that should be discussed and something that people should be reminded of. ted kennedy has gotten a pass on claiming when he is for women and yet he left one to die in his car and didn't pay that big of a consequence for. he didn't run for president, but he was also glorified by the democratic party up until his

death. if they want to continue to glorify him i think we need to continue to criticize him. >> let me show you the other side of this. this is from june, 2009. the former governor of south carolina, mark sanford, now congressman. >> i have been unfaithful through my life. i have developed a relationship with a dear friend from argentina. it began very innocently, as i suspect these things do, in a casual e-mail back and forth, advice on life. recently, over this last year, it developed into something much more.

as a consequence, i hurt her. i hurt you all. i hurt my wife, my boys, friends, a lot of different folks. all i can say is that i apologize. >> what is your reaction when you see mark sanford -- a conservative district, it didn't seem to bother the people down there. >> he was the governor at that time, and i think we remember when he came out to talk about this. i'm not defending republicans. the difference here is that mark sanford is not being glorified as leader of the republican party. he is not being glorified at rnc conventions like bill clinton would be, who of course goes around the country campaigning for candidates. mark sanford is not doing that. i am not defending the misgivings of politicians in general.

there are plenty on both sides of the aisle. the difference is that the media has a higher standard for republicans. those types of people are necessarily glorified at a level of bill clinton are ted kennedy, idolized in the way they are. >> the republicans are accused of being holier than thou, moralistic, christian -- and then they do things like this and they are still reelected. >> i think that america in general is a very forgiving country. they forgive democrats and republicans for their misgivings, and they do forgive republicans who come from more conservative districts for the mistakes they make. but i think the difference is the way the media treats them and the issues that they claim to be fighting for. when you have people like bill clinton, who was accused of sexual assault, who was part of a movement on the left that

claims to be fighting rape culture, objective indication of --objectification of women, it is difficult to stomach because they don't add up with it comes to the people they vote for in the things they claim to stand for in terms of women's equality. >> here is another republican, a different kind of a controversy, but it is in the same area we are talking about. he is going to run for governor of louisiana. >> to louisiana, where david vitter made his first public appearance tonight in a week. he was caught up and what has become known as the d.c. madam sex scandal. he is one of the senate's most conservative members and has long campaigned for legislation as part of his platform for strict family values. last week, he admitted in a statement that he had made some serious mistakes. tonight, the senator and his

wife spoke for the first time since. >> republican louisiana senator david better, accompanied by his wife, made his first public appearance today since admitting one week ago that he had been linked to an alleged prostitution ring. >> i want to again offer my deep, sincere apologies to all those i have let down and disappointed with these actions. i am completely responsible, and i am so very, very sorry. >> you also have some harsh things to say about eliot spitzer. what is your reaction? >> my reaction is -- i am not justifying the actions of republicans. my book is about discussing things with the media that the left doesn't want to talk about, in terms of saying they have these positions about the dignity of women, when the

issues are really only abortion and contraception, and they tolerate these things and allow these people to continue to run their party. it is not upheld -- he is not upheld as a hero of the republican party. i certainly have no stomach for him or anyone who behaves in that way. i think prostitution is a horrible situation for women to be in and men who take advantage of it should be scrutinized and condemned. but these things happen on both sides. the issue is that in 2012, barack obama's campaign use the war on women campaign to turn the election, and that is where this idea came from, and they didn't based on promising false it based on promising false things, using false statements, like terry mcauliffe did, using and hinging more than any campaign in history.

the book is really an argument about the whole pushing back on that and pointing out that they don't practice what they preach and they talk about women in one way in public differently than they do treat them behind close d doors. >> it is well-known that hillary clinton was a hated, divisive political figure, considered a liar by people on the left and the right, until her husband's cheating made everyone feel sorry for her. >> i think that is absolutely true. she was not a popular person in washington before the bill clinton sex scandal began cropping up. before he ran for president and during with monica lewinsky. hillary clinton built a career on playing the victim card and getting to where she is now. for someone who claims to be fighting for women and standing

up or women, we can talk about women we can talk about her most recent history of the state department where she didn't address allegations of sexual abuse of minor girls overseas by ambassadors working inside the state department. some were deliberately retaliated against for speaking out against sexual misgivings and abuse. there was a lot of abuse that hillary clinton never addressed and tried to brush under the rug. then there was that story from "the free beacon," where she laughed about getting someone off charges. we can look at a career that was putting up with a philandering husband when you look at her own record for being a champion of women and girls, her record says opposite.

>> how calculating is your language in the book to get people to agree with you? i will give you an example. it shouldn't be this easy for them -- just look at the crowd of creeps and liars who leave the democratic -- who lead the democratic party today. i'm not just talking about bill clinton, the alleged rapist whose wife used her husband's embarrassing pattern of sexual misconduct and assault to launch her own political career, nor am i referring only to that notorious house of horndogs, the kennedy family." can i see you sitting at your typewriter thinking, the more strident i am -- >> i think what you just read is accurate. i think it is all very true. when you write a book you want people to buy it, obviously, but

i think the language speaks for itself and the language used is accurate. i don't think it is nonfactual. it is heavily documented, the actions of all those people, like the mayor of san diego, and nancy pelosi helped cover up his abuse of female veterans who had been victims of rape in the military. awful stuff that people on the left went out of their way to cover up for years until finally they couldn't do it anymore. the language is there because it is accurate and it is time people stopped sugarcoating it. >> how often have you personally come in contact with people who are oriented in this town to this kind of a lifestyle? >> i spend a lot of time outside of washington, d.c. this kind of thing happens all the time on both sides of the

aisle. but i do not come into contact with that type of behavior because i choose to spend my time outside the beltway. >> who were your role models beside your aunt? >> my mother played a huge role in my upbringing in life. she is a strong, independent woman who started out her career working for a railway and npr. she went off to be a professor at northern arizona university and then decided she was a private sector kind of gal. she has been a person to look to for paving your own way and doing things with strength and dignity and confidence, and really taking risks. she is certainly someone who i look up to. other role models that are

necessarily female -- my father, of course. my boss at townhall has served as a great example of how to run an organization, how to allow employees to pursue their own interests because it is beneficial to the company as a whole. he has allowed me to pursue different opportunities, which has been helpful to me. he has been very helpful. i had a professor who was helpful in the sense of navigating the college campus atmosphere, determining how i wanted to move forward. they helped to develop me into who i am. i wanted to go into politics and go into journalism and learn how to do those things. there are a lot of them. i am very grateful for all the people who have come into my life to show me things.

when i was growing up, i remember watching the press secretary of the white house and saying, i want to be a press secretary. now i get to work with press secretaries. i am very grateful for that. there are lots of different people i have learned from and looked up to, and also the people i don't necessarily agree with who have taught me great lessons. i think those people are also important. >> you quoted that you might the thinking about running for senate in 2022. >> john mccain is running for reelection in 2016, but if he's not around i might take a shot. what's the difference between your politics and john mccain? >> will when i say defend the border i actually mean it. there is a whole other topic, differences between myself and

john mccain. i think a lot of arizonans are tired. his wishes are not coming true. >> here you are in a speech back in july of this year. i believe july 19. the western conservative summit, talking about something called cronyism. >> the establishment, whenever there is a new idea that comes up from the grassroots, it is immediately put off. i see where that comes from, because when you have been in power for 30 years, you feel threatened and you don't want that power taken away. going back to the point i made at the beginning, you have to take a serious look at where the fight on the right comes from.

there isn't that big of a difference between republicans and democrats and i think it is time or big government republicans to take a hard look at the way they are voting and the way they are in bed with crony capitalism. [applause] that is really easy for people who have been in the senate or in congress for 30 years, to say new ideas aren't going to work, when i don't think washington is working very well. >> what is wrong with crony capitalism? >> oh, everything. that doesn't allow the free market to work. it makes it almost impossible for new ideas and businesses and innovative ideas to come up through the economy and through the system. it is a real problem when you have the government in bed with big corporations.

those corporations are never going to go away. that is something people on the left and right have in common in terms of really taking a look at the relationship between the federal government and contractors, and also big banks, or car companies. it doesn't allow the little guy to function, and that is what the american dream is all about. we are seeing the government now working directly with insurance companies and mandating that people have insurance. the insurance companies love it because everyone has to buy insurance. i think it happens on both sides and i think we are going to have a huge problem when it comes to falling into that same trap of claiming they are all about the free market, but when it comes to the people they are working with inside d.c., scratching

their backs for a campaign donation for policy they can use. i think it is a problem that needs to be solved by limiting government. >> with you think mitch mcconnell will be as leader of the senate? >> there is a long list of things he wants to do in terms of -- to do. in terms of crony capitalism, i'm not sure much will be done about it. i think he has a long list of other priorities ahead of dealing with crony capitalism. >> in 2012, "morning joe" talked about something you write about in your book. let's get your reaction. >> president obama drew a contract between -- the president's reelection campaign

just launched the life of julia, a fictional character. tell us about her. >> one of the things that people do is create viral content for the web. this is one that maybe viral in the wrong way, that is a lot bigger on the republican side than it is on the democratic side. of the life of julia takes her from age 3 to age 67 and everything will point along the way, the government is giving her a hand. it helps her get student loans, helps her get a business loan, she is a web designer, and in the end the government helps her with retirement so she can work in a community garden. >> do you remember what your reaction was when you first saw this? >> i remember my reaction as a young, single woman who the obama administration was trying

to target, of being completely appalled and offended that they would ink that a young woman --think young woman like me needs the government to subsidize my life from cradle to grave. what they don't explain in a life of julia is that a life of dependency -- what it was trying to portray was that dependency is empowerment when it is exactly the opposite. depending on the government for everything limit your freedom and opportunities and quality of life. there was no doing things on your own, it was doing things from a government that doesn't care about julia. i write about this in the book. where was the life of john? why is it that the obama campaign only felt like they needed to make a life of julia and that women are the only side of the gender spectrum that needed to be helped along the way?

i thought it was dishonest, detrimental, not a portrayal of what life is really like under complete dependence of government, and quite frankly, it was sexist. they didn't produce a life of john. >> did it work? >> i think the life of julia backfired but i think as a whole it got more women. i don't think the life of dependency was that effectives in gaining voters. i don't think that voters really want to go to the government for everything. when it came to targeted issues like contraception, that certainly works. it is turned on the right to argue that they wanted to ban contraception which was a complete fallacy, and brought up into the national debate by

george stephanopoulos. targeted issues with government handouts and government doing things for women, i think that was thoroughly rejected. >> the right gets very upset about the mainstream media and the politics of the mainstream media. but if you look at salem, the head of salem ran for congress once. many are on radio stations all the time for candidates. if you get so upset about the mainstream media, why is the right-wing media doing the same thing? >> i think there is a difference between conservative talk radio and journalism, because the washington post and the new york

times parade as middle-of-the-road, moderate outlets that don't have a bias, when really, everyone has a bias. i just wish we would all be honest. i am a conservative writer and reporter and i am happy to offer opinions but i am also very interested in pursuing -- even though where i am coming from is a more transparent way then pretending like the new york times and washington post do, that they are straight news when we all have biases and biases can come in many forms. i as a conservative reporter and --am probably going to cover the

food stamp issue differently than a liberal reporter. that is not necessarily because we are thinking on an agenda, it is because we think of that issue differently, we are wired differently than the opposite. i think some outlets can stay moderate, but in general, the biases on both sides and i think if we can all open up about it and understand where we are coming from we can have a more honest debate. >> you write about doyougotinsurance.com. in that copy, it says he's hot, let's hope he's as easy to get at this birth control. what is this? >> this is an advertising campaign, put out by a far left

group. they were trying to promote obamacare and the "free" contraception. people behind the fat were male, ad were male, into me, this advertisement completely does the opposite of what feminist say they want, it objectifies women, defining them by the pills they take. it is offensive and a huge step back in terms of how we think of women and why you would portray women in the sense of they are only interested in getting someone in between the sheets. i feel like it is the opposite of what the 1960's feminism was supposed to be about and certainly what the early 1900's feminist movement was about.

if the left is going to argue that you can't objectify women then you can't have progress colorado putting out advertisements like that, showing women as only useful for one thing. >> here is another one, brosurance. it says, "keg stands are crazy. not having health insurance is crazier. don't tap into your beer money to cover those bills." what is the point of this? >> this campaign was put out trying to get young people into the obamacare exchanges. the healthy young people are supposed to be subsidizing the sick and less insured people, therefore they need these people to be buying insurance. but the reason why this is ridiculous is because this portrays young man as buffoons, and it shows this irresponsibility of not wanting to prioritize your spending.

instead of buying that extra case of beer you should maybe buy your own health insurance. it really comes down to the left saying to young people, don't worry about prioritizing and being and adult, just pay into this system that will be subsidized by taxpayers. it is a distraction from what they are ultimately trying to do, take away personal responsibility. >> to your book came out in july but in this book you read about bill cosby. >> in the news recently we have seen that bill cosby has come back into the news because of some allegations of sexual abuse and rape throughout the course of his career. i wrote about him in this book this summer, far before these new allegations, which are really old allegations which are coming to light. i talk about him because i talk

about him and his overall argument about how hollywood objectifies women, how they treat women, seeing them -- when you look at the stories that are told about how directors treat young girls, the kinds of think they're going to portray and the careers they are expected to have, and when they have a situation where someone like bill cosby -- they are told to shut up and be quiet because hollywood is protecting the old boys club. there are a lot of women in hollywood who have experienced the situations. i wrote about bill cosby because he was given a pass for a long time. maybe this time he won't be given one. hollywood has a habit of pushing bad behavior by powerful men in the industry under the rug. behavior is not only condoned

but they have been celebrated and defended by people like woody allen. the kind of people who they uphold as liberals are supposed to be fighting for women, and treating women as more than sexual objects, and they are actually doing the opposite. >> you quote whoopi goldberg as excusing the instant of roman incident of roman polanski. "i know it wasn't rape-rape, it was something else." >> this goes back to what we discussed earlier about how it is a standard -- how the standard for republicans is much higher than it is for liberals. goldberg is an example. you have a republican say "rape-rape" and he is condemned.

she isn't held accountable for that and it is not just that she wasn't held accountable, it's that -- hollywood as a whole unit not as "rape-rape" even though it she was underage and that allows it to happen again. women aren't willing to stand up to that behavior and say, it was rape, it was wrong. >> another thing you write about is "girls." why has lena dunham been so popular? >> her discussions about treating her sick sister and acting like a sexual predator --

she describes it in her own book, luring her sister into doing strange things. before this point of controversy she had gotten a lot of attention because she does things for sex. --affect. she writes things, she appears naked a lot inside her show. she portrays trays young women in a way that is helpless, needy, unsuccessful. she are traced this disheveled life as something that should be celebrated, as of living off your parents is ok. she did it for the shock value, but at some point shock value runs out. i think people are holding her accountable now. >> when in your life did you know that you were a conservative? >> i get that question a lot.

i think that i always knew. i think it was a kitchen table kind of thing. they never sat me down and describe the differences. but they were talking about things affecting our family. i was hearing in learning these things as an observer, but i do know that when i was six, i wrote a letter to bill clinton about tax policy and explained to him that it was unfair that he was spending our money. whether i knew what are not, i was passionate about the subject of politics and interested in how certain policies affected my family. >> you talk about single women covering political campaigns, noticed the tactics used to woo female voters are similar to the dating world. then you say democrats pull up in a shiny car, offer false compliments. they try to impress by throwing around lots of cash. they lied to you and tell you

they are interested in you, but really they're interested in using you before they move on to the next woman. they bank on you thinking with what is between your legs instead of what is in your head. they end up driving off with another girl in the shiny car they can't afford." what do the republicans do? what's the difference? >> [laughter] it wasn't necessarily dating a liberal, it was comparing the behavior of people who can't afford something to impress you but are just interested -- it talks about the reason it is called "assault and flattery." the obama administration has been good at that. obamacare was sold to women as this amazing program that we give them more access to health

care, more access to doctors, cheaper insurance, when we have seen the exact opposite. we have seen premiums increase by as much as 100%, 7 out of 10 doctors retiring early, we have seen the networks of doctors who are available that are available to women shrink. they came forward and said you were going to get all these free things, they wooed women into voting for them, and now this piece of legislation has had a detrimental effect. >> we will not hold you to this, but if you were to -- your instinct today as to who will be president in 2016, who do you think it will be? >> well, can i give you a couple

options? i think that hillary clinton is going to run, i don't think she is going to win. i think she is a bad candidate and we have seen that over the past few years. i don't think she is as great of a candidate as people are making her out to be. on the republican side, who i want to see as president -- i like scott walker. i like bobby jindal. i think they would make good leaders, good presidents, that their executive experience would be much more helpful in terms of cleaning up the messes made over the past eight years, that maybe someone who has just been in the senate. >> what would your reaction be if jeb bush was the candidate? >> my reaction would be republicans would lose. >> why? >> if you look at the pattern in history of republican candidates, a lot of candidates

were similar to jeb bush. i think jeb bush, although he has some good things to offer, doesn't have a lot of support the conservative base. he is a candidate very similar to the one before. a lot of baggage comes with his last name and i don't think the country is going to vote for another bush. >> katie pavlich, news editor of townhall.com. her book is "assault and flattery." thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> for free transcripts are to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q-and-a.org. they are also available as

c-span podcasts. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> this month is the 10th anniversary of q&a. featuring an encore presentation from each year, highlighting authors, and publicly fingers. from 2005, kenneth feinberg on the victims compensation fund. from 2006, lonnie bunch on the importance of the african-american experience to u.s. history. from 2007, robert novak on reporting in washington. from 2008, renew couture on the value of education in america. and from 2009, as he called.

a decade of compelling conversations. 26th -- 22nd through the 26th. >> care is a look at programs on christmas day on the c-span networks. holiday festivities start at 10 p.m. eastern with the lighting of the national christmas tree, followed by the white house christmas decorations with his lady michelle obama. p.m., celebrity activists talk about their causes. former, samuel alito and florida governor jeb bush on the bill of rights and the founding fathers. eastern,2 at 10 a.m. venture into the art of good writing with steve pinker. then see the feminine side of a leporero as jill explores the history of wonder woman. on american history tv on c-span3 at 8:00 a.m.