rights in 1968 as part of c-span's 1968, america in turmoil series. ♪ host: good morning. on capitol hill this week, the senate foreign relations committee will vote tomorrow afternoon on the nomination of mike pompeo for current cia director to become the next secretary of state. he b could become the first nominee to go to the full senate without the majority of support from that committee sinc. french president emmanuel macron in washington this week. he will be at the white house tuesday before a joint speech in front of congress on wednesday. it is sunday, april 22.

we want to be in with one perspective on the republican party. little rights, "once the party of house speaker paul ryan, the gop is now the party of donald trump." do you agree or disagree? our phone lines are open at (202) 748-8000, (202) 748-8001, and if you disagree, you can join on the conversation at facebook. thanks very much for being with us. we will get to your calls and comments. news overnights -- beginning with a ami bera took place in afghanistan -- news overnight beginning with the bombing that took place in afghanistan killing at least 31 people. another 54 wounded in the attack. the bomber targeted civilians that had gathered to receive identification cards.

the explosions shattered windows from the damage site and police blocked off all windows at the damage site. only ambulances were permitted. "new york post" writes that the taliban denied any involvement. the bombing was likely carried out by the local islamic state affiliate. 31 dead after a bombing inside in afghanistan voting center. the story from abc news -- three people dead and several injured at a shooting at a waffle house overnight international. -- near nashville. three are confirmed dead and several more injured after the shooting that took place this morning. nashville police confirmed the three people were shot and killed in the incident that took place at 3:30 a.m. local time in tennessee. four others were injured in a shooting. the hospital has accepted three of the injured patients, all of

whom are in critical conditions. that is this morning from abc news. we want to turn our attention to the republican party. is it now the party of donald trump? this is a piece from "congressional quarterly." ,ean writing the following "from the rise of the party in 2010 and the freedom caucus led ouster of speaker john boehner, o trump's divisive primary campaign two years ago, the republican party was tearing out it seems. now paul ryan is departing on his own accord. him.up toppled and whomever republicans choose to replace him will either like the statute arrival trump atop the party or won't want to." joining us now to sean. what led to your conclusions? guest: one speaker ryan resigned, i also covered the

departure of speaker boehner. i was very struck by the contrast where as speaker boehner had departed under the duress, he was under salt by conservatives and members of the freedom caucus who were upset about federal spending, about government money going to , and wererenthood demanding that he take a tougher stance at that time when barack obama was president. this time around, you have paul ryan departing in very different circumstances. his caucus has been very united this year. they have not gotten done as much as they wanted, but that's largely a result of the senate and the difficulty of getting bills pass through the senate. they did have a big achievement of course with the tax legislation. departure,n's

without a coup and discontent within his own caucus, it struck me about this really was a personal decision on his part and he was being for right about that -- forthright about that. his departure leaves donald trump really as the foremost person in washington, the foremost republican in washington. he is a strikingly different type of republican than paul ryan. host: let me bring in some news from over the weekend. back in 2012, donald trump endorsed mitt romney. we are now familiar with the speech that mitt romney gave in 2016 in which he was very critical of donald trump, calling him a phony. now he is running for the senate seat in utah, being left vacated by the retirement of on orrin hatch. utah delegates forcing mitt romney into a primary election.

politicalours of elbowing and shoving at the utah republican convention held at the hockey arena, delegates forcing mitt romney into a primary election against the state representative mike kennedy in this u.s. senate race. mitt romney came in second and representative kennedy came in with 51% of the utah convention delegates. you need 60% to bypass a primary. the primary will take place later this year. is that emblematic of where the republican party is at right now? guest: it's an interesting case. of course, mitt romney has lived in massachusetts for many years and was governor of massachusetts. there may be other factors at work in utah in terms of the difficulty he is having in securing the senate nomination. but he's also one of the foremost anti-trump republicans in the country. in a state like utah which was very skeptical of donald trump

despite republican leanings would not seem to be a bad thing, but the anti-trump side of the republican party has just not done very well elect poorly electorally and you have jeff flake, who is also been anti-trump person, retiring in large part because it's likely he would not be able to win reelection. viewed poorly in public opinion polling. that's also true of love corpora of tennessee, who is also retiring and facing a difficult reelection. it's just that the base of the party has really come around to president trump. he is very popular with republican voters. his approval rating among them is around 90%.

when you ask republican voters if they would rather have congressional candidates more like president trump or less like cam, it's three to one. they want more like president trump. nost: we are talking with shaw zeller. mitt romney said he was not yet committed to the reelection of donald trump and 2020. some developments in utah as that moves to a two-person primary. cq roll point from call, a survey of republicans and do they want their candidates for the house and senate to be more like trump? , 18% said not sure and 22% said less like trump. what does this tell you? guest: exactly. that's a three to one difference in terms of the republican voters who want candidates more like president trump. why we a huge part of

are not seeing more republican members of congress willing to contradict the president. they cannot cross a portion of their base that is so large and so powerful. as a result, i think even the trump skeptics in the party -- -- if know there are many they disagree with many of his policies on things like trade and immigration, those republicans who are more in the traditional business wing of the party. they also don't like his style. they are not willing to cross him. i interviewed several for the story and the magazine and several in places where they might be critical of president trump and not one of them was willing to criticize him on the record. host: he is the deputy editor of "cq" magazine. the gop --rump and

you can also read online at rollcall.com. thank you very much for being with us. guest: thanks for having me. host: do you agree or disagree with shawn zeller? our phone lines are open at (202) 748-8000 if you agree and (202) 748-8001 if you disagree. his point of view is now that it's donald trump party. barbara is joining us from alaska. go ahead please. caller: yes, i did not know i was going to be allowed to speak , but i did not care for president trump c in any way, shape, or form. i do not think you should be in office. knowpersonal experience, i s hishe can't keep him hands to himself in his personal life. inon't think you should be

charge of the country could . i don't think he has the intelligence and demeanor needed to run our country. host: how would you describe yourself politically? caller: i am more of a democratic independent person. should point out you are phoning from the city where sarah palin once served as mayor, correct? caller: yes, and i did not vote for sarah palin either. host: thank you very much for the call. is it donald trump's party now? if you agree, (202) 748-8000. if you disagree, (202) 748-8001. send us a tweet including this, who says, "funny thing is not that long ago trump was not even a republican." here's one senate candidate running in indiana to challenge senator joe conley to give you a sense of how this is playing out across gop primary politics.

[video clip] >> here's the truth. we are not going to be joe donnelly with a rhino. he is a lifelong democrat. he voted for obama or hillary. wow. plotted with the never traverse to steal the nomination for president trump. you've got to be kidding me. and i willkita proudly stand with my president and mike pence to drain the swamp. i'm todd rokita and i approve this message. host: one senate candidate in the primary battle. sandy beach says, i see that we are busy this morning ginning up the favorite subject, chaos and the gop. we are not saying that at all. we are asking whether it's donald trump's party. there is this. "trump does not leave the gop. he does not leave much at all. he is mostly talk." welcome to the conversation. caller: i think my military back

ground as a chaplain in the united states army, i want to give a point of view from the military. host: ok. caller: we have commanders in chief as great as george herbert walker bush, who is a master administrator. i met the man and i served under his tutelage. other people are here in ohio that were equally as great. hims a rhodes, i worked for , michael the line, and john glenn. here comes mr. trump, who is from new york, the boroughs, and represents a holy thought. -- a whole new thought. he takes us to the days of calvin coolidge, which is business is the american way. american business is business. i think the voters have put mr.

trump and because it's an economic boon. it has nothing to do with the parties. --i thomas jefferson said, it's like thomas jefferson said, "parties divide the people." senators are just jealous as hell. host: comments on the facebook page with a lot of you weighing in on facebook.com/c-span,' . fromays, "the party going primarily neocon run to populist nationalist. wake me up when the dnc schism ends." jack dunn says, "get the pro-fake more monsters and republican party. elect all anti-fake more candidates, even democrats independence." "get on the trump train or get off." michael says, it's always been trump's party and now they are no longer hiding how hateful they are.

noel is joining us. welcome to the conversation. caller: that's correct. thanks for having me on. listen, donald trump had one job to do and that was to defeat hillary clinton. he did so. i don't care what goes on. i cannot stand the democrats and i love trump. this guy is doing exactly what he got voted in four. by the way, he won a landslide electorally. the democrats are just whiny people. host: what do you think of this quote from hillary clinton him "they were never going to let me be president?" this is from the sunday review

section with her new book and comments on election night. eric in phoenix, good morning. caller: good morning. i love your show. one thing i want to say is that it goes back to the story that if you win a fight, you w on. no matter what, we have to deal with that. is thing i will say we've got to be optimistic. i did not vote for trumpe i . i voted for bernie sanders could. i will tell you this. it is his party now. you're crying over spilled milk and that's that. even if i did not vote for him, as long as i've been living, that's who i voted for. i lost my vote and i took it like a champ. a lot of people should just think of it like that and hope for the best. that's all we can do. host: thanks for the call.

karen says, "yes, the gop is now the real donald trump party. it is party and i will cry if i want to." columbia, south carolina, is the republican party now the party of donald trump? caller: it most definitely is. in addition to that, most of the people that are talking hateful about the democrats. let me clear this up. i'm a republican who will not vote republican this time coming because i don't like what i see going. it's too much hate number one. number 2 -- we are too close to russia with this new president. we are going to change our toionality from american americans of russian dissident because russia is going to take over.

,rump and his band of thugs they are just warmongers. host: what don't you like now? what changed over the last two years after voting for trump and 2016? caller: i don't like the fact that he talked about draining the swamp. he took out the guppies, but he put in dinosaurs. and how he has divided us. i don't care what skin tone you are. we are all americans. we came here as immigrants. i'm a fourth generation freed slaves. i served in the military so my grandfather who is not naturally born, his mom was a slave, but we came here not of our own free will, but we adjusted to america. yes, i am a minority. i still love this country. i wore the uniform so that those could talk.serve

the world is laughing at us. we should not be hateful. , bute hate the mexicans they are not looking at the corporate businesses who lord lured these people over here. host: this headline from "the washington post" -- north korea pledges eliciting some doubts. the reporting from west palm beach, florida, and it reads, "the white house is reacting skeptically, warning that dictator kim jong-un could be setting a trap and promising not to back off his hard-line stance ahead of a potential leader summit. president trump called pyongyang's move progress and good news and apparent tweets after the news broke friday evening. behind the scenes, his aides cautioned that kim jong-un statement that the north would shutter one and nuclear facility was wonderful

for what he left out -- a direct pledge to work toward nuclear disarmament. although some foreign-policy analysts were heartened that kim appeared eager and set a positive tone ahead of his summit with president trump, --mp-pence were lessene trump's aides were lessened enthused." welcome to the conversation. caller: my view is i think we should be of one accord. christ is coming back for just one church. the thing is you have got republicans and you have democrats fighting against one another. we need to be on one accord and get this nation together again as one. i'm a man of few words. ifid not vote for trump, but we can be of one accord, we can get everything done and in order. host: in dealt total, florida,

good morning. caller: how are you? host: i'm fine. caller: i'm always a president trump supporter, especially when he stood up in front of other people and i knew he was going to be president and take this country. i hope these people come to their senses and understand this country is being ruined. it.s the one who can fix let's start making this country great and fix it up. they should be ashamed of themselves. , do not like the gop people but i still wish all the best for president trump and i left love him. host: you would easily agree the republican party is now the party of donald trump? caller: well, that's the problem. that's the problem. they are not 100% with him, not

all of them. the swamp ones will go away one by one. you will see. we will have a good party for president trump. host: jasper is next in memphis, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to put out a thing about donald trump and his party . got all these right wing christians out here. on sunday church morning at these big mega-churches and think they will go to hell when they sit there and let the folks about what is right and what's wrong. they see what's wrong and the white woman, the white woman is a very naive person. anytime they don't want to pay for themselves, anytime they don't want health care and better living for their kids and family, something's wrong.

they don't see trump taking that every day from them. host: thanks for the call from tennessee. this is from "the wall street journal." is the gop the party of trump? it's an essay and millions of voters produce a republican rise what donald trump was still a private citizen. he writes the following and "the wall street journal." "donald trump's lasting contribution to politics was drawing attention to forgotten voters, especially in rural areas. their views are now on the table. but 26 teams win also dependent on support from moderate to conservative suburban republican voters, and the party cannot lose them. donald trump is a unique, charismatic political figure. the evidence so far is that the party of trump begins and ends with one man." you can read the full essay at thwsj.com. the next call is donovan from york, maine. caller: i believe donald trump is neither. donald trump is trying to build

an autocracy and he's doing that very systematically as other tyrants have done. he wants to dismantle the press. he wants to remove judges who don't agree with him. he will trash anyone and everyone that gets in his way. he thinks he is a supreme being of some sort to leave the country from the malaise that we have been in it over i think he's very dangerous and he violates every constitutional that we built a wonderful democratic society and people forget that we are a republic. when he starts to trash our judges and our judicial system, he's an absolute threat to the united states thank you. making this point, trump

not invited to barbara bush's funeral. melania trump was in attendance joined by four former presidents and we will have highlights coming up in just a few minutes. this is from politico and a republican strategist. the headline -- "trumpism without trump. goodbye paul ryan and hello to a new republican party that embraces the politics but not his persona." brad is joining us from oberlin, kansas. caller: hello. my comment is that i woke up every morning proud to be an american when obama was in the white house. who isa moral president not running around on his wife and was a good family man and was smarter than me. that made me comfortable to be an american. i'm so uncomfortable being an american with trump in the white house.

nothing that i want to be like him. there is no goal. i don't want to be rich. i don't want to be a tape to women. to women. i don't want to be anything he is. obama was a great remodel. -- role model. i'm ashamed to be an american right now. i'm ashamed. host: thanks for the call. we will go to darrell and henderson, north carolina. caller: good morning. we have exactly what we voted for. we like all that rhetoric coming from trump so he's doing exactly what he said. he's a poster child for the filthy rich and there's nothing wrong with being rich. i do have a problem with that. poverty sucks. it is bad when you show what america is about. we take things. we don't love people. we have become ugly americans. we are a nation of haters.

we like what you have and we take it whether it's your women or children or oil or gold. you cannot live like that. this little korean guy, you've got to leave that fool alone. trump is playing checkers in a chess match and we are the ones that are going to have to find bomb shelters when we don't have any because we are so cocky that we don't think anyone is going to cross those borders and get us. we are in trouble and twoo dumb to know what. that is my opinion and you know what they say about opinions. host: joining us from outside of washington, good morning. listener andime it's been a while since i called you. i'm so embarrassed to have him as president. he's a joke in the world and the republicans don't care what the rest of the world thinks, but we

need them. we don't have them anymore. you go to europe now and the people are like, what is wrong with your country? the people who voted for trump, they don't have a clue. he is not doing anything for them. goodeason the economy is is because it was put in place under the obama administration. we had to save the country from the bush debacle. by the way, i thought barbara bush possibly an was beautiful. i don't understand why people voted for him. he is such a low life. nobody in new york voted for him. he's a joke in new york. he cannot even get invited to a dinner party with anybody who is anybody. he doesn't have the money he says he has. he's incapable of telling the truth.

importantthing more in a person's character and being able to tell the truth. and he can do it. the republican party setback. they are a bunch of cowards. they won't stand up to him. i'm glad i am older now, but i worry about my grandchildren and what we are going to leave this country and the mess is going to be in after this low life as president. it is so embarrassing. we have all these republicans and this tea party bunch. i don't know what it is that they want. they want to destroy the government, which is really destroying the country. host: thank you for the call. from yahoo! news, viva lafrance. trump to host a glitzy white house state dinner. we will have coverage of the arrival tuesday morning and the dinner tuesday evening on the c-span networks. here's an excerpt of what yahoo! news is reporting.

'st is president donald trump turned to put on the charm offensive. president trump is paying it forward and celebrating nearly 250 years of u.s.-french relations by playing host to french president emmanuel macron at a glitzy white house state dinner on tuesday." christine lagarde is in as our house speaker paul ryan and defense secretary james mattis. the president inviting no democratic members of congress and no journalists according to a white house official. the last time a republican president hosted his french counterpart was november 2007 when george w. bush welcomed nicolas sarkozy. michael is joining us on the republican line. is it now the party of donald trump? yes, i think that donald trump represents the republican

party just well. i was driving for a little town called seneca falls. do you know where that is? host: upstate new york, been there many times. caller: women's rights -- that's where it all started. i have been driving around state te 520 and i've been looking at the buildings and there's a nice memorial day. it's a beautiful setting that they have an seneca falls. when me andng my wife are driving down the road and, who is our present? donald trump. does he represent women's rights? it's as if the town in the building doesn't exist now because he is the president and he is attacked the rights of women. unbelievable. i cannot figure out for the life of me why someone would vote for a guy like this. he has taken our debt and is increasing spending.

i hear that they're going to borrow 84% higher than last year. that figure came off-line. some of that stuff is fake news, but the way that he is spending money, it was like grant went through wrenc richmond. republicans have to pull their heads of the san like ostriches. he is doing more damage in this country politically than you can imagine. the republican party is severed at the seams. they are supporting a guy that went against women's rights. come on. you guys got to wake up, smell the coffee, and get rid of this guy. host: our podcast on c-span focusing on that very issue on the debt and the deficit. now in excess of $21 trillion. perdue is aid produce member of the senate budget committee. you can get that online at c-span.org.

we were in los angeles for another book festival. live coverage on c-span2 continues today. we will have the speech by the french president emmanuel macron that will take place wednesday here on one c-span. otis from south carolina, you're next. is it now the party of donald trump? caller: yes, i'm afraid it is, but in a good sense because i think it is his fault, they will be booted out of washington faster than they ever had. this is the worst person in the united states has ever voted for the president of the united states. everybody keeps saying he won the electoral vote, but he did not win the popular vote. that's the way it's going to count to get legislation done because we are the constituents. the electoral vote is not the constituency. one thing that bothers me the most is him going to mar-a-lago so much.

when hewhat he is doing is on the golf course down there this playing up with his rich buddies and they know that anything he says can affect the stock market. they are just waiting for him to say something. they're going to sell stocks the day before he says anything. when the stock market goes down, they will wait for it to come back up again so they can make money. i think they are all just in cahoots to make a bunch of money and on the taxpayers time. that's the biggest thing. he's down there on the golf course week after week after week really. what is wrong with the white house? listn't let his itinerary come out to let us know who you seeing all the time. he is so secretive and such an underhanded person. we've got to get rid of this person before he causes this country to fall apart and have a

depression or something like that. host: thank you very much for the call. your listening on c-span radio or serious xm potus channel 124, . we welcome our radio listeners. we are focusing on the view from the congressional quarterly. it is now the party of donald trump -- do you agree or disagree? there's also this from "the economist." republican party is organized around one man and that is dangerous. ,his includes the following "the organizing principle of mr. trump republican party is loyalty not as with the best presidents, loyalty to an idea, vision, or legislative program, but to one man, donald j. trump. to purchase and rage that consumed the voter base, that on occasion he struggles to control. that is unprecedented and that is dangerous."

that's a view from "the economist." the party organized around one man, the trump presidency. your joining us from columbus, ohio. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. you are on the air. caller: i'm sorry. i think that donald is his own party of donald trump. and no one else. i think he wants to be a monarch. you go back to the days of having a king and the things that he's doing with women's rights are absolutely deplorable. i cannot believe in this day and age that some things are still having to be fought out in the courts for us to be able to control our own bodies. host: thank you. this is from mark who says, "is the dnc hillary's party? if not, who?" another tweet saying, "the

repugnant party is now the party of real donald trump because no one else has stepped up to fill ryan's shoes. if the republicans don't find someone, they are in trouble." martin excell he is a former fighter pilot. she is running for a senate seat in arizona. here's an ad on the air in arizona again to give you a sense of how this is playing out in gop primary politics. [video clip] >> now i deployed to d.c. to fight for arizona. supporting our troops and saving the a-10. protecting arizona jobs and securing the border. >> my friend, martha met sally, she's the real deal. >> like our president, i'm tired of d.c. politicians and their bs excuses. i'm a fighter pilot and i talk like one. washington i told republicans to grow a pair of ovaries and get the job done. now i'm running for the senate to fight the fights that must be one on national security, economic security, and border

security. host: we will be covering the races and the debates as we move into the midterm elections as part of our c-span 2018 coverage. front page of "the new york times" on the current epa chief, scott pruitt. his ethics woes have a goes into his past including in oklahoma. you can read the full story at nytimes.com. it's an expensive piece on scott pruitt's financial dealings. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: we are fine. good morning. caller: i just wanted to make a comment. i listen to the news all the time about donald trump. to me he is worse than satan. and the christians that call themselves christians that follow him, they are not true christians. if they read the bible, the bible says you love one another as you love yourself.

they don't love people of color. they are not trying to help people of color. people of color are not going back to the slavery days that donald trump and his cronies think that they can do. that better wake up and smell the coffee that is brewing on the table. we are real people out here. i'm a christian and i love everybody, those that hurt me and try to affect me, i pray for them and love them. that's what a christian does. they don't set up and follow one man like satan and which donald trump portrays to be. he is going to break this country down and take all the money, he him and his friend and russia. they are going to laugh at everybody in the united states because he don't care about nobody but himself. that's all i have to say this morning. host: thank you. times"oue new york sunday magazine -- can dirt save the earth?

the cover story of cq. how colleges threaten liberal education. and then the 100 most influential people, including president trump, prince harry, roger federer, and abc's jimmy kimmel. you can check it out at times.com. david from middletown, new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span, the best channel on television. host: good morning. how are you, sir? good to hear from you again. caller: it's wonderful to talk to you anti-american people. -- and the american people. i've been listening to what's been said. i read the local paper and it was printed and i would like to read the letter to everybody because it tells the american people what our great country is going through.

host: be brief though. caller: ok. young world94 years war ii veteran and i'm very concerned for what is happening in our great country. the countrye say and the congress are divided. i believe they are polarized. the word compromise has disappeared. the citizens who think of themselves of conservatives and liberals, democrats or republicans. we all have to think of ourselves as americans. and do to come together what's best for each other and not what is best for the party. that was the key to my generation, the greatest generation. the one word that describes my generation was we.

after the war, my generation created the largest middle class and the history of the world. everyone, including our elected representatives, did what was best for we the people. our democracy depends on citizens getting involved and engaging our government. protect our partisan politicians on both sides of the aisle and they continue to manipulate the system. people like you and me are getting pushed to the sidelines in our own democracy by special interest with access to hordes of power that make contributions to politicians. only by working together can we forcefully and resolutely confront those elected officials that are trying to break the spirit of our people.

host: as you approach your 95th birthday, thanks very much for funding and. we always enjoy hearing from you. caller: i just want to end with this if you don't mind. host: certainly. caller: i would like to remind everyone that the first three words of the preamble to the constitution are not me the people. they are we the people. i think we the people are going to win out this coming november. it was wonderful talking to you and best to you and your loved ones. i hope to speak to you again in the future. host: we sure do and stay healthy. we appreciate that, sir. caller: goodbye. host: we will go to michael next in atlanta, georgia. is it now the party of donald trump as pointed out by role call in "cq?"

caller: i think it is the party of donald trump. it's the party of people with one agenda -- either second amendment rights, evangelicals, things of that nature. he drank the swamp with incompetent people who have no idea what they're doing. i think that trump is just a deplorable liar. we need to vote him out. i agree with the guy from kansas who said he is ashamed of being an american. i kind of feel that way too. someone says if you don't like it, you can leave. no, i can't leave. the country was founded on protest and dissent. i will vote against this guy and i hope that mueller can get his job done. think you very much. host: thank you very much for the call. i want to share you this headline from "the houston chronicle." barbara bush lay to rest. ,t begins with the following

"barbara peers bush, the wife and mother of u.s. presidents, later rest yesterday following a funeral service in houston where mourners remembered her as tough but loving, a family matriarch who believe that helping others." [video clip] ♪ host: described in "the houston chronicle" as a solemn ceremony frequented by laughter and joyful hems, family members and atends honoring barbara bush her service yesterday at st. maarten statistical church, including a eulogy from her son, former florida governor jeb bush. [video clip] >> my dad is a phenomenal letter writer and he would write mom on their wedding anniversaries,

which totaled an amazing 73 years. here's one of them written on july 6, 1994. will you marry me? i forgot we did that 49 years ago. [laughter] inas very happy on that day 1945, but i'm even happier today. you have given me joy that few men know. you have made our boys into men by pulling them out and then by loving them. you made the sweetest, greatest daughter in the whole world. i've climbed the highest mountain in the world, but even that cannot hold a candle to being barbara's husband. host: the service yesterday a barbara bush took place at noon eastern time. we had it live for you on the c-span networks. in case you missed it, it's available on her website at c-span.org. barbara bush who passed away a week ago is 93 years old. we will continue the conversation and take a closer look at the state of the republican party. joining us in just a moment is cline. -- andrew

his essay is america is done with adults like paul ryan. we will have this conversation after the break. and then, motor chair and and debra spahr to discussed the women's rights movement. don't forget to join us for newsmakers and our guest this week is oklahoma republican senator james lankford. he talks about where house republicans are to impeach deputy attorney general rod rosenstein and whether there is legislation he would support by senators tom tillis and chris coons that would insulate robert mueller from potential firing. here's a portion of that conversation. [video clip] >> are you at all concerned with some of the comments coming from house republicans going as far

as to call for the impeachment of rod rosenstein? do you think that typo, it is appropriate? -- type of comment is appropriate? >> everyone's can speak for themselves, but i'm not calling for the impeachment of rod rosenstein. nor for mueller at that point. the best thing is for all the individuals to finish the investigation. everyone will take in all the facts that are put out there to determine what is a partisan issue. we need to get the investigation complete. turnover of individuals does not change the investigation. it prolongs it even longer. legislationrted the to offer a measure of protection to special counsel should that person be fired by the present? .> i don't actually their constitutional issues whether you are in the legislative branch or in the executive branch. then you have another

constitutional issue about the president firing this person . the present keeps repeating over and over again that i'm not going to fire these individuals. he has had plenty of opportunity and months for the process to be able to do it. i don't think he's going to do it. the spokeswoman for the president has said over and over again it's not being considered. the president has repeated over and over again that he's not going to be fired. it becomes a political vote and a way to try to somehow smear the present. it does not accomplish anything at this point. i would rather say i'm going to take the president at his word. if the president chooses to firing mueller, we will have to face a very different conversations at that point because clearly that doesn't change anything coul. firing james comey did not stop the investigation. it led to a special counsel and the investigation might -- got bigger. it clearly does not stop the investigation. it will only make it bigger. host: you can listen to it on a

free c-span radio app. it airs at 10:00 a.m. eastern time and our guest this week is oklahoma senator james lankford. we hope you tune in. ew cline and isr a contributor to "usa today." he writes the following, "president trump is a symptom, not a cause. paul ryan is a serious man and a non-serious time. it is jettisoning adulthood." explain what you mean. guest: pleasure. i think a lot of this talk is that is it paul ryan's party or jeff flake's party or donald trump's party misses the bigger picture here. went frommp are not mars and put a spell on republican voters and take over the party. he grew out of a culture. voters grew out of a culture. my argument is we have a

combination here of ascendant youth culture in america that is combined with our social media and our technology to produce what i like to call a sick burn culture. everybody has to get in a sick burn. everybody is interested in getting the last word and being thrilled and excited and you can see it on twitter. getting the last dig in. everything is focused on andulation and the moment it's focused on the today makes -- the dynamics you in schools and the way that we seek attention and the way that we jockey for position. and the 2016 election dynamics we are seeing in today are a product of that culture.

politics is downstream of culture. we are seeing a moment where somebody like paul ryan who i consider a serious, sober, judicious person's trying to make logical arguments and is having a tough time getting oxygen in washington because the culture is so fixated on the latest excitement, the latest stimulation of the moment and that stimulus and has to be coming from president trump's tweets and other forms. it was part of a culture before that. that is my argument. washington has adopted this broader youth culture and technology through which we transmit information has amplified that culture and away that makes it really hard for people like paul ryan to be successful in d.c. anymore. host: did you have a chance to

watch either of the services from the barbara bush funeral yesterday? guest: i did not. host: this is the headline from "the washington post." an old-school farewell to a first lady and a political hero. i'm wondering if what we saw yesterday was part in a different -- of a different chapter for the republican party. guest: i would not put it only on the republican party. i think you are seeing right now a cycle in history. ist. not a declin i'm one who thinks things are better now than they have ever been. i don't want people to mistake this as well. i think we go through cycles. the cycle we are in is one in which dignity and decorum and professionalism and responsibility are not trendy. they are not in. somebody like barbara bush or george h bush, those people feel like they are from a past era.

paul ryan is somebody i think who has a lot of dignity and talks that way. he is viewed by a lot of people as being from this past era. we communicate a little bit differently now. things are in soundbites and quick hits. there is not the sort of time that people give to that and people have grown up in the united states in the last century really. there were people in the 1940's complaining about the rise of youth culture and having children grow up in a public education system where they are grouped together and there appear groups. the p or group becomes their dominant social influence. that is how they are acclimated socially. tot is how they learn how behave. adults are not as much in the picture as they used to be. we had a century of this youth culture rising and changing our culture and its combined with

technology to affect the culture as well. i think we have reached a point in history where it has become a problem. i'm not saying that's the future. the "usa today" headline says it's the future. i think its a moment right now and i think it can cycle back, but that's where we are at the moment. if you are dignified and soft-spoken and very interested in details and policy, that does not get you very far these days because it's hard to get attention. the currency of the moment is attention. somebody like donald trump, who is a master of commanding people's attention, is going to suck the oxygen out of the room and make it difficult for anyone to be heard , which is what we saw in the 2016 primaries. host: out sober injudicious, in loud and obnoxious and the social dynamics of the nursery.

you also write the following, "the rise of youth culture in the mid-20th century remains one of the most important social development in american history. worstits ascendancy, the mistake of politician can make is to be uncool. every losing presence of candidate since 1980 was the least cool candidate in the race." guest: i think people can misread that. and isly it's an op ed don't have time to give a long explanation. i don't mean that is the only factor contributing to somebody's win, but it's interesting to note that for decades now, and obviously you can go back to jfk, being dignified and adult in the presidential race is a weakness. it is not a strength. itng hip and cool and with is a strength.

that is something that our culture has produced an something we have to deal with. if you look at barack obama and mitt romney, this is not just something that you can lay at the feet of the voters. go back and read "the washington post" coverage of this race. example, "the washington post" mocked mitt romney's clothes. this is a political reporter at one of the most procedures papers in the country writing that mitt romney's genes were not cool and two square. these are the coverage that we get out of our major procedures papers. this is a problem and a product of youth culture. likeannot expect somebody paul ryan to thrive and survive in a culture where even the most prestigious publications we have

our fixated on popularity, are fixated on presentation, are fixated on how with it and cool you are. it's a product of our culture and it's something we have to learn and navigate and deal with. host: our guest is drew cline. he is the president of the josiah bartlett center for public policy, a name that dates back to the 1700s. who is josiah bartlett and why does he have a center named after him? guest: he was well before president of the united states and "the west wing." he was governor of the have just -- new hampshire. he was a president. as first governor, he was leaning toward republicanism. he was someone very concerned in creating a state

where the people had control and power. the think tank is a free market think tank founded in the 1990's named after him. host: elected to the senate but never served, correct? guest: that is true. host: nick is joining us from norfolk, virginia. caller: good morning. my question was, as an independent, what role do you think technology and instant information plays a role in what is happening according to your article please? guest: thank you. that's a great question. i think technology is absolutely critical. we had a growth of youth culture in the united states now going back a long time. in the past, we have had pockets of these youth uprisings. it's i will go back to my alma mater.

there were riots, they were student riots. they grew out of the american revolution and this idea that the people own these institutions. in 1799, students beat the president of the university and stoned the professor. there have been used uprisings throughout american history. youth culturen of as it grew out of our public education system and the combination of technology today , videoou have twitter games, social media.

social media is really important. it continues that clustering. schools, we have a situation where kids get together and appear group is the dominant social factor. that's only amplified with technology and with social media. adult influence in their culture. that's a problem. cocoon andeople to it creates this sort of rapid .esponse that we have greater just hours.are it used to be a day. technology is responsible for that. twitter and social media and the newspapers and tv

stations are posting things immediately online. everybody wants to go to the story of the moment. that is a product of technology. that's what enhances the youth culture of fact. now andng is focused on making a long sustained argument just as irrelevant. it's not getting covered, except on c-span. host: does the president's twitter account redefine the bully pulpit? guest: it completely does. you don't have to have twitter to be caught up in this. the president makes policy announcement on twitters. he makes hiring decisions on twitter. it's the medium in which he communicates to the public and

the press. i subscribe to a lot of newspapers online. you will see depending on the moment a lot of stories on the front page of the paper, president tweets this. with social media as a common medium through which we communicate, our politicians are learned to communicate. the mainstream media is following that. it's catching up to that. it's become an important vehicle. it's actually changing the way we communicate. that's lending i mean by the sick burn culture.

creates incentives to be get out a be short, big or insult in a way that generates lots of likes and followers. communicator, you have incentives to be outrageous. you can do some in this going to give you an immediate feedback. some people have likened it to addiction. we see this feedback and the is to get ar this lot of attention. the way twitter and other social media platforms work, it just amplifies that and shortens the time frame.

it encourages us to be even more outrageous. way wehanging the communicate with each other and the way politicians communicate with us. opinion is an contributor at usa today. he is the president of the josiah bartlett center for public policy. james from atlanta, you're next. caller: thank you. politics is a 360 degrees. was donald trump did recycle old talking points from donald graham -- ronald reagan. everybody else is here. that, donald trump says what he wanted to sacred

people will leave him. this is what democrats need to do. say what you have to say in order to get elected. yourself -- the democratic party does not need to defend's food stamps. more white people get food stamps and welfare. guilty west virginia. donald trump the start a called them united states every other country, no democracy has lasted for the government goes on. we are on that time. this man is corrupt. he is evil and these people calling themselves christians

that follow him, i feel like they are called members. this is what the country was built on, immigrants. , theyf these people on tv are one generation immigrants. stateo not know what we've been through and suffered through. everyone is jumping on the coattails to use freedom fighters and this and that. room --u great caller: that black caller made some fairly valid points. ancestry is german.

my wife is from taiwan. you take a look. we are a nation of immigrants. primarily, when we started as a nation, the ofrwhelming majority europeans that came in were germanic. primarily set up in the midwest and the south. you take a look at germany, it's not the size of texas and you look at how advanced the nation of germany is in the areas of science, mathematics, engineering. i'm going to lay it on the table right now. we are a superior people.

and the story. we just get the job done. that's the nature of who we are. donald trump was not a successful businessman. his father was successful because he constantly worked. he didn't fool around with women either, the father. my wife is chinese. you take a look, she showed me something when china ruled the world. amazing, this is what he said in 1922. the white race in the yellow race are basically the smart ones. all other races are feeble and stupid. i didn't say that. adolf hitler didn't send that. you can check that. 1922.d that in host: what are you hearing this morning?

i would like to address both of those points. just make the general point that culture as we've been talking about today, culture is a factor we are looking at in terms of whether a society is successful or not. if you look at the chinese and the germans, the chinese were more advanced than any western country for centuries. the reason they fell behind the last was because they shut their country off. because it was open to exchange of ideas. when you look at the chinese did before the west, it's exhaustive. the idea that any particular country in europe is superior in any way is nonsense. familyhat as some of his

emigrated here from germany in the 1700s. culture is what drives things. that's what we are talking about today. the reason china has stayed dominant is because of the culture. because of opening up the country to opportunities, getting rid of those obstacles and barriers to advancement that aristocratic societies always have through human history. ae american revolution was world changing event because for the first time in history, it every opportunity. every position in society is open to everyone. people complain about that now that donald trump is president.

one of the seller to point out to people who are impatient he got elected because there was a sense of impatience. people have been complaining about the same issues for decades. they don't feel like their concerns are addressed. there are lots of reasons why that is. one of them is because of the structure of government. slow so itted to be couldn't become oppressive. technology, we live in an age where gratification feels like it should be instant. sense india gives us a the way our technology works, we should get things done right away. one of the reasons is the government was created to be slow and deliberate. we have delivered of oddities

and argue about things so all sides can be heard and we can come to compromise. americans are impatient. wedding for that compromise the happen is getting more challenging and more difficult given the technology that we have. i think one of the reasons why donald trump was elected is he came in like clint eastwood and said he would sweep away these protocols and get things done. doesn't that washington work that way. it's not supposed to work that way. institutions give us the ability , byontrol the government design slowing deliberate. you have attention now between the institutions and the people

who are impatient. that's something we're going to have to deal with even more as technology grows and becomes more immediately satisfying to us. how do we deal with that as a culture? how do we do with the idea that everything we have, every impulse we have to be satisfied immediately? this photograph of paul ryan as he goes into great detail on the budget plan and his health care bill. following:he

let's go to a democrat. lyndon is joining us from north carolina. caller: i have two questions. 43ould like to know why republicans are running for the hills? vladimirresiding paid keep mittable to romney from being secretary of state, can he block mike pompeo? why eachcan't answer of those are retiring. picture,ok at the big you see a culture where it's them,or people, some of

they find it difficult to break through the noise. there is a sense that there is a democratic title wave coming. themwould rather retire get swamped in an election. host: do you take paul ryan at his word? he has been in the house for two decades. his oldest is 16 and he was to spend time with his kids before they go to college? guest: i think that's been tugging at him for long time. that's been pretty clear. i don't want to get into second-guessing his motives. dynamic in the washington, if you are a person like paul ryan who is interested and making things more responsive and dealing with some

of our structural issues like the national debt, it doesn't feel like you're going to be able to make a lot of headway. that can be frustrating. the don't feel like you're going to achieve results, why not go home and be with your family? host: martin is joining us from michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to ask mr. klein, how do we reset the culture? will it take a national calamity like what the germans and japanese faced? thank you. guest: that's a great question. i don't know that culture can be

changed from the top down. it generally generates in the bottom up. there are institutions in effect the culture. tolic education, we can look the way it structured. i am deeply in favor of public education. at senator ben sas book, he notices a phenomena in the 20 century. the way we do public schools, we groups withn large very little adult supervision or influence. we are surprised when they ,raduate and they are passive not self-reliant. there are ways we can work on

the education system to focus more on making kids self-reliant. them to be active learners and participants in their education. a lot of states are working on it. it's been growing a long time, to make education more participatory and what kids have more agency as they go forward. rather than have them feel like they are passive recipients of education. that could help a lot. the: he is working for josias bartlett center. good morning. caller: can you hear me? i have a question. i am wondering how much he

believes the fast pace of media that goes on and the constant negativity affects the use ability to comprehend all the political aspects of the government? feelecond question, do you that because the middle area of the united states primarily president versus peoplenia, the middle wanted him in because they weren't being heard? they werelike forgotten and they wanted their voices heard? way, to have aly bombastic person like tromp

trout -- trump? the youth don't seem to think for themselves unless they are in a group mentality. i'm just concerned and worried about that. you're referring to flyover country? you may have seen this before. chuck todd put them out on meet the press about a year ago that water, out if you test you voted for hillary clinton. beyond that, it was donald trump as we moved inside. that's an interesting sidebar. on your last point, there a dynamic where

people felt left out. trump talked about the forgotten man in that resonated with a lot of people. feeling lefts were out. they felt like they were being ignored. they felt like the government believeng attention to coastal communities and big cities and they were being ignored. that was clear in the election. ,he first part of the question i do think social media and current communication technology does play a role. people cluster, makes them alienated from other groups. that has a dynamic in it.

if you feel left out or marginalized, you are going to cluster in these social media communities of people who are like-minded. there's been research that shows that happened. it becomes an echo chamber. that is a very bad thing. is designed to engage people with different points of view in a broader discussion of policy so we can come to an agreement. if we are not talking to each other, it's impossible to have that conversation. all we do is shout at each other. maria from atlanta, good morning. good morning. i came in a little late on the conversation. i just caught the end of the comments on immigration.

i have a couple related to this. i come from a family of immigrants. have members of my family who had to wait 20 years to get into the united states. we followed the rules. host: where do they come from? caller: several countries. rico, argentina. host: puerto rico is not a country. caller: it's not a state. it's actually not part of the united states. host: it is part of the united states. rico, youe in puerto

are an american citizen. go ahead with your other point. caller: that's one issue. you have to go through things like proof that you are of good health. you would have to get x-rays to prove you don't have tuberculosis. line, the united states used to choose peopleally to import that have passed those players of tests. host: your response? guest: we heard from the voters, people who elected donald trump. they felt excluded and marginalized and one of the reasons they felt that way is there were lots of complaints in uncheckedt about

illegal immigration, about what you said about people not feeling like the process was fair. we had immigrants who came through the legal process. it's not just because it was unfair, there was the perception that illegal immigrants were taking jobs and opportunities from people who were here first. trump really caught on to that. that's an example of an issue the public has been saying is a problem for decades and washington has not responded to. health care is another example. polls show health care being a top five subject for years and years. congress didn't address it in any way and that allowed barack obama to take control of that

issue. republicans had congress. they could have pushed by health care reform law that addressed a lot of the concerns. that was the sense biggest priority. when congress is not responsive to people's concerns, you build up pressure in anger until they find a way to take it out on washington. is ank donald trump example. host: we welcome our viewers in great britain. we only have a minute or two left. thanks very much for listening. i don't recognize the democratic party from the way it was many years ago, from the 60's and

70's. people were voting for donald trump because it was a fresh approach to things. there and all those children were kidnapped in africa, he tried to tie conditions because he knew where they were from the secret service. you tieed to say unless this to abortion and same-sex marriage. this is just totally immoral. triedk donald trump has to put back this moral order. things wesome understand, if god is left out, all evil abounds. there are people fighting abortion. we know that where abortion is

concerned, there won't be peace until this ends. house,look at the white she gives a marvelous exposé that there will not be peace until abortion finishes. it is a moral doubt between good and evil going on. i'm quite optimistic the american people know what they are doing. host: we are short on time. your thoughts? i think 2016 showed thought issues were black and white. i will leave it at that. i appreciate you have a son. host: how can people follow your work? guest: i am on twitter.

also on twitter. website is a mess right now. we are in the process of updating it. it's kind of like a 90's website. social media is a great way to catch up with us. host: thank you very much for being with us. please come back again. guest: i would be happy to. our series,tinue looking at 1968, a historic year 50 years later. turmoil, we focus on the women's rights movement. deborahbe joined by spahr, joining us from york. we have the author of a new book called sex matters.

the feminine mystique was credited with sparking the second wave feminist movement of the 1960's. about why the movement was necessary. tv, 9068,n history america in turmoil. women, wearate you of had to get rid of that. we had to break through that. we had to say women are people. consciously fight for and realize we were entitled tothe same opportunities participate in society. to same opportunities control our own destiny, the same right to participate in society and control our own

destiny as men had it. it, the think about women's movement, the moderns women's movement in america began with my book the feminist mystique in 1963. and we37 years later have transformed society. in 1963 whatasking do you want to be when you grow up? you will be a mommy like mommy. they did not ask women what do you do? you were supposed to say housewife, just a housewife was a label. most women had that those days.

even 40 years ago, only a third of american women worked outside the home. not all the women went home again after world war ii. a lot did it. .wo generations they made up for it by having the baby boom that some of you may be part of. that was all right. having babies is a good thing. i have three. there are real values in motherhood it. 1950's, this doctrine lifelong, ake it full-time occupation.

words like career women became dirty words. even though i went to a very even in that college, all i learned about the acty severance -- suffrage was they were product and suffering from tina send the. s envy. it was a revelation for me when , i wasrched my book going to give a rationalization for penis envy. women had every right to envy the opportunities that men had.

c-span3's american history tv, our focus is on 1968, america in turmoil. joining us is the former president of our narda college. -- barnard college. fellowington, the senior at the public policy center. matters, how sex about modern feminism. let me begin with you. what was the first feminist movement, why was there a second wave in the 1960's? the waves of feminism are not a natural phenomenon that you can completely defined. people with think about the first wave as the suffrage

movement in the u.s. and the u.k. to get women the right to vote. that occurred in the early 20th century and was largely successful. you get let's now called second wave feminism, coming around the time of the book in 1963 and cresting in 1968. that was a movement for all the things the vote alone had not granted to women. payee quality, getting into educational institutes, the right for women to play sports, the things society had not granted to women. host: let's talk about this time period. women went into the workforce during world war ii, what happened after world war ii

until the mid-1960's? guest: i discussed in my book the mythology that is come down to us about rosie the river -- riveter. jobs, menall of these were not performing because they were at the front. rosie is the iconic image of women in an industrial job. the truth is more complicated. were propagandized and encouraged to take these jobs because there was a labor shortage because of the war. they made it seem like a patriotic duty. there was a huge amount of government sponsored advertising aimed at women to get them to take these jobs. the jobs, sometimes women in joined them, they were dirty and

dangerous jobs. women did them because it was wartime and we were completely mobilized. war, there was a time of grateful domesticity that followed. the economy was booming. been able tod not get married or have families during the depression and during world war ii, there was a demand for normalcy. rush the war, there was a to the suburbs and people having large families and retreating a little bit. women retreated somewhat from the jobs they had done in the second world war. host: is that how women were idealized in the 1950's? guest: i think there is a disconnect between the popular

image of what the 1950's or and the realities on the ground. we have this idea that women in the 1950's were stepford wives, they were discouraged from work, from achieving their own individual dreams. if you look at the data, women did begin in large numbers going to work. what you saw was a pattern of women working. they streamed to universities. pattern ofed a working while they were single, continuing to work while they were early married, cutting back to part time or no work while their kids were young, resuming

work after their kids were in school. image that has come down to us about the 1950's. we've been told it was a prison and that women were just baby makers and homemakers and so forth. i don't think that's an accurate picture of the way things were then. host: let's talk about some of the key players. who was that he for dan? building on what mona just said, i think she's exactly right. it's interesting what the culture celebrated. even though she mentions women were working in larger numbers than in the past, give you look , what wasion shows celebrated was the happy homemaker. that's a large part of what betty responded to.

she began her own career as a reporter. she reported on women's issues in the making of pot roast and sweaters. in her big book. she started to get the sense that something was wrong. she went back to her college classmates and started interviewing them and other women. she began to focus on what she called the problem that has no name. malaise, the discontent she found in many women who on the surface would have appeared to have these perfect lives that the culture and the tv shows were raving about.

here that somet critics of pointed to is the women she was writing about were almost overwhelmingly white and upper middle class. they were the women of the leave it to beaver era. on wasr work is focused looking at how deeply disappointed these women were because they weren't being fulfilled by lives they thought were supposed to bring them great satisfaction. most people focus on the early chapters where she tells the stories of women crying in the kitchen and drinking with their friends and being despond and thinking is this all there is? book, go deeper into the it's a marxist inspired argument.

in then corporations television era paired up with american advertising to create this wave of products that women had to be interested in it. women are being peddled dishwashing detergent and floor waxes and kitchen equipment and all these things. they are keeping their homes need in clean and tidy and living up to some standard. her argument is the energy that women could of been spending building lives of importance are instead being spent keeping their kitchens is notwhich she told you what anybody's life should be devoted to. host: our series looking back to on thee are focusing women's movement. let's talk about some other players. we want to show phyllis lasley.

she was an activist, a political activist. guest: she was a conservative republican who formed an organization to fight the passage of the equal rights amendment. the amendment would actually certain kinds of changes to things like the social security act, the draft, other things that would not benefit the women's movement. women would have to be drafted just like men. windows would not be entitled to benefits that their deceased husbands were eligible for. she started a grassroots movement. america has a long history of

grassroots movements. think of prohibition which began in similar kitchen tables and garages. she started this organization. ultimately, she was successful. it had come to within three states that needed to ratify. extended the time frame even more. together with her, she was able to defeat it. it is still not part of the constitution today. host: let's put some numbers on the screen as we look at the makeup of the house and senate. statue to the first woman in the house of representatives. 1968, there was one woman in the u.s. senate. there were 11 and the house of

representatives. today, there are 23 women in the senate and 83 in the house of representatives. can you talk about those numbers? response isbvious this is good, we are moving in the right direction. i think if you put 50 years in context, we haven't come so far at all. are still looking at best are 20%, 25% of positions of power. if you go back to the excitement that surrounded the women's movement in 1968, there was an assumption that in 50 years women would be close to 50% of positions of power. book, what we see across the united states and the developed world is women max out

between 16% and 18% of power positions. it's a little bit better in congress right now. you can't see this is the glass half full. we have come a long way in 50 years. after second wave feminism, by the time we hit the mature parts of our career, we could be closer to 50%. skeptical a tiny bit of the justice by counting metric. i think if women want to be in positions of leadership, they should be. i think there is evidence that the voter is happy to vote for women at every level of government now. it didn't used to be that way. i think there may be other reasons why women don't share

these positions. , people are turned off by excessive partisanship. they dislike the combat involved in politics. host: mona is here in washington, deborah is in new york. stephen is in pennsylvania. go ahead. caller: hello. perfect. talk about first wave in second wave. the first wave, you had a problem where they could not vote. my problem is second wave feminism seems to say i don't like what women are doing based on what the culture doesn't like, not what the government is doing it to women.

i think as long as the government is treating men and women equally, how they are viewed in the courts, you can do a legislation situation for that. when i hear i don't like the way the culture is, i don't like the way the tv per trays women, let's have a government solution. let's enforce what i think women should be an age 30 because i like what they are. i just don't agree with that usage of government. host: thanks for the call. let's turn to deborah. go ahead. many: i think there are so pieces to second wave feminism. it's unfair to say that it was

all about governmental solutions. if i look at my sector in higher 1963 and 1968, the most elite educational institutions were close to women. virtually none of the educational institutions has sports programs for women. those were things that didn't technically need it governmental solutions, the institutions allowed women and started to do sports programs for women. this was not a long by activism and governmental policy. title ix has been hugely important in making sure women have equal access to sports programs. the caller, that everything has a governmental solution. what the activists realize in the 60's, there has to to be some pressure toward giving women greater help.

it was how the institutions were treating them. host: our next call is from north carolina. go ahead. caller: i just wanted to mention i was 18 in 1972 and i got married. by 1980, i did not have financial economy. i could not do anything without my husband. go ahead, mona. i'm not sure what she is getting at. she can go to grad school, she could start a family, she can do many things. the 1968e things about feminism, the second wave feminism, you can't see it just

says part of the women's movement that proceeded through different waves. you have to see it as part of its era. it grew out of a moment in american history when the new left was rising, there was tremendous turmoil in general thet racial issues and rights of homosexuals and the stature of the country and the vietnam war. environment radicalism on many levels. , the oneist movement who came immediately after that, they did in price a radical position of reform.

they were not just saying we want equal pay for equal work or to have sports programs, they were attacking the entire society, what they called the patriarchy. life, thefamily sexual norms that had prevailed for hundreds of years, everything was going to be almost french revolution style. there were lots of people in this movement. some of them were on the radical side. steinem to some extent, i think she's right that 19 69,were married in you couldn't sign for a home mortgage without your husbands permission.

there were some tactical issues that women faced at that time. guest: i think we might disagree about how radical they were. writings,k at the there were feminist blockbusters in the 1970's, the dialectic of books were big sellers. they were celebrated on time magazine. they are very much part of the culture. they were radical in their positions. they were endorsing the nuclear family, which they thought was the cradle of all problems of women. back, again, if you go

that was a much less radical view. i don't think you want to condemn the whole movement by looking at just specific pieces of it. it was a complex movement and it still is. guest: that's true. you are right. there are many different feminists and many different schools, sometimes too many. think that i recently reread a study the feminine mystique. be deeplye book to flawed. she was not quite on the anti-family bandwagon, she did unbelievably silly and even destructive comments, such as describing a suburban home

life as a comfortable concentration cap. if any of us are lucky enough in her books are read 50 years from now, people will find some quibbles as well. host: in 1923, the first equal rights amendment's was introduced in the house of representatives. in 1971. in the house it passed in the senate by a 4-8. 35 states.fied by it was three states short. let's go to calling joining us from florida. this is a wonderful topic. i am so glad we are discussing it. girls today don't comprehend

that back in the 1950's, the laws on divorce, it was very difficult to get a divorce. there was a lot of shame involved. you couldn't go and get your own onse, you couldn't carry with your family as mother and children. they could not separate themselves from the husband. alimony and child support were so low that you literally couldn't maintain your family. the law had a lot to do with it. people agreed with all that. host: thanks for the call. i have a different view of the divorce laws and alimony. the movement toward no-fault divorce was not an

advantage for women. treating mothers and fathers as equivalent when it came to child , husbandscisions, men who were divorcing, it gave them more power within the relationship. they could threaten to contest for custody of children and forced their lives to accept less in alimony. theony went down after introduction of no-fault divorce. it was a mixed picture. couples that have divorced, about two thirds of annual divorces are couples know

open conflict. divorce has been a big problem for women. side it has allowed women to escape unhappy marriages more easily. it is also made it easier for everybody to get out of a marriage contract. it's easier to escape a marriage contract than a car loan. i'm not sure that's great for society. guest: a little of both. i think divorce is always complicated. trying to separate the data issue is murky. mona justhink as said, the evolution of law the past 50 years has made divorce easier. that has led to some bad

consequences, but i think in general it has led to good consequences so that women do have the legal power to get out of bad marriages and get out of them in ways that don't destroy themselves or their children financially. steve: debora spar is the author of this book, wonder women, sex, power and the quest for perfection. new book, how feminism lost touch with science, love, and common sense. >> you can preorder on amazon. [laughter] steve: coming out in june. i want to get your reaction from the street from a regular viewer saying can your guests speculate on one the e.r.a. -- on why the e.r.a. amendment was not ratified? debora: i don't have a great answer for it. wasink part of the reason it took a really long time as these things do. getting any kind of amendment is

a torturous political process. i think as time moved on, we have heard from mona and others, this was not universally admired were desired. i think time went on, interest lagged, some parts of the country that did not want this. to go back to one of our earlier colors, and i would tweak his views a little bit, the amendment even if it had best -- had passed was not going to be a silver bullet. so i think even the people who had pushed that agenda over the years were able to sort of take their activism and their worktives and try to through them on other channels. it is a very complicated political moment, but in the end there wasn't enough unified what is a lotbat of very diffuse opposition. steve: also the civil rights

movement was front and center. 1964 legislation passed by the have -- by the house and senate. i want to hear from this congressman. in 1970 he reflected on the civil rights act and women as part of the language in that legislation. >> there are those in the women's movement who would correspond very much to the in delhi c.p.a. and the civil rights -- the naacp and the civil rights movement as civil rights action bringing women forward into participation in society and there are women when we as a movement who would be in agreement with the critique proposed. very many parallels. >> what about civil rights? are there civil rights women do not enjoy? >> i think there certainly are. maybe i should turn it back to martha griffis, but i would like to add one footnote to what she

the sexut 1964 because provision was added as a joke, put in by southern -- [speaking simultaneously] added as a joke. the men who originally offered it thought that he was going to hurt the bill. but i made the argument that i wasn't joking. i understood exactly what it would do. it was accepted not as a joke but because the people who sat there agreed with my argument that you would have given black women rights that white women never had. i didn't make the further statements which i think was true that no one brought that bill to the floor had ever anyider giving anyone rights, and the truth is black women and white women got those rights together. but no one voted that day voted as a joke.

>> i am certainly didn't vote as a joke, but there was a great deal of levity. >> levity stops when i started speaking. [speaking simultaneously] >> it really didn't work out that way at all. but one of the things, it is a myth that had been put out through this process that it was a joke. every woman who said it again and again really aided the supreme court in making a very erroneous decision. it question the civil rights of women before and after. >> women don't really have any rights. the 14th amendment has never been applied to get women equal protection under the law. she doesn't have any rights. only the right to vote and the right to hold public office during those are the only two rights that the constitution of the united states guarantees. steve: a discussion on politics that took place in 1970 at the

university of michigan. this is a photograph from the east room in the white house in 1964, president lyndon johnson signing this. it is primarily a room full of men. mona charen. andrew: i was going to make two points -- mona: i was going to make two points. women were included, so sex was added so that all of the rights guaranteed under that act, it was very clear applied to women as well. this comment here so often that women did not have any right, miss griffis said in the tape and you heard it a lot and you still do that women didn't receive the right to vote until the 1920's and therefore they had no rights, that is not true. the fact is if a woman were accused of a crime, she had the right not to incriminate herself, she had the right to a trial by jury. she had the right to speak, the

right to practice her face. she had -- her faith. she had all of the rights. even though there is no equal rights amendment, it was never said those rights were meant to apply only to men. they are universal. steve: debora, do you want to respond? debora: i think that is accurate but clearly there are significant number of women in this country who feel that despite having these rights, the basic rights enumerated in the constitution, women's reality is that they face different obstacles than do men. those obstacles of change since the 1960's, but they are still there. the political pressure remains what is the best way to fix that reality? is it through law, and if it is, to what extent must it rely on a constitutional amendment, and that is where you can have a lot of debate.

clearly women face obstacles as do people in this country that are quite different from those the face white men. steve: we talked about conservative as you missed -- conservative activists. this woman discuss her opposition to the equal rights amendment. >> for many years i generated -- i debated the equal rights amendment. don't women in college today were not even born when that was fighting, so they don't even understand. it needs to be explained, but if you look at the feminists who i debated 20 years ago, they don't have the wonderful things that i have which are 14 grandchildren. that is a whole new life. i think the young women to look ahead and see what his life going to be like for you in 20 years, 20 years into the future. they need to examine that and find out what they really want

because the feminist movement told young women that they should have liberation, and it was much more exciting to be a corporation vice president that it was to be just a plain old mother raising her children. it doesn't always work out that way. >> did you ever think you would be more than just a mother raising her children? >> i am a very hard-working person and always have lots of -- politics became my hobby. steve: the interview is available as c-span.org. our focus is 1968, 50 years later. we are talking about the women's movement during this time. josephine's next. thank you for waiting. caller: good morning. i want to use new jersey as an example. i work for the state of new jersey for 42 years. not once did you ever see a ofan in a position

authority. i'm talking about cabinet as an example. for the first time that i can remember, our cabinet right now in new jersey is predominantly female. how refreshing. 11 women have been appointed. how refreshing. that didn't happen under republican i have to say. it didn't happen under republican. not only that, we are getting the bill passed for equal pay. again how refreshing. we have to have the laws, yeah, we do. if anyone denies that, you have to wake up. laws give us our rights. unfortunately we can't do it alone and the more important they for women out there, they have got to vote. if you don't vote, you do not get your rights to complain about it, sitting on your butt

doesn't work. you have got to vote. thank you very much. mona: nice to hear from a caller from my old hometown, livingston, new jersey. equal payint out that has been the law of the land since 1963, so i don't know what new jersey is planning to elaborate on that fact, but that has been true for a long time. steve: go ahead. echoa: i would jump in and her comments. women have to vote and particularly young women. what i have seen a young -- among young women is a real wake-up call because all of these rights and privileges that they thought they could take for granted have been called into question the past few years. i think it is good that they are understanding how important it is not just to tweet but to vote as well. steve: helen is waiting from fullerton, california. caller: yes equally refreshing

is a devout republican from california. i was 14 in 1968. my mother read that book in the 1960's when it first came out. she went to the local drug store and saw it on the paper book will crack and fix it up and transformed my expectations with the newfound philosophy. the book was still around when i was 14 and i read it. meopened up a world also to that maybe i could do more than do more than just get married and have kids and be totally dependent on my husband's benevolence towards me and live happily ever after. ironically that didn't happen. it never would have happened because economically this would not be feasible. it was a dream being sold by the

being sold by companies who wanted to sell their products because i did take a class in college on american studies called women in american society. there were more women after world war ii who remained in the workforce, and never before in american history. two incomes, so companies were going after that extra income because they knew now women could afford, people could afford to buy cars and blenders and makeup and clothes and more disposable income. what eventually happened i think , i read elizabeth warren's two income trap. maybe the guests are familiar with it. she did a good job, how eventually over time as more women entered into the workforce and the profession, the same

amount of money as their spouses things aree, changing economically for everyone. one of the main ones was the outsourcing of manufacturing to certain third world countries where products were more cheaper. ironically money needed to buy housing increased triples, housing costs tripled. steve: thank you for the call. did you want to respond? debora: pick up on where helen started because it is an important anecdote. so many women have that moment they were -- they recalled her mother picking that book up at a drugstore or a friends house. it was a transformative book. when the politics and legal aside, the fact a single book wrote -- woke women up to their potential is radical. steve: during this time after

1968, 1971, the u.s. army put together this film at the time advising how women serving in the military should look and dress. the full program will be airing after this program. here is the next search. >> ladies, you have come a long way. no question about it. you have more to say these days about your education, your appearance, your occupation, and your role in life than any young women have had in history. you have a voice in your own destiny. civilian life in the military. that is right, there is a lot you can say and do about who you are, where you are going and how you look, especially in the military. susan mayfield looks good, but she never won at a beautiful bathing contest. she has to work for it. takes more than luck to appear smart looking. ♪

nobody is trying to sell you. all we are talking about is making the most of what you have. steve: that u.s. army field. your laughing. antique,is a little but compared with some of the messages we send young women today like even teenagers, preteens, that they should begin to look sexy and where lots of makeup and appeal to men at very young ages, this seems downright wholesome. people should want to look -- what did they say? neat and tidy and clean and fresh or whatever it was. in a way i have a wistful sense about that era when that was the goal. i don't know. i am at a disadvantage. i could only hear the film.

it grates at me to think what the male equivalent is to any of the army fields -- films for men concentrate on their looks. mona: they do. [speaking simultaneously] but in the military even today, the men have to comb their hair is certain way, they have to shine their buckles a certain way. debora: but is not where you start. it is a footnote to why they might want to be in the military where as for women -- you are right. it runs across so many pieces of our culture, but the emphasis on how women look, it is different. mona: i agree with that. steve: we will go to tallahassee, next. krista, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. i am going to get a little deeper here. i started hearing about women when i was in college in the

early 1970's. it was like, whatever. but i believed it, then when i went out i said not really happening yet. not in most places. but the thing i think a lot of people don't understand that is really critical is that this is not a political issue. this is a survival issue. 80's, andhe pennsylvania, there was lots on the books that said how big of a stick your husband can use to beat you and for what purpose. if your child would come and disclose sexual abuse, you would be committed. you would not be listened to. many,: we are discussing many large social phenomena. cannot discuss the place in society without other things

with others in politics. you are right to say it is a broad suspect -- subject but the isa mentored the their wives a myth. christina has exploded that myth in her book who stole and is him -- feminism. i give feminism credit for changing the way we treated rape . for a long time there was no such thing as marital rape, and for a long time it was the case that women's own sexual history could be used to impeach them on the stand. and the law changed. on the other hand there are myths that have been peddled about domestic violence for example by feminists. they made outlandish claims that people who are most likely to or women areives

husbands. they are the least likely to commit to mystic violence. the most likely our live in boyfriends. -- are live in boyfriends. there is a tendency to mix up the myths with that. the truth is married women are the safest of all women, safer than divorced widows, single and especially those who are cohabiting. steve: i want to put another name on the table. jermaine greer, she now lives in the u.k. for this is a 1971 cover story, also treated as a major voice of the second wave feminist movement. she said women have the right to define their own values or their own priorities and decide their own fate. why was she such a large figure? captured ahink she lot of the zeitgeist of that moment. she is a beautiful writer, very

clean. she spoke to a lot of people. it was a moment in time when people -- we have heard this from all of our callers, people wanted to address these issues. she was a different voice from betty frieden. she was different from gloria steinem. on put a finger or pinprick some of the deep yearnings women withside from politics just a have a voice, and identity, to have dreams of being something other than a housewife. and beautiful writer. i think she just a voice out there that people responded to. steve: debora spar is the former president of barnard college, joining us in new york. , thea -- mona charen ethics and public policy center. leo from the bronx in new york, democrats line. caller: good morning. thinking that the issue of

women's rights i want to raise is last year you saw an explosion of reckoning against people in the media such as harvey weinstein and charlie rose for being abusive towards women. why do you think this suddenly happened and why now and why 50 years later? steve: thank you. let's turn to debora spar. the #metoo movement. debora: this has been a watershed moment in the women's movement. i don't think it flash and panic. very important. i think what happened is the stories have been out there for years, about specific men and more in general. i really think there was a couple of incredibly devoted journalists who were very careful and very diligent both in new york and the new york times, did their homework, dotted their i's and crossed their t's and took what was

rumored and put it down. they worked with a handful of brain women who were willing to risk their careers and reputations to go public with what had been quiet for a long time. and once it was out and on the front page of the new york times, everything just crescendoed around it. steve: from akron, ohio, sign is next. caller: good morning. reports in 1970 m ever since has worked to feminist andelf all with the responsibility to the 99% of slave animals who are female who are kept captive for eggs in the and then slaughtered to become 99% of fast food burgers. and just as a footnote, every ingle hibernating bear

alaska every single mother bear in alaska has had her rights invaded this month by every republican senator voting that her babies may be killed while they are hibernating in a wildlife sanctuary. fly that's what we are talking about here, the women's movement of the 19th 63. caller: connie would go out in the streets and pass out leaflets saying women, you are abused by men. why are you accusing your fellow women animals. and i think the trump administration is perhaps the worst ever. steve: do you want to respond in any way? mona: the tenderness towards .nimals is admirable i am resistant to the idea that they have rights that are equal

to human rights. i think we should be kind to animals, not make them suffer, but i don't take that to this degree discolored does. bookendst me put two to the 1960's, 1970's here the faa approves the pill in 1960 and moving ahead to 1973, roe v. wade. why are these events important to understand? debora: we have been talking for an hour and this is the first time this critical issue has come up. but the dual emergence of the abortionl and legal are probably in some ways the most important developments that came out of the 1960's and early 1970's. there is a kind of arguments one can put forward and there is huge, still more arguments around abortion, but i think when you look back in the broad swath of history, as i am

starting to do now, the single most important development for women's rights was contraception . it is wonderful to argue for women's rights. the laws are important, but what gave women the ability to control their destiny was the ability to control their fertility. the combination of contraception which allowed women to decide when and if they wanted to become pregnant and abortion which give them that last option if they became pregnant and at that time they didn't want to, that is what really gave women the freedom to begin to control their destinies. steve: if you were pregnant and a 1960's and the workforce, how would your employer typically react? debora: it wasn't something that was supposed to happen. women were supposed to leave the workforce before they got pregnant. they were supposed to hide the pregnant is should they occur. my understanding, have not in

their what the presumption was the moment they got pregnant they would be out. they would go home and take care of the babies because that is what women did. clearly pregnancy, that is the difference at the core between men and women. women get pregnant and men don't. that really is what has kept women in a secondary status for so long. being able to have pretty good degree of control over their pregnancies is in my mind really the single greatest liberating force for women. debora: here we get to -- mona: here we get to the heart of an important dispute about women, men, life. i believe the feminist movement made a horrible, horrible wrong turn when it embraced abortion as the feminist issue. because it alienated millions of american women and men who regard abortion as an abomination.

the second part is the tendency -- the second point before i get to the last. the pill and the other sordid contradictions -- contraception set begin available could have been taken by women as just a way to decide how many children they want and how to space them out and all of that. it did not necessarily mean women had to sign on to the sexual revolution. unfortunately the two were linked, and people encouraged both. that also has not serve the interests of women well nor families which are critical to everyone's well-being, men and women. in the topic that debra just mentioned, women get pregnant, of don't, this is a phrase what does it do to women in the workplace. women being pregnant and being mothers and giving birth and nursing and carry further babies

is like the best -- for their babies is like the best part of life. the 70's movement has tended to diminish and devalue it. we see it as an obstacle on the path to the corner office. i think that has things upside down. the most important things in our lives involve our families and our personal relationships. yes in our incredibly abundant and wealthy country, you can have it all. you can do it all, but you should not be portraying caring for children and family life as just kind of something that is an impediment to women in the workplace. steve: the book by mona charen, sex matters, how modern feminism love,ouch with science, and common sense. it comes out in june, and debora spar, wonder women, sex, power and the quest for perfection. thomasville, georgia.

caller: i have got to say this is one of the most entertaining programs i have seen on c-span. i can't decide which comment i like the most. i did want to say that obviously and sometimes we forget obvious any time one group gains in power, another group loses power. power comes from somewhere. so with the idea that power closes the ideas, people, all that, i can tell you that a 55-year-old white man like me has less power than he did in 1965. that is fine. i have more obstacles than my counterpart did in 1965. i have to deal with that. anytime you put government involved where you say, you should not have that many obstacles, we need to take care of that, unintended consequences happen. title ix, in the 1970's. i think that is when it was put in place.

the idea was we need more females to participate in sports like the counterparts. back then in 1970, college sports was not now, that the money that has been generated by predominantly minority, black athletes, that money is being taken from them, given to universities and .istributed her female forts if they had known in 1970 that it would still be a $9 billion don't think it be that. had you not had title ix, someone might say ok, all those people entertaining us saturday and only getting paid by the education that they never graduate, never get, so maybe one day, you get paid. that amounts -- sounds like

modern-day sharecropping. money is being redistributed. the have to have money, they won't get rid of female sports. thank you. we get a response. guest: i would agree critically. every think -- understand its consequences. all havert of what we to deal with. i don't know how much women's sports plays into what we are seeing in college sports. they are deeply problematic. i want to conclude by going back to something you said at the beginning that we don't talk about enough. that is the impact of the women's movement on men. it's been dramatic. power,e group gets more other groups almost by definition flows out or find options constrained. thatnk it's intriguing we've now had at least 50 years

of philosophizing around feminism. there is one million strains of feminism. policies, theories, we haven't talked about men over the past 50 years. we have not come up with new models of what it means to be a male, and what it means to be a father, husband. i completely agree that having children is wonderful, being a parent. if women are going to be in the workforce and parents, we have to change our ideas for what it means to be a man and parent. we have not done nearly enough work of thinking about the implications of feminism for men. host: what's go to desmond from fort wayne, indiana. caller: thank you. fascinating panel today. both of the ladies here. i have three daughters myself.

i couldn't convince them to come to the living room and watch this. host: tell them it will be honor website and read -- reairing on american history tv. [laughter] plenty of chances to watch it again. caller: deborah was saying, she's right. come from five generations of divorce. hearing from mona especially or deborah is, the fact of the matter is, the future of the children is what is most important. political of our peccadilloes, we can all agree that husband, wife, whatever, the two heads of the household keepe foundation toward so -- socioeconomic advancement. i haven't heard that the entire

segment. that's one of the things i told myself before i got married. my wife and i worked full-time jobs. -- work full-time jobs. we respect each other. she's better at some things than i am.it's the bedrock we are going to stick together regardless, because of our children. i'm not hearing that from the panel. all caps off to hear your thoughts -- i will jump off before. thoughts. host: any boys? caller: no. i have six brothers. [laughter] guest: thank you for the question. you may not have heard me say it on this segment, but i have a lot in my book about the critical importance of family. that is, i think, one of the great crises we are facing as a society that's true of both divorce.

and unmarried childbearing families disintegrating. it takes to parents to raise happy, healthy people and good citizens. not only is it important for society, but it's important for happiness. all of the social shines is unequivocal -- social shines -- social science is unequivocal marriedldren raised by parents do way better than children raised in and the other environment. it does not rely on class or race or anything else. if you come from an intact family, your chances of a childng in life as are dramatically improved. have, there have been a number of things tearing families apart.it ties into what we were discussing before this, namely what the movement has done to men -- the feminist movement has

done to men. there are many good things the feminist movement has done, but one of the best things is it has tended to pit the sexes against one another, for trained men and women as adversaries -- portraying men and women as adversaries. are spouses or the dearest in their lives, most important people -- our lives most important people,.to overlook that is a mistake . i cannot thrive if my husband, sons are not doing well. we depict a refreshing and -- our thriving and success as being based on gender rather than family structure and relationships, a great mistake. it's led to unnecessary suffering. ibm -- iant to talk want to talk again about the 1960's. we have the second wave feminist

movement as we talked about. the civil rights movement, and the antiwar demonstrations in the mid-late 1960's. how did that come together in 1968? guest: it came together as most people will recall in a giant conflagration. an awful lot was happening. createdred fellows were , roman scots mushed together. it was an across-the-board activism. emerging today. what happens i think for the women's movement per se is that shawl thatn this women were part of the civil rights movement and antiwar movement.

it was a moment being led by men. forced into disturbing positions within the antiwar movement. the war ended, whether or not in response to the movements. with it how -- having felt that their voices weren't heard in the way that they might have hoped. there was a record that went on after that point. i don't know that you contributed to the splintering of the feminist movement, but that certainly didn't help the movements build solidarity after that point. 1968, a year in turmoil. the significance of developments during that time. lois joining us from new york. caller: i just wanted to say that first of all, it's

misinformation to say that american women in marriages are safer. unreportedause it is when domestic violence occurs in families, because it affects the children, the husbands employment, the wife's employment i am a retired university. and plosser -- i am a rick perry university professor. i went to school in the 60's cap -- i'm a retired university professor. i became a lawyer, and then an educational leadership professor.i -- taught law for the last 14 years before i retired. the system of inequality in was a part of how women were constrained from reporting violence. the incidents of domestic violence on intimate partners is oftentimes much greater because

there isn't a family association that strains them from doing so. qualityages, the same to report -- he quality to report but it isn't -- equality two report but it isn't enforced. to be are encouraged neutral as opposed to protecting women. information, scholarly research, especially among minorities. first of all i wanted to say that. second of all, for women in the movement, i would never have understood that i had options to lead a separate life within that marriage. yes i had children,, five they all went to college., they are decent human beings. that was difficult. host: things for adding your voice to the conversation. referring to some of your comments earlier. guest: it's difficult, painful

question about domestic violence. horror, but to say because data are wrong people are likely to report? that is not a good way to deal with statistics. you can't say "the numbers would be higher if people work reporting" we can expect this is underreported but if it's not reported, you don't know it. i'm not convinced more people would be willing to reported when they are living together situations i would also say. when you look at people' self reporting of happinesss, you also say people and married, committed relationships report higher levels of happiness. if there were tremendous amount of abuse and those, i don't think they'd have that kind of self-reported.there were reports in 1968 host: of a robbery in

atlantic city, new jersey at a .iss america competition, 1969 miss america was going to be crowned in september of 1968. miss illinois was the winner. portion ofshare a how nbc news covered thus, september, 1968. ho, beauty pageant has got to go. >> organized several groups to protest the miss america pageant as a symbol of societies exploitation of women as sex objects. it's popular. s name is as colorful as red stockings. new feminist, women for women.they are addicted to acronyms lf, women's liberation front.

♪ pros that's full nbc new -- news program airing on real america following this program. you can get more information on our website, c-span.org. if you heard what was happening in the late 60's-early 70's, what were your thoughts? bra burningieve the itself is an urban myth. i think it was a very clever, performance if you will stage, -- if you will, staged at miss america. to throw bras out the trash can is a visual sign of women's opposition to things like american pad -- the america pageant. it was a beautiful way to organize the protest. it got a lot of attention was very visual,. it worked! it really galvanized women to

get out there, focus on something silly. it's a beauty pageant, not something deeply important for anyone.to capture people's attention on this particular subject. the way in which women are always evaluated on looks. whether it be in the beauty pageant contest or in terms of military. it's a highlight of activism. we still talk about it 50 years on. host: let's go to fran in florida. caller: yes. my question is for deborah. have a good part do you think kellen brown's cosmopolitan magazine played in the women's movement? guest: ahh. good question. is ank helen gurley brown important figure. she was not a deep philosopher.

she never claimed to be. she had a kind of feminism that later feminist would announce because -- feminists would announce, because it was about using women's sexuality as power. brown was brilliant not only in terms of shipping her own career, but realizing her position, her platform, nobody else had. trying to make it on the talk shows. she was trying to talk to 17-19-year-old girls, and she did. i think she really inspired, for lack of better word, a whole generation of young women to think about their careers, exciting lives and to think of themselves as something other than housewives. was she perfect? no. hits now -- tips about how to wear makeup, they

are deeply cringe-worthy, how to please a man. she found voice, used it, and got the attention of millions of young women. she wrote this blockbuster called "sex and the single girl, " that was a huge influence on the culture at the time.she later claimed she was the first feminist . "sex and thead single girl, you will note" -- not only cringe at advice of how to catch a man but, when she says it's fine to have affairs with married man. she said they will give you presence. where not talking about outright being kept, but just, you know, having the office fling and so forth. immorals an utterly view she took about sexuality, women's behavior, that did not

set a good tone for what was to come. , and president of bernard college. america's first lady bird johnson. debra spark, what role if any did she play in the women's movement? g i'm not sure to be honest -- i'm not sure guest: to be honest -- i'm not sure, to be honest. not the type of romanism i -- feminism i have read about and research. -- r: any first lady is deeply constrained by what she can do. she didn't have a lot of freedom. shein the confines of that, pushed the boundaries. she tried to show herself as a woman who, even though she was number one housewife in the country, was a woman who stayed

of the loyal,eals dedicated wife and mother but clearly was an intelligent, smart woman with ideas of her own, and a platform should try to use. she did as best as she could do among -- under those circumstances. host: two toledo, ohio next. calvin. caller: i'd like to talk about when they signed the discrimination law against that .lack men and black women they had to hire black men and black women. then, they slip in that's jews were the minority and white women were the minority. guest: not sure exactly what you thatby that, except that there are special affirmative-action programs for

therend white women -- were four white women. i don't think jews were considered a minority. my father in the 1930's applied to medical school but could not get in. there were a number of jews like this. they had to do something else. host: another leading voice. member -- one of the members of the house from new york. why was she so influential? guest: she was in the political i thinked her voice, separated herself from the more radical feminist. she was someone who work inside the system. she stood for women across the

country, women and -- women of color in addition to white women. she was a fighter. she wasn't someone who was fighting from the inside. i think if you look across this whole panel of women you brought up in the past hour or so, you'd see how you need the persona. oneseed the sort of wild for that -- writing for the magazine's, the activists burning bras. -- someone who was inside the system and fought to get inside, and was pushing through the muddy, murky, important work of getting laws changed. host: let me go back to her announcement for president in 1972. kratz of new york. -- democrats of new york. >> i stand before you as a a candidate for the

democratic nomination for the president of the united states of america. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] not the candidate of , although i am black and proud. [applause] i am not the candidate of the women's movement of this country, although i am a woman, and i'm equally proud of that. [applause] the candidate of any political fatcat or special interests. [applause] now withoutand here endorsement from many big-name politicians or celebrities, or any other kind of crops. -- props. i do not intend to offer you cliches with for too long we have accepted as part of our

political life. i am the candidates of the people of america. -- candidate of the people of america. [applause] my fellow americans, we have looked in vain to the next and administration for the courage, the spirit, the character, and the words to bring out the best in us, to rekindle our faith in the american dream. although we have received in return is another smooth exercise in political manipulation, deceit and deception, callous and indifference to us as individuals, and divisive politics hitting the young against the old, labor against management, north against south, blacks against whites. [applause] host: when you hear that, is of

the intersection of the women's movement and civil rights movement of this era? guest: it's that and more. listening to her, you can't help but be inspired. in many ways, she paved the way for obama, hillary clinton elizabeth warren,, kamala harris. she says it all. she says " not the candidate of the people of color, the women's movement. on the qualified candidate." -- i am a qualified candidate." she encapsulated both movements, but goes for what is most important, which is recognizing people have merit and people of intellect. she is all those things. to robert in brooklyn, new york. caller: why do you think rose of parks refuses to go to the back of the bus? second question. -- extremelyress

distressing to her -- host: rosa parks. a figure ofarks as the civil rights movement exclusively. i think it happens to be the case that she was a brave woman, but her point was not for women. it was for african-americans. if she had been a white woman, she would have been able to sit in the front of the bus with no problem. this is about the rights of african-americans. natalie portman, she does make it clear that the reason she was not accepting the award is because she does not want to endorse the prime minister. addressing support to her opponents of israel.

1918, one female member of the house of representatives from montana. in 1968, there was one of 711 females members in the house of representatives. there are 23 in the u.s. senate today, 83 and the house of representatives. 2019 will see what look like. guest: could be interesting. i don't have numbers at my fingertips. more women running for office now than ever before. we shouldn't elect anyone simply because of their gender, but i hope we are going to see a wave of talented, deserving, smart civic-minded women in office. i'm sure your viewers know, we had a baby on the floor of the .enate i think this is a beautiful watershed moment as well.

we will hopefully get women of numbers. i don't mean to imply women will or should go at women, but there's plenty of data to suggest women are less inclined to be partisan once they are in congress, that there's more of a willingness among women. aisle,larly, across the policies that matter and to figure out ways to get things done without getting too stuck in ideology either side of the i i'll. as long as women are stuck at --, they will be retreated treated as women rather than just representatives. guest: our last color from connecticut, go ahead please. guest: hello.

i'm 92 years old. i'm black and have never been a part of the women's movement. i think they have failed black women. because id poor women don't know if anybody knows, but this has been -- for the past half hour. all those people black and white -- i mean black when -- men and women, were all white trade a la cart to see if there is one black face there. i didn't see one. that a woman in she's noto anything, starting to be on the top of the latter or a glass ceiling or whatever it is. no. life,ant to live a full do what they want and be free. all women want that.

movement did not include them. host: we will get a response. right.i think you are that's one of the powerful criticisms .gainst second wave feminism it's more educated. it's starting to become more diverse. and the 1960's into the 1970's, that was about the time when it all split and lost power. we are very much now in getting -- we are now getting a third wave of feminism, which is focused more on socioeconomic issues, issues of color, gender. i would say to our caller, you are only 92 so don't give up hope. there's still time. host: a segue to my final question to both of you. the legacy 50 years later. guest: very next. -- mixed.

happened.things have liberty, expanding opportunities for women has been terrific. the damage though to family ofe, and to, and to a sense solidarity with men has been lost. we cut 50 years of -- we have had 50 years of basically sex wars in various forms that has i think led to the sum total of unhappiness in the world. what i hope for a new feminism going forward will be in and knowledge meant of the real differences between men and women, a recognition that cannot thrive at the hand of the expense men and vice versa, we thrive foremost as families. third,rdm that -- and that devoting ourselves to our

children is one of the best things human beings do. we have to figure out better ways of prioritizing families and children together. host: 50 years later, the legacy? debora spar, 50 years later, the legacy. debora: i think of the french revolution, he said it was too early to tell. we are still similarly in the early days. i tend to want to think about things in broad swaths of history. men and women live in narrowly circumscribed roles for thousands and thousands of years , and the women's movement tried to reshape those roles in fundamental and radical ways. it would be naive to believe you could completely change these deeply set conventions in only 50 years. i think we are still in the early eras of this, but i am more optimistic van mona is. mona ms.we -- than

women can do things and we have a voice that my mother and grandmother's generation could not have dreamed of area there is a lot of work left to do. we have to do much better job of thinking about the lives and struggles of women, black women, immigrant women, refugees, a whole range of other women. we have to look at the men's peace of this. we have to figure out what roles for men look like in ways that don't put the same constraints on them that we want to put on women. i think finally we have to do what i refer to as the math. this goes back to the parenting piece of this. it takes more than one person to raise a child. the old way of social organization actually works. the man earns the money, the woman took care of the children. it worked. once we start to shift the women's peace and give women things to do other than or in addition to raising children, we have to shift the whole

equation. we have to think of different ways of taking care of our children and our families without constraining either women or men or without putting ill effects on the children. we have not done that yet but i am optimistic we will. the world has come a long way. society does write about things going on has come a long way in 50 years and we need to pushing forward. steve: from our studio in new york, debora spar, former president barnard college, the author of winter women, the quest for perception. mona charen and her new book sex matters, modern feminism lost touch with science, love and comment and. thank you -- common sense. thank you to both of you. we appreciate it. >> thank you. debora: thank you. steve: khan "american history tv" and c-span history, we look at mrk and turmoil.

we will be joined by nbc reporter marvin towel along with pulitzer prize-winning photographer and out of journalist david kennerly. that is next sunday live 8:30 eastern time on c-span and simulcast on c-span3's "american history tv." tvr those of you on c-span3 ah you will see series on the women's movement from 1969 and 1970. this report covers the court cases, protest, and statements from the movement leaders are saying to nbc news. coming up next on "reel america." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] steve: "washington journal is back tomorrow, a busy week in washington along with mike pompeo. aragorn or of the washington post and john bennett of cq roll call will be here to tee up the week and take your phone calls. mark -- we look at the faa and

.irline safety a policy analyst for the heritage foundation at 7:30 a.m. newsmakers is next. thank you for joining us area enjoy the rest of your weekend. have a great week ahead. ♪ announcer 1: here on c-span this morning, newsmakers is next with republican senator james lankford of oklahoma. that is followed by a memorial service on capitol hill for the late representative louise ofughter who died at the age 88. and the senate finance hearing on ways to address the opioid epidemic.