relative. we really appreciate, of course a longtime supporter of young america's foundation and also i wanted to mr. rodriguez come let you know although a lot of people wear those t-shirts, when i was in college my mother sent me an anti-sheikh of our t-shirt that i readily wore to my latin american studies course. you can imagine how well that went over. specifically after i wore it particularly when they would start, you know, boosting him. that was in the lesson plan so it was great. i want to start off to get a to start off today the first thanking america foundation for of course having here today. when they say i was inspired to do what i'm doing now, that's a result of attending a conference here in 2008. it's true. young america's foundation with this change the lives of students especially when they're constantly and hostile environment on the college campuses. what young america's foundation provides in terms of tools and mentorship for people is extremely fortunate i can say the work that the they do realls an impact. living in washington, d.c. now and seeing all of the graduates of young america's foundation programs working in policy decisions or in media really making a difference really just proved how important your support is and how important this organization has been for years. but especially now in the modern age. so i visit him here today to talk about my latest book, "assault and flattery," and i'm going to start like is how utterly absurd it is how the left is portrayed as a champion of women. every book comes from an idea or a moment. at death and a few of those moments leading up to the writeup of this book. the first gain in february 2012 when nancy pelosi invited 30 year old georgetown law student sandra block to testify capitol hill about why taxpayers should foot the bill for -- foot the bill for contraception but at the time the media was portrayed as a woman in her early '20s. but that wasn't true. she had been well into adulthood years or a decade before making her statements on capitol hill. my office is in rosslyn, virginia, which is right across the river from georgetown university where ms. sandor went to moscow. after listening to her testimony, i looked across the river in disbelief and just thought, how is it at my age, which was 20 at the time of her testimony, as a young professional working hard to pull a paycheck and to pay my own bills, right? is 30 year old woman wants me as a taxpayer to pay for anything other than my own medical bills, my own needs and anything else i think i should be having in my life. i was in disbelief but i just couldn't believe that why was it a $9 a month which was a big video for a strong independent woman to come up with. you know, the answer to this was that the left obviously likes to uphold people could simply pass responsibility for their actions on to others, which is why i wasn't surprised when sandra fluke was upheld as a hero and, of course, put on the 2012 campaign trail. then and at the moment the lead up to the writing of this book came when i was sitting at the 2012 tnc convention in charlotte, north carolina, and my job as reporter and a journalist is to sit through lots of different speeches. and for hours and days i've been listening to speech after speech about mitt romney's war on women, conservatives hate women. and not only did bill clinton speak on the same night that sandra fluke spoke, but the tnc honored a man as ann coulter describes as having the only confirmed kill on the war on women. the tv cameras didn't catch this because it was during a break but because i was there i did. in between speakers they play there seven minute long glorious tribute video to none other than ted kennedy. remind you, they're complaining about the war on women. so as if that wasn't bad enough, they plastered the words women's rights champions in all capital letters across the screen of the video they were playing in the arena. it was pretty amazing actually. and for some reason they skipped over one of the most important and iconic moments of his life, a time when he drove drunk off a bridge, wandered away and left a 28 year-old loyal campaign staffer who happen to be a woman to die in his car. no one dared to utter the words chappaquiddick that night. they were going to talk about in the green and they certainly are going to talk about indie media. but i sure have plans to talk about it later that night. luckily at this point appears morgan still had a show. i was booked on a political panel for piers morgan show that night, and i was on with piers morgan, my friend richard grenell desert is one of mitt romney's ashes good advisors, ellie rosen who is the woman who famously said that ann romney has never worked a day in her life, and van jones was a self-appointed communist. so before, i was hoping appears morgan would bring up ted kennedy because it would be my moment. and thankfully that moment came. in the stated that they play during back to the gate is jen, they should mitt romney debating ted kennedy with mitt romney challenging and received back in the '90s that ann romney said in this debate, that was featured in a video that he was pro-choice. obviously, he has since changed his position. that didn't stop piers morgan from asking me, does it make you uncomfortable hearing mitt romney is passing the joys of being pro-choice? >> and i just responded and said no, you, you know what many uncomfortable, piers? that have a confession becomes be fighting the war on women that they would play a lengthy seven minute video, attribute to a man who let a woman to drown in his car. [applause] so after that the panel exploded to it was like we can't bring up the chappaquiddick, no way. no way. we can talk about how romney pulling a kid when he was 13 but when i go to talk about what happened with ted kennedy. so hilary rosen, staunch defender despite, there's a war on women yelled all, come on. piers morgan said on air my comment was below the belt. so i'm just like, all right, whatever. ansa during the commercial break, hilary rosen turns to me and said i think what you said was discussing, to which i responded, i think what he did was disgusting. [applause] but on a serious note, ted kennedy is portrayed as this perfect example of how the left is supposed to behave, right? he really is a false hero but he isn't the only false hero that the left has portrayed in the media as if there's a difference, portrayed for liberals to look up to. hillary clinton is also one of those people. and most people don't know really about hillary clinton's real record because on college campuses she is portrayed as the ultimate female figure who provides a glowing example for women everywhere. the fact is she doesn't and are underreported legacy is one of defending races and second graders and i'm not just talk about her husband, though clinton. are you okay over the? are you all right? so to give it a little bit of evidence of this, you know, last month of audio of hillary clinton gleefully -- was polish it to get a little back story on this, in 1975 during a time as an attorney, hillary clinton took on the case of thomas alfred taylor county man who brutally raped a 12 year-old girl at the age of 41. clinton said that she thought he was guilty. the issue isn't her defense. after all, this is america and even the worst of the worst in our society get their day in court and are entitled to an attorney. instead, the issue is clinton's behavior after getting taylor out of a lengthy sentence for his crime when she thought he was guilty. she -- he served less than one yeayear in prison. this is what the reporter, quote, described the events also decade after the card clinton struck a casual and complacent attitude toward her client in the trial rate for a minor. i had him take a polygraph, clinton said, which he passed and then she started laughing. you can hear several points during this either laughing and saying that, oh, the crime lab loss all of the evidence to the actual destruction of evidence is why taylor got off from the crime because he is no longer tied to the crime due to the lost evidence. but apparently the destruction, actual destruction of dna evidence wasn't enough for hillary clinton to go when. so instead she attacked the 12 year-old victim girl as possibly emotionally unstable and someone who may be exaggerating or romanticizing a sexual experience. a 12 year old. further, clinton wrote in an affidavit at the time, i have been informed that the complaint is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in and a sizing. so she went out of her way to attack the victim in the case who was a 12 year old child who just happened to be a young girl. you know, the "daily beast" followed up with an interview of the rape victim, obviously a couple decades now, and she heard this on the of hillary clinton laughing at her, for getting the men who raped her off. and she said quote, hillary clinton took me through the she took a case of mind in 75 and you like about me. i realize the truth of the shias supposed to be for women? do you call that being for women, what you've done to me? i hear you on the table laughing. it seems pre-shocking, right to put this down and covered audio is just one piece of hillary clinton's long legacy career and life by defending sexual predators. clinton sister of brushing sexual assaults and abuse of young women under the rug for her own personal and political gain just as the left has done to women for decades is nothing new, and it persists today. fast forward a few years after add clinton relieved a child rapist of any real consequence or justice, you will find for decades she willfully helped destroy the women who run husband, former president bill clinton, was accused of sexual assaulting or raping. it's funny how the left constantly screams about rape culture but yet they refuse to address the rape culture that goes on in their own party. time and time again is that holding her husband accountable she defamed his female accusers are mentally unstable women looking for money. and clinton repeal it allowed women to be lied about, sneered and many believe so her philandering husband could hold onto power which eventually led to her own position as a senator from new york, a presidential candidate, and president obama's secretary of state. speaking of her record at the state department, what exactly did she do during her tenure there? the pattern of behavior continued. she ignored rapid sexual abuse by high ranking state department employees. and under her watch, the u.s. ambassador out of was accused of routinely ditching his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children in a nearby park, according to an intel memo written by chief inspector general investigated. the state department security official station in beirut was accused of engaging in multiple sexual assaults. and for the u.s. embassy official was removed for allegedly trading visas for sexual favors. at cbs news first reported last year, lease seven of hillary clinton second agent routinely hired prostitutes on official trips overseas. this bad behavior was described as endemic by whistleblower. although the agents were eventually reassigned, they weren't seriously punished. when investigations were launched into misconduct, they were immediately shot down by hillary clinton's chief of staff. the fema whistleblowers who brought all of this to their attention who spoke out against and expose what was going on inside the state department, they were retaliated against for doing so. whistleblower kerry howard was run out of the foreign service and stripped of her job and was bullied for exposing his counsel general donald moore when he allegedly engaged in sexual activities with women inside his government office and with call girls in naples. so this is just a snapshot of clinton's legacy of defending rapists and sexual predators. she's done for decades and yet somehow has been portrayed as a women's rights champion. a record proves the opposite. hillary clinton will go down in history as america's most famous enabler of abusive and powerful men. but debate about hillary clinton and other false heroes like ted kennedy, and the historical record that comes with them is all but banned on college campuses. and it's my job and the job of people on the overflow room, the students and the job of the young america's foundation to break that censorship. i'm often asked why young people in general but specifically what young single women vote for the left and when they tend to lead to the left but you really can't blame them for doing something when they have never been told otherwise. the educational system is about indoctrination and university system is a different. the only thing they're hearing on college campuses is a great hillary clinton is about the left is the way that women should be leaning towards. you have to be able to go in and tell them that there is another side to that story. in addition to know to effectively fight on campus, it's very important to understand what exactly students are up against. the left is dependent on ignorance to accomplish the goals and to push their agenda. the left isn't playing a long-term game with women since 1960 and has been lying about the real empowerment and equality ever since. so the question is how do we understand the left? you have to infiltrate the left to go to where they are, go to where the battle actually is. so last year i applied for press credentials to cover the nationalization of women conference in chicago. i figured now they bill themselves as the largest opposition of feminist activist and the indices were 5000 contributing members and 550 chapters in 50 states. according to their website, since its founding in 1956 their goal has been to take action to bring about equality are all women. yes, all women. if you're familiar with the hashtag. unless of course you're a woman who happens to be a conservative or a capitalist, so prior to applying for press credentials from the convention i came across a n.o.w. letter which claim that the goal for the future of the or decision was to expand and diversify membership, ongoing efforts to bring different perspectives to the organization. i was pretty happy, as pretty sure i was going to get in. i was pretty sure i would be welcomed with open arms, be providing this different perspective and diversity of thought to the conference. it didn't happen that way. two days before i departed for chicago, i was informed that despite being a credentialed female member of the press, my press credentials for this conference were being denied. quote thank you for your interest in attending this year's n.o.w. conference as a member of the press. a woman named sarah wrote to me a new mail. she is on twitter by the way if you want to get in contact or. however, press credentials for the conference will not be issued to you. we regret any inconvenience this may have caused. no other offer, no of the expedition was given. so i wrote back and said, you know, as a credentialed female member of the press i would like to know why the credentials to the conference was denied especially considering why flights and hotel rooms have already been booked. i look forward to your response. she never responded. so guess who is going anyway? that was me that i was going to go anyway. but the only way to attend the national organization for women conference i found out, maybe do something i thought and never would do. i had to become a member of the national organizationational or. so i'm a card-carrying member who pays dues but i'm also a member in good standing after the speech i'm not sure if i'll still have the membership. so when my plane touched down in chicago, i wasn't really sure what to expect. i knew that chicago was ground zero for radical movements in the post-1960s feminist movement was no exception. chicago after all was the home of jeremiah wright and, of course, barack obama. so when i walked into the conference at the hilton downtown in chicago expected to see a roomful of young women fighting for the rights. but instead the room was actually pretty much anti. now, you get the question a lot, why do you care what the national or decision for women think what are they ever the? the fact is that they're not and they're very important to pay attention to because people like barack obama and washington, d.c., are paying attention to what they have to say and they take their advice when it comes to implement a policy changes and when it comes to messaging on certain issues. but it wasn't necessary the speeches that were being given at this conference the company interest. instead it was the exhibit hall and what was being sold. so they were selling books about marxism and the feminist movement. things like, oh, the economist manifesto was available for purchase at multiple exhibit tables. picked up a copy. things like, oh, i don't know, education for socialists. communists continuity and the fight for women's liberation. documents of the socialist workers party. these are only two books. i bought five of them. they didn't is given to me me, which i thought was weird considering they wanted money for them. that's capitalism, right? that's weird. lightweight, you want me to give you money for these? aren't they free? so that's the kind of make you that there were selling at the n.o.w. conference. and so i was quickly realizing that now wasn't about women's rights actually, but about socialism, big government and abolishing capitalism. when any conservative organization such as cpac event exhibitors at the mainstream media deemed radical, this was a number of headlines and news stories designed to embarrass the conservative movement. by contrast one of the nation's largest women's rights groups features exhibitors that preach marxist ideologies and condemn american capitalism, there is no comment about it anywhere. good thing i went to the conference. but, in fact, marxist teaching is not a tiny fraction of the modern feminist agenda. it's not a fringe movement either. it is a centerpiece. from the time of karl marx in 1960 and up until today the progressive women's rights movement has hardly been about women's rights at all but instead about the transformation of american society and the transfer of wealth through government force. women's rights have simply acted as a failed to distract away from the true intention. some social revolution in america depende depend on two t. a breakdown of the family and women voting for progress as. both of which they've been very successful at doing. in the 19th and for a manifesto prairie fire, the politics of revolution, bill ayers and the weather underground devoted an entire chapter to have the women's rights movement should be used to advanced revolutionary goals calling feminists to join the ranks and there political agenda. they wrote quote sexism will not be destroyed and killed in realism is overthrown. it is in the collective interest of women to do this and to take full part in building a socialist revolution. we need power. socialist revolution lays the foundation for the liberation of women and begins dismantling the tenacious institutions of sexism. now there are only a few hundred copies of prairie fire that were produced, and the book has been long out of print but only the closest activists were privileged to see the blueprint plan for women moving forward in america. and through the decades. but as the introduction to the manifesto states, it was written to commons minded people. the more important it was written to women's groups and laid the groundwork for a long-term takeover of the feminist movement. this analysis represents the beginning of a process, not its final conclusion, they wrote. so in this manifesto bill ayers who was close guys obviously to the president and even that nobody wants to talk about that, i'll ayers give women a set of test based on his realization of the power of an uprising of women could bring to the progressive cause. he said quote our goal is the development of feminism which genuinely determined safeguards and defends the collective interest of women and which puts, points in the direction of revolution. we need to build a revolutionary feminism. women are at the intersection of the crisis and the will to survive. they believe that men acted as male supremacist to women, and that energy change society a breakdown in the traditional family structure was necessary and in order to destroy the structure they portrayed women as victims inside of it. quote the individual capitalists family structure is a wasteful social forum and not healthy for children to grow up and. it's a trap for women. it is a sanctioned form for sexual exportation and a hypocritical double standard. the family greets competitiveness among us. if you think the left hates competition, they do, even in your own family. that family-based competitors amongst us no future for women to grow with children, to means old women separating them from the life of the community and the build a single mothers to work and raise and care for children and making a household is a monument of women strengthen the commission. the modern male run clearly the found when we tear away the veil of sentimentality is the basic unit of capitalist society. capitalists in the modern family together historically feeding off of each other's development. so you can see that the instead what capitalism was about and exactly what that they needed to change it to implement their own progressive socialist policy. but the fact is the spot where the weather underground what went to think about the so-called wasteful structure of the free market economy and the family, the embrace of the traditional family structure is one of the best things that ever happened to women and to discount them out of poverty. it should be no surprise that according to reports from united nations develop the project, women living in at the free markets are social systems, especially in eastern europe, experience higher rates of poverty. and so the prairie fire manifesto wasn't on the fringe of far left policy position to its philosophies were deeply rooted in marxist and socialist thought and private throughout marxist and socialist literature. take for example, feminism and the marxist movement, another book that it picked up at the n.o.w. conference. how winning the liberation of women is linked to the struggle of the working class transform all economic and social relations, by mary alice waters from 1972. waters was the editor of the marxist journal of politics in theory, and idolize mass murder shea guevara in her writings. interwork just details the role of socialism played in stoking the 1960 revolutionary feminism and the socialist workers party and young socialist alliance promoted the idea of women's liberation be necessary to change economic structure of the united states. quote we throw ourselves into the movement to learn from, to better understand it and completed an independent and fighting direction and when the most conscious feminists to bring the most conscious of us to an understanding that only a socialist revolution could provide the necessary material foundations for the complete liberation of women. so they're saying in order for women to be liberated you have to tear down a capitalist structure. at the same time she wrote, we begin the process of arming ourselves theoretically. we studied the relevant marxist classics more deeply than before, and tried to apply them to current reality. we ground our practice and political orientation in the fundamentals of marxism. and so marx was a hero for waters who became a hero of the feminist movement. so someone she glorified and pointed out, she pointed out that he was right when he came to the so-called oppression of women inside the capitalists family structure. she lamented the idea that many women choose to stay home and be a wife and mother, and acknowledged that the women's suffrage movement was not built on the idea of destroying capitalism, but that it was something that needed to be changed for the hijacking and renaming of the women's liberation movement after the 1960s. so one thing that people might not know is the women's suffrage movement was actually a conservative movement. it was conservative who wanted women have the right to vote. it was conservatives who pushed through legislative that allowed women to get the right to vote. it was the left that voted against giving women the right to vote. and it wasn't until later when it came politically convenient as bill ayers and this manifesto and many others, have hijacked the movement and have been getting credit for bring pro women ever since, much like they did with the civil rights movement. and so a socialist began to infiltrate and hijacked the feminist movement, they began to grin new organizations for greater women's rights group with an underlying agenda of socialism and redistribution of wealth in america. the national organization for women wasn't one of them. there are many more. i know we've heard a lot about marx but i think we need to take a look at what exactly he said and go straight to the source on issue. what did he say about women? you can find it all in the commons manifesto which is sold at your local socialist bookstore. no. but no, everything can be found in his comments manifesto. he boldly states is goals of destroying the family and promoting single women in addition to dependence on all, and all powerful state government. he wrote abolition as a family that men claim to exploit the women in their families. on one sunday at the present family based on capital, on private games. is completely developed from this family, from this family, this this family, december exists only among the capitalist but this state of things find its government and the aspect of the among public institutions. so marx believed keeping women and children to get inside the family was exportation to give believed instead they should be raised by an educated by the government. he said to you charged us with wanting to stop the exportation of children by their parents, as if keeping kids inside the town was exportation? exportationquick you see this a lot with x. -- education system. why do they want your kids to be in school and feed them three knows that have come everything come to the state education system but he says this kind of want to destroy the family we plead guilty, what you will say we destroy the most out of relation to we replace home education by the social state. social studies ring a bell, anyone? .. >> why to do they oppose the right to keep and carry a firearm for self-defense? you know, barack obama is the most pro-american woman in history as many far left feminist groups have classified him, then why does he seek to make women feint on the government for everything they have? -- dependent on the government for everything they have? the obama campaign produced this life of julia slide show. and, you know, i always like to hold the left accountable up to their own standards, as if they have any. but to their own standards and statements. [laughter] and they're constantly screaming about sexism, right? and this life of julia slide show portrayed this young whom's born, and then she dies, and her entire life she was dependent on the government for her food, her education, her housing, raising her child without a father, everything. but where was the life of john? why is it the left who thought women are the weaker of the genders, there's no way they could survive anytime in their life without a government handout, without the government holding their hands? on that issue, of course, this was included in the life of julia, if the right to an abortion gives women personal autonomy and sexual freedom, then why are the after effects conveniently ignored? we often hear conservatives are against women's health. why it is that conservatives want women to know all of their options and all of the information before they go in to have that procedure? it's the left who is constantly trying to keep information out of the hands of women on very serious, life-long decisions that they make in those medical areas. and finally, if conservatives are so insensitive to women, then why is it that ted kennedy and bill clinton's heavenly have been ignored or covered up for years? the left has been lying to all of us for decades, and they've successfully rewritten history. the left talks about women in one way, but in reality treat them very differently, and the left has been selling victimhood as empowerment for decades. i know that i'm -- [inaudible] being defined by the pills that i take and being defined by lady parts or as the victim of my gender, and i'm sure that a lot of the women in this room are too, and i'm sure that the men are tired of being accused of hating women simply because you want them to pay their own bills which once upon a time was an empowering thing to do. the bottom line is women succeed through free markets and hard work, not through dependence on the government or socialist policies, and we all succeed in this way. the place to push back against this classification of women, the sexist classification of women by the pills that they take, is on college campuses. and it's important for young america's foundation to continue that fight. thank you again to all of you for being here. thank you to the students who have taken their time, and i'll take your questions. [applause] >> hi, katie. my name is grant wolf, and i'm a senior in dallas, texas. my question for you is, first of all, i wanted to thank you for your inciteful remarks, and i think you bring up a very good point that the left often uses misdirection and the covering up of the true issue with their own falsely-created issue. what do you think we need to talk about as conservatives that will draw aside that veil and provide clarity as to what the real issues are that are confronting our country, and how can we do that in a winsome manner? >> first of all, i remember grant. it's good to see you again. doing good work. you know, that's a broad issue that needs to be addressed, i think, issue by issue. but in terms of just not allowing the left to distract away from what the real issues are. the reason why they got away with the war on women rhetoric in 2012, and this happened in virginia as well with terry mcauliffe is that as conservatives we give the american people a little more credit. and we thought that talking about birth control and that sense was kind of -- contraception was below the public conversation. it's appropriate all of a sudden to talk about contraception openly. i don't know when that happened. [laughter] but the issue is if you don't define your own position first before your opposition defines it for you, then they're able to easily distract away from what the real issues are. for example, ken cucinelli in virginia didn't really to the best job of defining his own position on the issues of abortion and contraception did. chris christie did in his run, and he said this is my position, take it or leave it, and it was left on the table even though he was running against a woman. the war on women rhetoric didn't come up in his campaign. if you don't define your position right away, that allows the left to define it for you, and that allows for a distraction on those issues. so defining issues right away and then telling people, you know, i think that conservatives also want to be a little more polite when it comes to pushing back on those things. it's important to say they're lying. not to say they're misleading or there's a different perspective, they're lying, is what their doing. the hobby lobby position is a perfect example of that, and it's coming from the highest levels, you know, nancy pelosi, hillary clinton, debbie wasserman-schultz. but also defining positions and standing by them and addressing them when they come up instead of just acting like they're going to go away, i think s the best way to focus on issues which are the most important which are jobs and the economy and, by the way, women's issues, i think, is also kind of an offensive term. i think i care about all issues, and i don't think women's issues should be the only ones that women are focused on. and yet the left -- [applause] automatically thinks i don't want to talk about it all the time. why do you think women only care about this? do you not think women care about other things? isn't that kind of absurd that you think that they're too stupid to talk about the economy? [laughter] so throwing it back at them that way, i think, is a good way to start. >> hi, katie. you remember i told you i have three sons but no daughter, and i said my, i'd like to adopt you, and that still goes. [laughter] >> done. [laughter] i live in santa barbara, so i'll be at the beach. >> i've been in business for well over 40 years, and i've worked with women. i've seen so many women that have done such great jobs. and my question to you is would it help if the women that are in these jobs that are conservative women would speak out more, possibly in letters to the editor, editorials, but take a stronger voice in what's happening? what i see so often is we hear nancy pelosi and the rest of them get all this credit, but like i said in the 41 years i worked, i've seen so many great women, and i know they can do great jobs. what do you think? >> yeah. i think, you know, one of my -- the things that drives me crazy about the left is that they act like there's no other thought process on the female side of the spectrum. you know, you have the president of now, terry o'neill, going on national television and saying this is an attack on women, we're 50% of the population, there's going to be hell to pay. excuse me, i am a woman, and i am pretty happy about the hobby lobby decision. why is it that i don't matter? one of the things that the hobby lobby case has been completely ignored, conveniently, is that the entire hobby lobby legal team and all of the businesses that issued briefs on behalf of that company were women. they were women. have you been hearing about that in the media? [laughter] how this amazing female legal team just won one of the most historic supreme court cases that our country's ever going to see and that will be talked about for years? [applause] no, but they did. and so the great, you know, avery's going into media. that is very important. we complain a lot about media, but the fact is we have more media now than we've ever had. it has never been easier for everyone to have a voice. and i think it's time to really stand up and for women to say we don't all think the same, it's ridiculous that you think we all think the same, and it's important for conservative women to speak out. like i said earlier, you can't blame people for not knowing something if they've never been told. if they've never been told there's another side to the story, of course they're going to think in one way. i think conservative women are attacked in a very vicious way. we've seen what's happened to sarah palin, michele bachmann, there's an entire chapter in my book. but we're strong, and we can take it, and i think it's time for us to stand up and say, look, we have a voice too, and we also happen to be female, and this is our position. so, yes, speak out. >> katie, i have a question for you. we see the implementation of core -- [inaudible] common core. being implemented out here and the effects that it's going to have on our school children. i mean, we have a grandson that's going to fourth grade, and we've already seen it for two years. the ideas that they're forcing down their throats, the socialist ideas and so forth and so on, and all we can see out of that is it's going to enforce exactly what you've said, continue to tax and continued ignorance of history and women's place in history. >> uh-huh. well, i'm not an expert at common core, but i can tell you my father is a public schoolteacher, and he has to deal with common core, and he doesn't like it at all. he thinks it's pretty terrible. one of the greatest atrocityies i think we've allowed is to allow u.s. history to be turned into social studies. the change in that definition has done so much damage and has allowed the left to rewrite history in the most dishonest way. and common core is nothing different than that. they're just continuing that forward. i know that one of the bright lights, though, is that common core has been stopped by grassroots activists and people who have stood up and said, no, participants who have said -- parents who have said, no. again, it goes to show if you don't want something to happen, you really can stop it, it just takes some work. when people say you're crazy or you really don't understand what the curriculum is, and of course this isn't about socialism. the reason i talk so much about what i found in the communist manifesto and the education for socialists, because they're saying exactly what we're seeing happening, right? that is exactly what they're doing. so talking about it in an honest way and not trying to cut around the corners to be polite, i think, is an important way to approach that issue as well. any more questions? over there. >> thank you. is somebody going to write a book on the irs scandal? who's going to take that up? [laughter] i mean, i just -- >> someone -- [laughter] i would hope so. it's, you know, covered that top toic pretty closely, and there's definitely enough material to do so. the media hasn't, shocker, covered it like they should. i'm proud to say that i'm on the side of the media that is standing up against the irs. the left has been defending the irs. i don't know, who does that. that's very strange to me. [laughter] but, okay. yeah, i don't know if anyone's planning on writing a book, but there's definitely enough material there. and i actually do touch on the irs scandal in this book in particular, because there's a very interesting component to that that plays into the left's plans to keep conservative women out of the political realm. >> hi, katie. recently you've done some very important reporting about the whole illegal unaccompanied children being sent around the united states and the fact that ms-13 gang members are taking advantage of that and, basically, being used as coyotes in order to bring these kids into the united states in the first place. and then they're infiltrating cities too. two questions i have. the first is, why is it that i.c.e. members feel that they cannot segregate these ms-13 gang members and prevent them from going across the country and recruiting other illegal children into that gang? >> uh-huh. >> my second question is, what can we as citizens do in order to prevent the exacerbation of this situation? >> well, to answer your first question in terms of what agents are capable of doing, their hands are tied. there's a difference between border patrol and i.c.e.. so border patrol are the ones who are processing all of these minors. an issue you mentioned is that in the united states you are considered a minor until you turn 18. but being a minor in places like hop doors and el salvador -- honduras and el salvador is a very different kind of thing than it is here in the united states. and we do know there are a lot -- not a lot, but enough gang members from some of the most violent gangs in the world using these processing facilities not only to enter the united states to get to their family members who have been living here illegally, which is all in official border patrol documentation, but they're also using these hubs where 47% of the minors are young men. they're using them to recruit more people for their gangs because it's a perfect breeding ground, right? these people are in the united states, their parents aren't around, they have nothing, they can offer a sense of community, they can offer a sense of livelihood, give them something to do. we're talking about very violent people here. i mean, people, it's documented showing that they've engaged in murder, torture back in their home countries before entering the united states. in terms of border patrol not being able to separate them out, that's a policy. that's a washington, d.c. policy that doesn't allow there to be a determination between minors and juveniles who are engaged in gang activity. to border patrol's job, due to policy -- and if you're an agent, you have to fall in line, or you lose your job -- is to process these people through, and then they turn them over to i.c.e., and then i.c.e. does something with them. whether they deliver them to their parent who's been living in the united states illegally or not, that happens. there isn't a lot of answers about where the people are being taken. all i know is that they are being scheduled to be placed somewhere in the united states, and then they're given a court date and asked to show up and, of course, they don't show up, right? so it's a very serious issue on that end, a public safety issue, an issue for our law enforcement to deal with later down the road, it breeds more crime. and on the issue of stopping it, you know, i think that these protests that we've seen in arizona and in marietta, california, are the way that you really can be effective. and they're not, you're not being inhumane or insensitive or not emotional enough. this is a very serious problem and a serious issue. and the federal government has failed to do their job, and now we have a crisis on our hands. and americans shouldn't have to put up with it. and it's not just one side of the political spectrum that thinks that way. it's left, right, independent cans who are saying this is crazy. so i think standing up and doing what you can and contacting people who can do something about it is the way to go, and exposing what's going on inside these facilities is important as well. so that's what i would say to, you know, my best explanation of what's going on. and one more question? two more? over here and then we'll go to here. >> katie, just thank you for being a voice for the conservative movement. we really appreciate it. and a young voice, which is encouraging to our youth. question, with your knowledge and studies what do you see the 2014 elections looking like and the 2016 presidential election? >> you know, my focus is really on issues, so i could try and say i think it's going to go this way or that way. my focus isn't necessarily on candidates or whether we're going to win or not or what the chances of one side or the other taking whatever, senate, presidential candidates. so i'm not really sure. i have hope, and i know what the feelings are surrounding big issues like obamacare and the border crisis and foreign policy and all those kinds of things. but in terms of the details on that, i just don't have enough brain capacity with everything that i cover on the issue side to really pay that close attention. so i'm hopeful, but i think it's going to take some work, and i hope that they don't drop the ball, so to speak. we're on the 2-yard line, and we've got just keep it going, keep it going, push it across. so we'll see. i apologize for not having the details, but that's just not exactly my focus. so -- >> hi. thank you. thank you so much for being here. we appreciate everything you do, and we love watching you on all the shows. you're so articulate and knowledgeable. >> thank you. i appreciate that. >> here's an issue, fast and furious. i assume since you wrote a book about it, you are still interested in what's happening. do you have an update on what is happening now? >> so for the past year and a half really we've been stuck in this waiting period because everything is caught up in the court system. and when everything's caught up in the court system, it's impossible to get documents, it's impossible to talk to people because there's an ongoing lawsuit. we have seen some movement now in the past month with judicial watch which is a phenomenal organization if you haven't heard about it, getting a hearing in front of a judge saying, look, the executive privilege claim by barack obama over all these documents, you know, it's taking, a, too long for you to make a decision, and, b, we have a freedom of information request lawsuit out that needs to be responded to. it's been far too long. they are very good at getting details that each congress isn't -- even congress isn't capable of getting. so really we're in this waiting period to see what a judge is going to decide, and that will determine whether we're going to get any more information about what happened. i am hopeful we'll at least see some more documentation which is pretty key, but we're just going to have to wait and see. >> [inaudible] >> all right. thanks, guys. [applause] >> you're watching booktv, television for serious readers. you can watch any program you see here online at booktv.org. >> booktv asked, what are you reading this summer? >> well, i think i'm doing a catch-up summer. i'm reading a lot of things that are not particularly new, but i have meant to read and not gotten done. so i sort of ticked off a little list of 'em. they start with two sort of real life rescue stories from world d war ii. one actually i'm reading now is

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Moscow , Moskva , Russia , North Carolina , Texas , California , Virginia , Washington , District Of Columbia , Beirut , Beyrouth , Lebanon , Charlotte , Arizona , El Salvador , Poland , Capitol Hill , Georgetown University , Chicago , Illinois , Polish , Americans , America , Salvador , American , Donald Moore , Nancy Pelosi , Terry Mcauliffe , Kerry Howard , Santa Barbara , Hilary Rosen , Mary Alice , Wendy Mccaw , Jeremiah Wright , Thomas Alfred Taylor , Ellie Rosen , Michele Bachmann , Ann Coulter , Chris Christie , Barack Obama , Shea Guevara , Sarah Palin , Katie Pavlich , Karl Marx , Ann Romney , Hillary Clinton , Ted Kennedy ,