Proposed by eisenhower in 1956. the 64 civil rights act, the 65 civil rights, voting rights act, the vast majority of republicans voted for both. i happen to disagree with goldwater on this. i understood his philosophy. ithe had no a anmous whatsoever. the problem i have is that the democrat party and their mouthpieces in the media keep accusing republicans of what they were. well, i think they have lurched in a completely different direction, a radical left direction. there s no doubt about that. mark: that s a very bleak place to take the country, very dangerous. we ll be right back.k. place toe country. very dangerous. very dangerous. we ll be right back. to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it s best to make you everybody else.
Consider the demeanor that judge kavanaugh demonstrated at that hearing yesterday, filled with ranker and rage, anmous and arrogance and i think that the kind of temperament is reflective of those allegations as well. it s interesting that mark judge, obviously is i assume going to be interviewed. the reporting was obviously just that. you were questioning judge kavanaugh about that yesterday. and basically indicating what kavanaugh was saying under oath about what mark judge had submitted, judge kavanaugh kept saying he, under penalty of perjury sent an affidavit essentially. you pointed out it was actually something written by his attorn ay. exactly right, anderson. it s not a affidavit, ritit s a
Interview. and it s job interview for a position unlike any other. i have tremendous reverence for the united states supreme court. i was a law clerk there. i ve argued four cases there. i ve spent most of my career in the courts. and my belief is that this decision on how to vote and i will vote no is among the most important that i will make as a united states senator. the united states of america deserves not just a good nominee but the best person for the job. and the person that we saw come before us yesterday was filled with such rancor and anmous, such anger that i cannot accept he would be an impartial and objective justice on the united states supreme court.
That you do have an agenda in terms of what you think. you have a clear point of view on that. but the implication is that you are an objective reporter who s pommel gating a point of view. you said openly you don t think your point of view is biassed. but what i said about the president had nothing to do with statues. i was talking about his behavior on stage. again, totally understood but the way it read is that you have a personal anmous towards the president. whether it s true or not, that s the way a lot of his followers are going to take it. i have aminous against a guest on the show or someone in the street who has ignorance of history. you need to be able to defend yourself and to defend yourself, to have a right, clear perspective you need know history and be educated about it and in many cases the people fighting for the issues do not.
You go back to a university and it s gone. weak, weak people. so he said that the media is trying to do that. the media is simply responding to people there protesting and to the story of the statues being taken down. the media hasn t called for the statues to be taken down. so i don t understand when he says the media is trying to take away your culture. i do think one of the conservative critiques of the media is that the media have a political agenda and they hide behind this petina of objectivety. to push forward the agenda. you were very passionate about the statements about the media last night, and there is a reason for that. the comments last night but a lot of it goes to what his base thinks, which is that you have an anmous for his agenda and you personally want to see these