tv Washington Journal Liz Wheeler CSPAN December 31, 2019 1:30pm-2:19pm EST
legislation is often like sausage. -- eleanorr you confining her work at the dailybeast.com. guest: happy new year to you and all of your listeners. stay safe and prosperous. host: a little bit about your network for those not familiar with it, tell us about it and doesn't take a point of view and what perspective does it bring. for one america news network and i host the show point."tipping for 21 hours of the day, we do straight news, almost old-fashioned news we call it, where we do quick headlines. we have three times as many
headlines in every 15 minute block as any of the other cable news networks, which you know, tends to stick to one topic for a long time. there are three opinion talkshows in the evening in the evening and primetime hours. i host one of the opinion talkshows so i am very openly conservative as are the viewers and the readers of my book know. the rest of the 21 hours are straight news, no bias. host: you choose the topic, tipping points, for the show and your book, what are you trying to say to that title as far as the book is concerned? guest: i wanted to let people know that there is an urgency in fighting for the values and principles that made our nation great. traditional conservative values. limited government, free speech, a right to worship the god we choose, right to free press, individual liberty in general, and there is an urgency and -- in fighting for those, but it is also not something that we have to feel cynical about.
not something we have to feel hopeless about. there are things that all of our viewers and all of my readers can do in their every day lives, even if they do not work in the swamp, even if they do not run for office are working -- or work for government, things we can do to fight for these values and ultimately, defeat the radical leftist ideas so that liberty and freedom and prosperity can prevail. host: the way that you described the book is sort of a handbook. what do you mean? guest: i wrote it as a response to another handbook for the left where they get all of their tactics. once you have read that book, which i highly recommend to your viewers, you can recognize the tactics that the left is using in everyday life because they use the same template of tactics, the same strategy in all of their political endeavors. i wanted to give an alternative to conservatives and republicans to have the same go to set of
strategies to be able to use to defend our own principles, defend our policies, and debunk the lies we hear on a daily basis from the left. everyone who watches the mainstream media, everyone who listens to democrat leadership knows that this is one of their main tactics is misinformation. they package it in this is -- in this really palatable and talking point so people who may not be as informed believe it, or believe that it might to be true. i give people in chapter four actually, i give people 11 verbal tactics you can use in your college classroom, with your high school friends, and your workplace, with your family, on twitter to combat these arguments and misinformation, lies from the left. it is debate tactics. host: you can talk to our guests by calling (202) 748-8001 republicans, (202) 748-8000 democrats, (202) 748-8002 for independents, and you can text us thoughts at (202) 748-8003.
post on twitter and on facebook. you start the book was talking about your home state of california. you say "think of california as patient zero. the first person infected with the plague will infect 10 more people and so on until the pervasive illness, we will call it liberalism, is rampant sweeping the nation, leaving strewn in its path, victims formally of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." why did you start that way? guest: it is my adoptive home state, and i moved to san diego six years ago. as a transplant, i have seen the policies in the california state government that have caused the destruction of our state. in san francisco to the human feces and drug needles on the streets, the homelessness, to
the high taxes, illegal immigration crisis, social, authoritarian tendencies of the left codified into law -- if you look at california, and as i say and my book, press the mute button on the rhetoric of the democrat, you can see what their actual agenda is. actions speak louder than words. the actions of the left in california are clear. they are not trying to pretend they are moderate. they are enacting radical leftist policies whether it is gun control or punishing nurses for misgendering patients, these absolutely insane, absurd, anti-liberty policies, and what happens first in california does spread to the rest of the nation. states are supposed to be laboratories of democracy. california is a laboratory of totalitarianism. host: liz wheeler joining us and if you want to ask her questions, you can call the lines or post on social media.
how did the book come about as far as your need for such type of a handbook? what convinced you? guest: great question. one of the most popular emails i get from viewers after my show every night, they say to me, i agree with what you are saying and i am shocked and horrified, but what can i do to stop it? these are everyday americans. they are not people that necessarily work in the media, not people who work in washington dc. these are moms, dads, small business owners, students, young conservatives, who want to know what they can do instead of feeling helpless. it is very easy to feel helpless watching the news every day, watching the democrats, feeling like your vote once a year does not make an impact. it does, but people still feel that way. i thought, i know how people can take part in this and i know how people can mobilize. everyday american people can take part in fighting for our country.
i wrote them a handbook. this is an expanded version of the email that i wish i had time to send back to every person. this is the expanded version of my answer. host: we have some calls lined up. we will start off with tim in toledo, ohio. democrat line, you are on with our guest. caller: there we go. i just want to say, i am a news junkie and i consider myself kind of a conservative democrat or a liberal republican, because i think some people have valid points on both sides. but the one american news, you are like dealing with my ex-wife. you say a half-truth to perpetuate a lie. if you are going to say -- obama did some good things, he was not the perfect president, but he did some good things. trumpeted some good things, too,
but he tears this country apart with his hate speech. one american news seems to demonize the one-party and elevate the other, when really, we are all just people. compromise is the magic word. the tit for tat garbage, that is what you people are perpetuating. guest: first of all, it is so great you are from ohio, i am from cincinnati. fellow buckhead, nice to talk to you. , youentioned half-truth say my network has half-truths -- do you have a specific example? host: he hung up. guest: that is one of the tactics i talk about in my book so this is a perfect opportunity. a lot of times from the left, they make vague accusations or allegations, and one of the best things to do is ask for a specific example. that is a large allegation, i am -- accusation, i am happy to
correct if i make an error, but typically when liberals make accusations, they do not have the facts to substantiate it. what he was saying was clearly has opinion. he likes obama, and the same with president trump. my show specifically, although i have full confidence in my network as well -- i am openly conservative, that is true. i think the policy that president trump has put into place is wonderful for the american people. he is protecting religious liberty, he is protecting individual liberties in general, and he has done amazing for our economy and our jobs. the divisive rhetoric in our nation was not started by president trump. anybody who thinks that our problem started with president trump need to pick up a history book. the left has been levying unfair attacks against president trump. i would pause at this thought experiment for people. if the president right now were not president trump but another nameless, faceless person who had enacted the policies, he would be considered a centrist
president. many of the policies are things that the democrats in the past have gotten on board was. -- with. even immigration, president trump's immigration policies from the border wall, daca, deportation, sanctuary cities -- all these things are things that the democrats previously not only supported but appropriated money in congress for. if you want to talk about so-called hate speech or divisive rhetoric, you should look at what is coming from the democrats and see if they are being intellectually honest about the opinions and policies they support or maybe they are just suffering from trump derangement syndrome and hate what is going on because they do not like the president. host: are you asked if your network is a pro trump network and how would you respond? guest: most of the people are memberse that that are of the left mainstream media, but we are flattered and grateful that president trump
watches our network and enjoys it, but we do not cater to one politician, one party in anyone -- any weight, shape, or form. i am openly conservative. i voted for president trump. an opinion commentator which is what our prime time lineup is come about our news site is certainly unbiased and the mainstream media wants to do anything they can to discredit a competitor or anyone who is standing up for the principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. that is the best they have got. host: let's hear from the independent line. trent, monroe, louisiana. caller: liz, you talk so fast. slow down, i am a southerner. i appreciated what you are about -- what you are talking about. i raised seven kids and i am an old guy now, but i remember a time when theology was felt to be the queen of the sciences, that we presuppositionally look at that first and then applied that to our social, political,
economic, judicial, foreign policy problems. something that says how to stop a civil war in america, this past issue of my "new york" magazine is about new tariffs, nationalism, and populism. give me a slow answer here, because i feel like the real terrorists, the ruling class, what samuel francis called the managerial elite, the globalists, the new world order people who have smashed the idea that the presuppositions of revelation from god are anything to look at, and that they -- what trump has done as he has said, look, the news media is full of fakery, and if we keep applying that across the intellectual spectrum, we may see that the financials are a bit of faith thing. no one understands it. the law school, education. host: you put a lot out there, let's let our guest respond. guest: you sound like my
grandfather in the sense that he always tells me to slow down and that i talk too fast. i will do my best. in regards to theology and religion, i am a practicing catholic, so i do not buy into the doomsday apocalypse, i think that is nonsense. faith in god is fundamentally important to what i do and who i am in my politics. i recommend that you read a book about the founding of our nation called "did america have a christian founding?" it is by mark david hall. it is a fabulous book about the crossover between theology and politics in our nation and what the founding fathers actually intended our nation to be. and that is in regards to how we integrate our religious values, judeo-christian principles, into the statutes, the legal structure, and the government foundation of our nation. it is really, really good and i think that will be eye-opening. in regards to the rest of this,
i would caution anybody to be careful about conspiracy theories. there is no doubt that the mainstream media is very bombastic. they have gotten to the point that they have pulled their own lies so many times, that they believe them. the democrat politicians, adam schiff comes to mind, has done the same thing. he has repeated his own falsehood so many times that he believes it. it is incumbent on you and me to call that out in a calm, rational, blunt, polite way that the american people have a chance to see the truth. host: you recommend in your book, you can expand on this, but you say pretend you are a shrink. guest: yes. a lot of people come into an argument with five or six preplanned talking points, but in the example, and i will use
abortion, when it comes to debating abortion, you will have pro-abortion activists, planned parenthood spokespeople, feminists coming to the table with five or six talking points about abortion and if you hold back, exercise self-restraint, and do not do a data dump of all of your facts and information, but let them get all of their arguments out first, they will data dump you, which means they will use not one or two, but all of their talking points in their first two minute spiel. in response to your response, they will not have any more arguments left. you can get more to the substance of the debate. if you do not let them have their say, then it does not matter what you say to them, they will just respond with one of their preplanned talking points. host: this is liz wheeler, the author of the book "tipping points: how to topple the left's house of cards." has a show by the same name "tipping point" on the one
america news network. joining us in san diego. republican line, we have a caller. caller: honored to be able to speak with you today. just recently in the past ashley -- actually started listening to "tipping point," and that is why we love you and why we love the president. you speak directly to the people and you do not have all of this where we cannot understand. you are telling it like it is. they get caught up on the msnbc and the cnn's, and their mind is twisted in such a way that they to at look through beautiful person like yourself and the president who is trying to speak to us as an individual and on our level. i would like to thank you for being on the air. this is great for c-span to have you on. this is the best of every way to end the year and start off the new year. host: do you have a question for
our guest? up, i would keep it love to see you more out on the scene like on the c-span's and different things. no, i would just like to tell her i appreciate what she does. thank you. host: william in north carolina. do you have any response? guest: i am so flattered, thank you so much. i do not mind the flattery. i do have a quick comment. when you talk about me talking directly to the american people which is what i try to do, i have the privilege of being in your homes every evening to talk directly to you to talk about the issues that are most important, but it is interesting that he mentions that phrase of talking directly to the american people. it is what we as the voting electorate, the populace of the united states crave from our elected officials. we want them to talk directly to
us, we do not want them always to talk in highfalutin talking points or press releases, or in a more controlled manner. we see president trump doing that same thing. he uses twitter, which the left ironically demonizes as they call for more press freedom, we see him talking to the direct american people. i appreciate that. host: when you exchange ideas with people who do not agree with you politically, do you ever learn from them and does it change your opinion? guest: people ask me this a lot, have i ever change my mind on any policy. i would say, yes, about 90%. there is one issue i have changed my mind on over the course of the past five or six years. this will come as a shock to a lot of listeners, especially those who know come from a military family. i changed my mind on the death penalty. i used to be pro-death penalty, pro-capital punishment for crimes for which that seemed to be deserved, but i've changed my mind looking at statistics, facts, analysis, not because i
am soft on crime. but because it is not necessary anymore. this is what i mean. the reason we implemented the death penalty originally in our country was because that was the only way we had to protect other innocent citizens from being harmed, from the rights being violated by the criminal. we did not have the capacity to incarcerate them in a safe way that would protect other people. now we do. we are not living in the wild west anymore. we have the capacity to house individuals, and when you combine that with the financial aspect of the fact that the death penalty actually costs a lot more than life in prison given the appeals process and all of that, i have changed my mind on the death penalty and i do not think for the most part, it is necessary. host: bernie in deerfield beach, florida. democrat line. caller: good morning. i have a question for you.
in the last 50 years, can you name the only two presidents who lowered our deficit? it is now over $1 trillion. host: do you want to respond? guest: yes, actually, i cannot name the two presidents that lowered the deficit. but here is what i will tell you -- conservatives and republicans in congress have neglected to do their duty when it comes to fiscal conservatism. it is strange to think about the fact that a couple of years ago, we had the tea party movement which was based on the idea of fiscal restraint. mentality, except for a very few legislators in congress, chip roy comes to mind, very few people actually are speaking out about this. very few republicans are speaking out about this. this says something and not something flattering about the state of our politics because the only reason that conservatives who are supposed to be fiscal conservative, would not speak out about this is
because they are afraid of losing their seats. this is what i mean. we have allowed the democrats, some republicans, to give away so much free stuff and expand our welfare state so much that it is now politically untenable for politicians to address their constituents and say hey, vote for me, i want to take away some of your free stuff. nobody would want to vote for someone saying i would want to take away your free stuff. even republicans and conservatives who allowed the big government welfare programs to expand the way that they are are afraid to tell their constituents, i stand for fiscal conservatism. it is something i think the republican party as a whole needs to do some serious soul-searching about because it is not just irresponsible in and of itself to spend the level we are spending, it is actually a national security threat for our nation to sell our debt to countries who are adversaries. host: independent line, pat in georgia. caller: hi, i am an educator of
the youth in our country, and i teach my students that our democracy has nothing to do with democrats or republicans. i can currently view for myself the divisive language that seems to be spewing out of people's mouths, of individuals like you, and the hypocrisy is unreal to me. it is difficult for me to go in my classroom and teach my constitution, our the democracy in this country, and see the leadership of this country. i do not care if it is a republican or democrat -- that children,ching our and may set an example for our country. it is shameless. it is hypocrisy. it is sad. and it makes me want to cry. i am tired of the divisive language of people like yourself and others. whether they are from either party, we have to do better to bring our country together. thank you. guest: ok.
nobody likes divisive rhetoric, and i am sorry that you are feeling emotional about it. i am sorry to hear that. you accuse me of using divisive language, do you have an example of divisive rhetoric? because taking a political stance is certainly not divisive. late is how you treat other people, especially people with io you disagree, for example, am treating you very respectfully, whereas you accuse me of divisive language. if you have an example, i would love to address it. a quick note, when you teach our students about democracy, it is a constitutional republic. host: pat, are you still there. caller: this is an example of what i am saying. most people like ms. wheeler, they do not listen. they just come back with something that does not make sense. i respect you just as you said you are expecting me, -- respect me, but i am telling you that our children are dying because they are being told and they are
living a lie because of the hypocrisy of the leaders in this country. we need to stop and listen, and see what we are actually doing. this country is divided because of the language you are using, even the term -- guest: can you give me an example of the language and i will be happy to address it for you? caller: i just said it. you are dividing this country like most people, they talk about people in terms of democrats and republicans. we are all americans. guest: ok, you are absolutely correct. we are all americans first. we should not even identify as americans first, but as first, as a christian, then american, then whatever party represents your political views. i agree with you. i also agree that it is time for our country to tone down the bombastic narrative, and take a chill pill. not you, but in general in our political environment. try to cool it back to where we do show each other dignity and respect. we are on the same page. again, i would just ask, if you
are going to say that i use divisive rhetoric, and it is not divisive to call someone a republican or democrat, it is how they vote, people are comfortable with that. that is not a defensive term. if you want me to address so-called divisive rhetoric, i am happy to do it, but you do need to give me an example. host: this is liz wheeler, the author of the book "tipping points: how to topple the left's house of cards." she has a program on the one america news network by the same name. this is from michigan, republican line. carol, hello. caller: hi liz, what a breath of fresh air. oh my gosh, you are wonderful. guest: thank you. caller: i have a saying that you cannot be a catholic and a democrat. it has got so many of my catholic friends hysterical. however, they will not admit that what they stand for is totally against their catholic religion.
also, can you help me with this -- i listen to c-span daily, i love everyone on this show. there is nothing like c-span except maybe yours. call after call of black people, all they do is accuse president trump of lying. this man does not lie to the amount that they say on a daily basis. and they will not admit what president trump has done for the black race. can you talk about this? guest: let me address your theological argument. i am a practicing catholic and i would agree with you to a large extent. i am not here to judge the state of anyone's soul or their sincerity of faith practice, but the policies perpetuated by the democratic party, especially those that are anti-life, assisted suicide, abortion, euthanasia -- those are
antithetical to the catholic doctrine. the catholic doctrine calls abortion an egregious sin. i agree with you and i would phrase it the same way. i do not understand how one can be a practicing catholic and vote democrat, when the policy of the democratic party including the majority of the 2020 contenders support, celebrate, and champion abortion up until the moment of birth. women nine months pregnant to -- who want to abort for any reason whatsoever, the democrats think there should be no restriction on that. you do not have to be a republican, conservative, you do not have to be christian alone catholic to know that is wrong, but catholics ought to know that is wrong. i pray for catholics on a daily basis that they would understand the gravity of the abortion agenda in our nation. i think a lot of times, catholics can be suckered in
by the social justice talk coming from democrats, because the catholic church, unfortunately, some individuals in the leadership, they mistake government welfare it for personal charity, so given that mistake, they support big government programs. versus encouraging individuals to take action, and that is a fundamental mistake. god made us with free will. he wants us to make the choice to do good. he wants us to make the choice to donate our money to charity. he wants us to make the choice to give freely to our time. he does not want the government to compel us to do that. two entirely different things. i think a lot of catholics mistake those two things. part of that responsibility lies with the leadership of the catholic church who conflate those two things to the detriment of a lot of people. in regards to your second comment about race, i would caution you to be very careful not to generalize any stereotype based on the color of someone's
skin. if there are individuals who are not acknowledging the truth or individual people, regardless of their demographic, who accuse a politician of lying when you believe the politician, go ahead and call them out for and tell them the truth and let the american people know the truth. you and i know the truth about what president trump has done for our entire economy, our unemployment rate, job creation, and yes, the unemployment rate of african-americans. and hispanic community and regards to the prosperity of our nation as a whole. host: to that, the president sent out a tweet about the u.s. - china trade to deal saying, i will be signing our trade deal with china on july 15. the ceremony will take place at the white house. representatives from china will be present. adding, at a later date, or -- more talk
the issue of the title of your book with someone saying, "the title of your book screams us versus them." how would you respond? guest: and a sense, it is. it is our principles against their principles. i talk about the compromise because we had a previous caller talking about how we need to compromise, and this has been an idea in our nation that a compromise is inherently a good thing, it means that people are getting along. and i reject that premise for this reason. i do not thing that compromise is a virtue in and of itself , especially when what is on the line and on the negotiating table are fundamentally contradictory principles. for example, we can go back to the life issues. you can talk about the economy, you can talk about abortion, you can talk about guns -- these are not issues where there are some middle ground because the premise of what we believe is
very different. let's use the second amendment as an example. republicans support the second amendment. they think that each individual has a constitutionally protected inherent right to keep and bear arms. the democrats think the government has the right to restrict and dictate who can own what firearms and when, and can take that right away. those are two fundamentally contradictory ideas. if we compromise with the left on our second amendment for the sake of compromise, then what have we achieved? the answer is we have given away some of our inherent rights. there is no virtue in negotiating away our inherent rights just for the sake of saying that we compromised. host: there is a chapter of your book dedicated to books that people should read and it is a variety, can you explain? guest: it is about 50 books i included in this chapter, but my original list was 200, so you can thank my editor for cutting
that down. that is also one of the emails that i get on a very regular basis is asking me what books to read, how do i educate myself so i am able to talk about xyz topic, how do you know this fact or that fact, so i give people a list. this is not a comprehensive list , is not the only list you can use to achieve that knowledge. it is a list i use. it is books that were very fundamental or instrumental in the formation of my political principles, and it is basically everything. there are fiction books on their, history books on there, founding documents are on there, there is policy related books on there. everything you could want in a list that i believe will help you understand our nation in a deeper way. host: you include rules for radicals, "handmaid's tale," as well. guest: it is important for people to listen to democrats
, as difficult as that may be for some republicans, and to read democrat ideology. how can we defeat their ideology if we do not know what underpins it? basically, you have to know your enemy in order to defeat it. the enemy, of course not being , the individual, but the principle that is antithetical to our constitution. read democrat books all the time, and the more you understand, the more you can anticipate their responses and the more you understand the flaws in their logic and the formation of policies. read as many democrat books as you can. host: this is from michigan, carol. caller: yes, i just wanted to say why the democrats, are you demonizing them, just because you are pro-choice does not mean you are pro-abortion, and as a catholic, i just want to keep my women's health rights to myself and i don't need to have people go when, a doctor, and if i have
a miscarriage, he will have to check me out to make sure i had a miscarriage to have an abortion. what do you think of that? guest: first of all, that would never happen. there would be no provision under the law that if you had a miscarriage that you would be penalized or forced to undergo an exam so you can rest at ease. that is a fear mongering tactic from the left to scare women and there is no truth behind that. i do not think that one can be pro-choice and also against abortion. we have to go back to the heart of the matter and say, what is abortion? what does abortion do? abortion ends the life of an unborn baby. another talking point from the left is that it is just about a woman's autonomy and a woman's body, but we know that it's fundamentally unscientific because we know that an unborn baby is a separate human being with separate, individualized dna from the mother's body.
we are not just talking about the mother, we are talking about two people, the mother and the baby. it is not just a matter of the mom making a choice for her body but do we want to allow people to end the life of a separate, distinct, unborn baby simply because they want to, and if abortion ends human life, what right do we have to do that even in the name of choice? host: we will go next to our independent line. we will hear from james in oceanside, california. caller: hi, this is james. hi liz. guest: hi james. caller: a few callers ago, you had a guy on, you asked for things that trump, he had said something about trump lying and you wanted some facts. guest: i think they accused me of lying, yeah. caller: i am not accusing you of
lying, but i could take it back to some of the simple stuff of who was going to pay for the wall? obviously, we are paying for the wall now. the other thing with the tariffs, the chinese were supposed to pay for the tariffs. we all know -- anyone with common sense knows -- that the taxpayers will pay for these tariffs in america. those are facts. when you are on a show and you are claiming that you want facts, i heard with my own ears and while i was following trump that mexico was going to pay for the wall. caller: he said that. that is accurate. caller: we are taking money out of our military to pay for that wall. why is that? caller: it is because the democrats will not fund or appropriate any money for border security and american citizens are being killed by people who are crossing our border illegally. it is true that president trump said that mexico would have paid for the wall. you and i agree, there is no reason to deny that.
it would be ideal if it was paid for like that. but the president does not have unilateral power to appropriate money, he has to cooperate with congress and the legislature to do that. you have to ask, why isn't the legislature doing that especially given the fact that democrats in 2007 appropriated money for the same thing? now the democrats are saying no, and you have to ask, why? are they doing that because it appears that president trump is not following through on a campaign promise or doing it for the good of our nation? i would argue that they are doing it that president trump does not have the capacity to follow through without the cooperation of democrats. host: our guest is the host of the show "tipping point" and the author of the book "tipping points: how to topple the left's house of cards." at one time you served as commissioner of the board of zoning. guest: i did. i was the youngest person to serve in that position in my
hometown which is a suburb , outside of cincinnati, ohio, so that was quite an experience. host: how did you end up in television? guest: around the time that i served as a commissioner on the board of zoning appeals, i collaborated on a book. we self published, me and 13 other young conservative activists around the country, and the original book was called "young conservative: why it is smart to be like us." after we self publish that book, i went on a small speaking tour where i talk to different groups about the book about the perspective of a young person who is conservative, and why i was conservative. not just why conservativism? further people, but why it worked for me, why it was best for me. from there, i got in touch with "one american news network" and the ceo, robert herring, who had seen my stuff and offered me a show. host: let's hear from tennessee, republican line. caller: hi, this is byron.
i would like to say, one america news network is one of the best conservative networks available to us. the reason i like president trump is because he sounds just like me. i would like to ask you a question. i have noticed that women are targeted by the democratic party, and they use the same philosophy that advertisers use on tv, that targets women because 90% of the advertisements target women. the democrat party uses the same tactics to apply their propaganda. i say propaganda because i think they are socialist or communist. guest: thank you for watching one american news. i too, think it is the best
network but i am biased. , i understand the point you are making about democrats targeting women. as a young woman myself, i find it fundamentally insulting that democrat politicians think the issues i care most about our -- our free birth control and celebrated abortion. democrats call those women's issues, but i call women's issues the economy, national security, individual liberty, prosperity, the protection of our constitutional rights, including the right to life. when democrats look at women and only see a commodity or a sex object, it is fundamentally demeaning to women so they use fear mongering tactics to keep women under their thumb. they tell women that they are going to be oppressed and going to be like the handmaid's tale, they will have to resort to back alley abortions. they use all of these very demeaning and insulting tactics -- political tactics to keep women subjugated and voting for the democrats. i fundamentally reject that and so do a lot of young women. host: from lisa, charlotte,
north carolina, democrats. hi. caller: i have something to say but i have to go after listening to that, i'm sorry, thank you. guest: good to talk to you, lisa. host: bill will be next on the independent line. caller: lisa, i like a lot what you have to say. i am in wisconsin. i talk just about as fast as you, so i will try to make this fast. i am 63 years old, former marine. in the sixth grade, my teacher said that russia would fall would gain rights, and every , right they gain, we would lose one. i have seen that come about in my lifetime, and i think it is sad. i have got two questions for you. how long do you think it will be before we talk about something that is politically incorrect that nobody wants to ever talk about, before the people of the
united states take up arms and turn against this country and there is a revolution, a violent revolution like we have had in the past, that one of our great presidents said was overdue in 20 years. do you see that as something that will happen because of the feeling of, we cannot do anything about this, like i feel and what you are talking about? people feel that we cannot overcome this. it has gotten so far out ahead of taking our rights away. seatbelt laws that do not apply to students on school buses. the straw thing you brought up. and -- byerty property and you have to pay taxes on it. you cannot cut down trees. it is widespread everywhere. taking our rights away. host: we will let our guest respond. guest: my short answer, no, we are not anywhere close to a physical revolution. i understand your feelings of hopelessness.
revolution is only necessary when there is no recourse politically and peacefully to our problems, and we have just a myriad of resources. we have the right to run for office, we have a representative that we can talk to who are supposed to listen to us and what we want them to do in the legislature. we have a free press, we can talk to the press, we can get involved, we can get involved in protesting, we can get involved online and talking to our family and friends. there are so many things that we do -- running for office for yourself. there are some any things we can do to have recourse to political policies that we do not agree with, even if we disagree with them strongly enough to consider them to be violations of our constitutional rights. unless there is no recourse, there is absolutely no need for a revolution. host: the book is "tipping points: how to topple the left's house of cards." remind people where they can find you. guest: i am on one american news network every night at 9:00 p.m. eastern, 6:00 p.m. pacific. my book "tipping point" on
amazon, barnes & noble anywhere , books are sold, and you can find me on social media. thank you for joining us. happy new year. >> wednesday night on c-span. a discussion with the president of an antiabortion group and the lawyer who represented planned parenthood in a landmark 1991 supremes or case -- supreme court case. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] isi will predict this court ready to overturn roe. cavalier been very about stare decisis. ,orsuch has joined the court the two latest justices.
more than anything -- everybody says, justice roberts is going to save the day -- justice roberts is not going to save the day on abortion. he was very much a student of rehnquist. he was a clerk for rehnquist. he believed on rehnquist's views. it was justice rehnquist that wrote the opinion overruling roe. it is absolutely clear roe will be overturned. the only question in my mind is when and i think this court is politically savvy and will wait until after the 2020 election to do this. >> you can watch the rest of this conversation wednesday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, here on c-span. >> normally what would happen is there would be a team of helicopters helping each other to make sure that they were safe. but because there was no one
else there, o'donnell made the decision that he would rescue these men. the landing zone area and he hovered on the ground for four minutes. wedding for the reconnaissance team. condition,n a battle and eternity. he waited, the reconnaissance team arrived. they boarded the helicopter. o'donnell began to fully helicopter up above the tree line and ready out, i have everyone, i'm coming out. >> president and ceo of the metropolitan museum of art, daniel weiss. at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q and a. ♪ >> my name is adam cook and i am the c-span winner.
i'm here to encourage you to wrap up this competition as the deadline is getting close. you will still have time. this is about the time i started selling my documentary the first time i entered. i am in ddc offices and i'm going to tell you -- it was an incredible opportunity for me to express my thoughts and views about the political climate as well as connect with some local and state leaders in political office. i am extremely excited you all are interested in this because it is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. >> there is still time for you to enter the c-span competition. you have until january 20 two created documentary that explores an issue he wanted presidential candidates to address during campaign 20. we are giving away a total of $100,000 in cash prizes, with a grand prize of $5,000. for more information, go to our
website. congress returns for work the first week of january. here is what is ahead. the house has yet to decide on impeachment managers and send the two articles of impeachment over to the senate. whatually, the senate citizen jury to hear the cases against president trump. we expect the senate to take up canada-mexico trade agreement. and congress will hear president trump deliver the state of the union address on february 4. watch the house live on c-span and the senate live on c-span2. >> georgia senator johnny isakson's tyrant went into effect today, ending a political career that spanned four decades. he is the only politician senator isaacson
announced his retirement earlier this year. next, has house colleagues pay tribute to his service. order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scott r. scott: madam chair, i have a lot to say. my colleague, mr. hice, has a lot to do. to mr. hice yield so he can speak briefly and go back to his committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hice: thank you, madam chair. i thank my good friend for moment. a quick there are few people in washington, d.c., and in america had the impact of senator johnny isakson. think of senator isakson, no question, there are come to our s that mind. senator, you are, you have been incredible statesman, a phenomenal leader, both in georgia,