updated 4/6/2004 12:04:44 PM ET 2004-04-06T16:04:44

Guests: Dana Rohrabacher, Dennis Kucinich, Laura Schlessinger

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST:  Tonight in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, what do we do in Iraq?  I say hunt them down.

You‘re about to enter SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.  No passport required, no surrender allowed.

After the bloodbaths in Fallujah and Baghdad, John Kerry‘s top ally, Senator Ted Kennedy, calls Iraq George Bush‘s Vietnam.  Cast your vote tonight and tell us if you agree.  And presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich says we should abandon Iraq now.  And he‘s here to heat up tonight‘s SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY showdown.

And more moms are quitting the rat race to raise their children. 

Controversial author Dr. Laura Schlessinger tells us why that‘s good for

America. 

And speaking of work, the economic numbers are going through the roof. 

Is good news for America bad news for John Kerry‘s campaign?  We‘ll get to the bottom of that with CNBC‘s Lawrence Kudlow.

Plus, a teacher who lost his job over “The Passion,” we‘ve got that story coming up. 

But, first, America‘s blood is spilling in Iraq.  Is it time to leave? 

It‘s time for tonight‘s “Real Deal.” 

The lynching in Fallujah and the bloody mob scene in Baghdad this weekend have Americans asking again whether it‘s time to bring our troops home.  After all, the Shiites are now joining the Sunni hard-liners and turning the situation in Iraq into a bloodbath that‘s spiraling out of control.  And today, Ted Kennedy used the Americans‘ deaths to label Iraq George Bush‘s Vietnam.  And others are calling for an immediate withdrawal.

But yielding to Saddam‘s thugs and Islamic fascists would be the worst possible move our leaders could make.  You remember back in 1993.  We retreated from Somalia after some of our G.I.s were killed and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu.  And Osama bin Laden would later say that America‘s retreat from Somalia proved that terrorists could have their way with the great Satan, America.  Since we can‘t retreat, what must we do? 

Well, we must win the war on terror.  That means hunting down the dogs who murdered American civilians, charred their corpses, and hung their dismembered bodies from a Fallujah bridge.  The U.S. has got to insure that Fallujah is not associated with Mogadishu, but rather with swift, ruthless justice. 

As for the Shiite religious leader who is preaching death to Americans, it‘s time America sends a message back.  If it‘s death you want, it‘s death you‘re going to get.  This is a war we‘re fighting, not an urban renewal project.  If our politicians don‘t start treating it like the war that it is, more Americans are going to be beaten, shot and lynched.  That‘s bad news, but it‘s tonight‘s “Real Deal.” 

Now, coming off the Fallujah lynchings and the Baghdad riots, a lot of Americans are questioning America‘s future role in Iraq. 

With us now to debate that role is Congressman Dennis Kucinich.  He‘s a Democratic presidential candidate who thinks we should bring the terror home.  And we also have Congressman Dana Rohrabacher.  He‘s a Republican from California and he‘s a senior member of the International Relations Committee. 

Let me begin with you, Dennis Kucinich.  You think it‘s time that we get out of Iraq and come home.  Why? 

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH (D-OH), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  Under these circumstances, that we go to the U.N. with an entirely new approach, setting aside unilateralism and preemption, asking the U.N. to handle the oil assets of Iraq on an interim basis on behalf other Iraqi people until the Iraqi people are self-governing.

Same with the contacts.  We would have to forego the privatization of Iraq, ask the U.N. to help develop a constitution and hold elections in Iraq.  Under those circumstance, we reach out to the world community, bring in U.N. peacekeepers and bring our troops home.  Why?  Because Americans are targets. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Dennis, here‘s my problem with that, though.  And tell me, how do we get the United Nations involved in Iraq when they were over there, their facilities were blown up, and they immediately retreated and went home?  How do we get them back? 

KUCINICH:  Joe, we have to remember, there‘s an entire process here that‘s at question. 

First of all, we rejected, our nation rejected the United Nations inspectors at a time when it would have been in hindsight much easier to take that path than to take the path we‘ve taken.  The world community at this point doesn‘t want anything to do with what the United States is involved in.  However, I‘m talking about a new approach.  I‘m talking about letting go of control of oil assets, of contracts, of trying to privatize Iraq and of—with the U.S.

SCARBOROUGH:  Who do you give those to?  Who do you give those to? 

Who do you give those to, Dennis?

KUCINICH:  Oh, it‘s not who you give them to.  The U.N. handles that on an interim basis until it goes back to the Iraqi people.  That belongs back to the Iraqi people, until the Iraqi people are self-governing.  We can‘t steal their assets over there.  That‘s endless war then.

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, Dennis, you know what?  You‘re a good friend, a former colleague of mine. 

Another former colleague who is a good friend, I hear him chortling. 

And I already know what he‘s laughing about. 

Dana Rohrabacher, are you saying that the United Nations doesn‘t—shouldn‘t have control of these assets because it‘s botched the oil-for-food program? 

REP. DANA ROHRABACHER ®, CALIFORNIA:  Look, I love Dennis.  He‘s got such a good heart. 

But to put your faith in the United Nations, for Pete‘s sakes, the United Nations, first of all, half the countries in the U.N. are crooks and tyrants of the worst kind.  The Security Council, you have to seek permission from communist China to get the job done?  The United Nations hasn‘t shown itself capable of accomplishing anything. 

(CROSSTALK)

ROHRABACHER:  Compared to us acting and getting the job done.  And what that means is that, when the going gets tough, we‘ve got to stick to it, and that‘s the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, there‘s your campaign commercial for this next campaign. 

Dana, as I said earlier, Ted Kennedy is trying to link Iraq with Vietnam.  This was his take on the war earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS:  This president has now created the largest credibility gap since Richard Nixon.  He‘s the problem, not the solution.  Iraq is George Bush‘s Vietnam.  Saying whatever it takes to prevail has become a standard operating procedure in the Bush White House. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCARBOROUGH:  I want to ask both of you whether you agree with Ted Kennedy or not. 

I‘ll start with you, Dana.  Do you believe that Iraq may be George Bush‘s Vietnam? 

ROHRABACHER:  Well, it‘s not his Chappaquiddick.  That‘s for sure. 

The fact is that, just like in Vietnam, maybe there was high motives.  And things that are very purely motivated can go wrong.  I don‘t think that‘s what‘s happening in Iraq today.  What was a justified—and I know Dennis disagrees with this—a justified strategic move in the war against radical Islam, and that is democratizing Iraq, to use as an example to the Islamic world that democracy can work in Muslim country, that was a very tough task. 

The president—it‘s part of a grand strategy.  I think it‘s worth this effort, because, otherwise, 10 years down the road, we‘re going to have a fight between the Islamic world and the Western world. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Congressman Dennis Kucinich, from the very beginning, you‘ve been saying that if America went to war with Iraq, there would be problems.  Do you agree with Ted Kennedy, one of John Kerry‘s biggest supporters, by the way, that Iraq is rapidly turning into George Bush‘s Vietnam?

KUCINICH:  Well, I don‘t think we need to personalize it to George Bush.  We need to ask, what‘s best for America?  And I believe what‘s best for America right now is we take a new direction.

Now, my good friend Dana Rohrabacher and I disagree on the role of the United Nations.  I happen to believe that the only way we‘re going to achieve peace in the world is try to make the U.N. viable again.  I know the difficulties with the U.N.  And Congressman Rohrabacher has identified some of them.  But what is our alternative?  Are we going to be the policemen of the world?  Are we prepared to put the lives of our sons and daughters on the line for the next five, 10 years in Iraq and other places in the world, when we ought to be reaching out and embracing the world community in the cause of trying to bring about international security and tracking down terrorists and creating a system of justice internationally?

This is my concern.  Now, President Bush did take this country into a war against Iraq.  And I think that it‘s a legitimate subject of debate.  But I also think that—and this is why, Joe, I‘m in this race—the Democratic Party ought to indicate what it stands for.  And we should ought to stand for, I believe, a new director which takes us away from unilateralism and preemption, which works the world community.

And I‘m in this race to give people in this country, the 16 elections that remain, an opportunity to say the party ought to stand for peace, a new direction of international cooperation, among other things. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, Dennis, I‘m glad you said that.  I‘m glad you brought that up, because I‘ve been—I‘ll just be honest with you—I‘ve been very surprised that John Kerry hasn‘t spoken up more since the tragedy in Fallujah, where you have Americans—and I‘ve seen the tapes, the tapes that the rest of America hasn‘t seen.  They are so grisly. 

What these people did in Fallujah—they‘re not people.  They‘re dogs.  What they did to American civilians is just sickening.  And then you see what happened yesterday.  And John Kerry doesn‘t seem to be speaking out on this issue.  Do you think it‘s—do you think he may be afraid that if he speaks out too aggressively against the war in Iraq, it will backfire on him? 

KUCINICH:  Well, let me tell you this, Joe.

My position in this race, I‘m like a little tugboat that‘s trying to pull a big liner called the Democratic Party to get it out to sea so it can sail successfully to victory.  I don‘t think it can do that if it‘s staying in the harbor quibbling about whether to take a position on the war or not. 

So I‘m going to continue to insist that Democrats take a position, challenging the administration on the war, taking the country in a direction towards peace, bringing our troops home, stopping any possibility of a draft, and enabling the United States to work with the world community to bring about stability in Iraq and bringing our troops home.  That‘s what I‘m aiming at doing.  Senator Kerry has the nomination.  I know that. 

(CROSSTALK)

ROHRABACHER:  Dennis‘ philosophy certainly I think reflects the

Democratic Party.  And that‘s—and with all due respect, that‘s why we

shouldn‘t trust the Democratic Party with our security.  The fact is that

(CROSSTALK) 

SCARBOROUGH:  Hold on, Dana.  Dana, Dana, Dana, we‘re not really sure though, Dana, whether what Dennis Kucinich is saying tonight reflects what John Kerry‘s position on the war is, because, to be honest with you, he hasn‘t really been blunt. 

But George Bush was blunt today.  And I want to play you and get you to respond to what George Bush said earlier today, when he said that America is not going to back down.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  We will stay the course.  We will do what is right.  We will make sure that a free Iraq emerges, not only for our own security, but for the sake of free peoples everywhere.  We will not be shaken by thugs and terrorists. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCARBOROUGH:  That sounds good.  It really does.  But I was sitting yesterday watching what was going on in Baghdad and was absolutely shocked that we were allowing these mobs in the street to shoot guns at Americans.  I was shocked by what happened in Fallujah.  And we‘re not responding.  Is the president going to respond?  Is the administration going to start treating this like a war or are they going to continue to allow people to go in the streets like this and lynch Americans, char their bodies, tear them up, and do nothing? 

ROHRABACHER:  Well, I wouldn‘t say that we‘re not doing anything. 

And, at this point, Joe, I think it is presumptuous to suggest that we‘re not doing something.  And I would think that within a very reasonable period of time, those people in Fallujah will understand that there‘s a price to be paid for allowing this type of attack to be launched from their neighborhoods.  And I don‘t know exactly what it is, but you can count on it. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Are you going to put pressure on them?  Are you and Congress going to put pressure on the president and the administration to go after these people in Fallujah? 

ROHRABACHER:  I‘m going to have to tell you, Joe, I don‘t—the

difference between the Clinton administration and the Bush administration -

·         and I‘ve lived through both of them now—is, you don‘t have to convince this president to do those hard jobs that are necessary for our national security. 

Bill Clinton, in a case like this, well, first of all, he would have

turned over everything to the United Nations and there wouldn‘t have been -

·         we wouldn‘t have liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban, much less have liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein, had we left it up to the United Nations.  Bill Clinton would have kicked the can down the road and left us with a major problem.  George Bush is taking care of business.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Going to have to leave it there, Dana.  Thanks for being with us, Dana Rohrabacher and Congressman Dennis Kucinich.  We greatly appreciate you being here tonight.

And we want to know what you think.  Is Iraq George Bush‘s Vietnam?  Weigh in on the debate at Joe.MSNBC.com.  And we‘re going to show you the results of that poll later in this program. 

But coming up, more moms are staying at home with their kids.  Is that a bad news the women‘s movement or is it a step forward for families?  Controversial author Dr. Laura Schlessinger weighs in on that.  Plus, we‘re going to be taking your phone calls.

And straight ahead, the U.S. economy is shifting into overdrive just in time for the election.  Is that bad news for John Kerry‘s campaign? 

Plus, a little third-grade girl is strip-searched by a teacher at school.  Wait until you here why the teacher did it. 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Dr. Laura Schlessinger is here to tell us whether moms should quite their jobs and submit to their husbands.

That‘s straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Dr. Laura Schlessinger‘s book “The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands” is still hot and on “The New York Times” best-seller list after three months.  And she‘s back in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY. 

Dr. Laura, welcome back.  I want to begin by asking...

DR. LAURA SCHLESSINGER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  Thank you very much. 

SCARBOROUGH:  I want to begin by asking you, why do you think your book has struck such a nerve with readers?  Why is it doing so well? 

SCHLESSINGER:  It‘s doing well for a number of reasons.  One, the men, who don‘t usually buy books about relationships, are buying this up.  And the feedback I get from the men is that they‘re just so grateful somebody is speaking and articulating their feelings in a way that sometimes they didn‘t even understand themselves, much less have the courage to express. 

And the women, the feedback I‘ve gotten, it is so much more sensitive than I anticipated.  I anticipated a lot more grinding about it.  And yet I‘m just inundated every day with letters and faxes saying:  I didn‘t even get to chapter three when I started to cry because I didn‘t appreciate how important I was to him and how I treat him and what that brings out of him. 

It‘s just been like a revelation for people.  And I think it struck a real chord.  And the reason I think it‘s continuing to do well is because it‘s helping marriages improve, even good ones.

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, you know, being salacious, as we are here at SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, the thing we keyed in on was the fact that you in effect were telling women they needed to have sex with their husbands.  So I can understand why the men were calling you and crying and saying, thank you, thank you.

But I‘m surprised you didn‘t get a more negative response from women by saying, if your husband wants to have sex with you, it doesn‘t matter, you‘ve got to do it. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, I never say that in the book.  But I do suggest that a woman should not turn down a perfectly good orgasm because she‘s tired or not in the mood or annoyed with him about something.  That‘s too much to give up.  It‘s not as though she‘s giving something to him she‘s not going to enjoy, you know. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Yes.  So now you said the O-word and now you‘re being salacious.  So let‘s move on.

(LAUGHTER)

SCARBOROUGH:  I want to show you a cover of “TIME” magazine that came out a couple weeks ago.  And it talked about how women are quitting work and they are returning home to take care of their kids.  Is that a good thing? 

SCHLESSINGER:  Yes. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Why is that happening? 

SCHLESSINGER:  I guess to some people, that was some kind of a revelation.  And, frankly, and not with any humility, I was stunned that “TIME” magazine would dare to print an article about this subject without mentioning or interviewing the prime person in the media for 25 years who has been banging this pot, namely, me. 

There is not a day that goes by, not a book signing that I do, not a public appearance, not the mail that I read, where droves of women are not saying, because of you and the emphasis on the well-being of children and the fact that I‘m not doing 17 things at once and going crazy and hating my life, I‘m home raising my kids.

It is a horror to me that for so many years women were willing to buy the lie that hired help or institutionalized day care is a equivalent to a mother‘s love.  How bizarre that any woman would even buy it.

SCARBOROUGH:  And this is what “TIME” magazine wrote.  They said: “A reluctant revolt is under way.  Today‘s women execs are less willing to play the juggler‘s game and more willing to sacrifice paychecks and prestige for time with their family.”

What do you think is causing this?  I don‘t know you say you‘ve been beating this drum for 25 years.  Why do you think this has reached such a fever pitch that even “TIME” magazine is picking up on it and putting it on the cover of their magazine? 

SCHLESSINGER:  I think it‘s reached such a fever pitch because the experiment failed.  The lie has been exposed. 

Women are not happier abandoning their children and feeling distant from their homes and husbands.  Women do not feel more elevated by the drudgery of doing 17 million things at once and feeling like they‘re doing nothing well and watching their children call a babysitter mommy.  Women are not happier not nurturing their own children.  It‘s just been a lie.  It is built into our DNA.  We love and nurture.  New life comes out of our body, suckles at our breast. 

This is core to the beauty of what is a woman.  And as I tell women all the time, the minute your kid hits kindergarten, from 8:00 in the morning until 3:00 or 4:00 in the afternoon, you‘re free to do whatever you would like.  But the nurturing and the bonding and the teaching of trust and love and the joy of watching kids take their first step and learn to speak and learn to behave well, this is the joy a woman should have for all the childbirth pain. 

SCARBOROUGH:  There‘s also been the big lie that you can have it all.  And that, of course, is something that the feminist movement started preaching in the ‘60s and ‘70s.  And talk about the burnout that when you talk to callers who have been fooled into believing they can have it all, what‘s the impact? 

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, the women who call me on the air, it sounds like a revelation to them.  Sometimes, I must sound a little annoyed that they‘re surprised.

And that is, they‘ll go, well, I work a full-time job and I take care of the kids and I do this and I do that and I‘m tired and I‘m stressed and I‘m not happy with my life and he‘s not, and I‘m going, well, why don‘t we make a list of these things, put them in the order of priority, and eliminate some of them, so that you can enjoy being alive, you can enjoy being a mother and a wife and a friend and a neighbor and all the beautiful things that life has to offer?

And they are stunned to think that they can actually choose.  And that‘s where I have a big argument with the feminist movement the way it was co-opted by a mentality that did not appreciate masculinity, femininity, marriage, mothering, taking care of a home.  It devalues women.  Our society is really disdainful of women who are at home with their kids, tell them they‘re wasting their minds, they‘re wasting their lives.  It‘s been ugly.  And there‘s been very little to support a woman making this choice to value what is important.  And that is family. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know what surprised me about this magazine article was, it suggested that there was a generation gap that was causing more moms to quit. 

And this is what they said. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Yes. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: “While boomer women sought career opportunities that were

unavailable to their mostly stay-at-home moms, Gen Xers were the latchkey

kids and the children of divorce.”  And one study showed that 51 percent of Gen X moms were staying home full-time, as opposed to 33 percent of baby boomers. 

Are you hearing that?  Do you hear a generation gap when people call into your show or people come up and have you sign their books, that it seems that the younger mothers are saying, you know what, I am going to have it all, but I‘m going to work and then I‘m going to come and give me all to my children, and then maybe later on, I may go back to work?  Is that how they‘re ordering it up? 

SCHLESSINGER:  Actually, yes.  And I‘m grateful to say that I‘m a recovered feminist and I almost missed out on the mothering part.  And it horrifies me now to think that I might have missed that.

I was in college in the ‘60s.  The feminist movement hit, we‘re victims, and we need respect, and anything a man asks of us is oppression, and anything we give to a man is robbing ourselves of something and all that nonsense that was so easy to buy, because whenever you‘re being told, you can have power, I think it excites people.  And it distracts us and gets us way off track.

And so I came from that mind-set.  And I look around and I see the women of my generation with the marriages and divorces, marriages and divorces, shacking up, alienation from their kids.  Their focus is on themselves and their careers and their love affairs and everything else, because the movement said, I count and that‘s it.  And the children, the bruised and damaged and hurt, neglected children of this generation—and it‘s impacted the men, too.  We should talk about that in a little bit. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCHLESSINGER:  Look back at how they were latchkey and how they didn‘t feel important to their mothers and how a home life was not significant.  And they don‘t want that for themselves and they absolutely don‘t want it for their kids. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, we‘ll talk about that when we get back. 

And if you have questions for Dr. Laura, now is your chance.  We‘re going to be taking your phone calls straight ahead.  That number is 888-MSNBC-USA. 

Plus, up next, we‘re going to also tell you how “The Passion” got a schoolteacher fired.  That‘s coming up. 

But, first, let‘s get the latest headlines from the MSNBC News Desk. 

(NEWS BREAK)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCARBOROUGH:  We‘re back with Dr. Laura Schlessinger.  She of course is the author of the best-seller “The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands,” which, of course, the last time, Dr. Laura, we had you on here, we were flooded by e-mails afterwards, many of them, of course, very, very positive, but some were accusing you of suggesting that a wife should be a sexual slave to her husband. 

Respond. 

(LAUGHTER)

SCHLESSINGER:  I guess they didn‘t read the book.  There‘s nothing in the book that says that.  I guess they didn‘t read the book. 

The closest anything comes to that is, I have reminded women time and again, if they allow themselves to be so frazzled or so annoyed that they‘re not going to attend to the intimate parts of their relationship with their husbands, that‘s a tragedy and a travesty.  And women and men both have the responsibility to be giving and thoughtful and attentive and take care of their psyches in such a way that they don‘t punish their partner for whatever stresses and strains they have with their lives.  That goes both ways.  They just didn‘t read the book and they‘re hysterical.  I don‘t know.

SCARBOROUGH:  What‘s been the response from the feminist community from this book? 

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, the reviews that have been done by feminists of the book have been cruel and mean, spent a lot of time calling me bad names and then saying stupid things like sexual slave, when they clearly haven‘t read the book. 

And I have always wondered how their editors permitted them to do this when it‘s real clear they didn‘t—there are no quotes from the book, so it‘s real clear they didn‘t read it.  I‘m amazed what passes for reviews these days.

SCARBOROUGH:  One feminist author wrote this, though, about you.  She said: “Dr. Laura doesn‘t feel your pain.  She‘s there to dish it out.  Not surprisingly, Dr. Laura heaps a pile of scorn on the feminist project, so it pains me to admit that she‘s on to something.”

(CROSSTALK)

SCHLESSINGER:  You see, truth surpasses everything. 

SCARBOROUGH:  No, but you actually have found that some people that may not agree with you all the time have actually embraced this book, because it is selling tons and tons of—you‘re telling tons of books out there, so you‘ve struck a chord. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, I look at it this way.  You know, obviously, the publishing company looks at each book and sees a profit margin. 

I look at each book that goes out there and I‘m so grateful, because I think that‘s another marriage that‘ll be on the right track.  And it‘s so simple.  I‘m just trying to convince women that the problem in their lives is not their men.  It‘s their mentality.  And when they change that perspective and get back in touch with what is feminine and lovely and wonderful about us women, that things change like that, because you guys are very easy. 

We can change your mood with a fluttering of eyelashes.  Just admit it.

SCARBOROUGH:  It doesn‘t take much.  I will be the first to admit I am a very simple kind of guy.

Let‘s go to Tracy from Pennsylvania.  She wants to talk to you, Dr.

Laura.

Go ahead, Tracy.  You‘re on SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.

CALLER:  Hi, Dr. Laura.  This is Tracy. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Hi.

CALLER:  I‘ve recently had a 10-month affair on my husband.  And it has came out and the affair is over.  And I want nothing more than to make my marriage work.  My husband has not left me.  He is still living in the same house with us.  We do have two small children.  I‘m just wondering if you could give me any advice on how to help rebuild our marriage.  I feel like I‘m hitting a brick wall. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Dr. Laura?  SCHLESSINGER:  Why did you have the affair? 

CALLER:  I felt that my needs emotionally were not being met.  I thought I was trying to make him love me.  I never felt that he loved me.  I thought that, if I was skinnier, I kept the house cleaner, if I looked a certain way, that he‘d love me.  I now realize that that was probably my low self-esteem.  He has to love me.  He‘s still here. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, you‘re lucky, because, predominantly, when the woman has an affair the man leaves.  So, so far, you‘re really lucky. 

I think what you need to do is two-part.  One, you don‘t do anything for the rest of your married lives which gives him a moment‘s pause to wonder where you are.  Secondly, a lot of the time, especially with us women types, when we think we‘re being unloved, we need to look at how men express love.  They express love through two main ways, one, sex with us.  We like dialogue.  That makes us feel intimate.  Men have sex with us. 

That makes them feel intimate.  That‘s important for you to remember. 

The second way men show love is, they do stuff.  To a man that he goes off and shovels the snow off our car, so you don‘t have to do that in the morning, is how he shows love.  So a lot of how I‘ve had to retrain women in their thinking about men is to understand a man‘s language.  And it‘s not a woman‘s language.  They sit and yack like we do.  And they don‘t go over and over their feelings.  They‘re a lot more stoic.  They do for us and they make love to us.

And if you can keep that in your mind and realize that he‘s not there to make you feel like a whole person, that‘s largely your job to bring to him, I think this is probably going to work out. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, now, in your book, Dr. Laura, you write this:

“If I were listing rules for the proper care and feeding of husbands, rule No. 1 would be to be a girl.”

What do you mean by that? 

SCHLESSINGER:  Yes. 

Well, we forget to be girly girls at home.  I cannot tell you how many women I talk to on my radio show, and I go, well, you‘re a wife and you‘re a mother and you‘re this and you‘re working and you‘re that and boom, boom, boom, and you‘re just so harried and frustrated.  Did you ever think that it was fun to be his girlfriend and he misses that, too, and the cute stuff of how you behaved and what you put on and how you fix yourself up a little bit, a little bit of perfume, a little in strategic places? 

Oh, I‘m getting provocative again.  And cute little clothes, instead of him coming home to think it‘s his sister there.  And I think we have to keep in touch with the fact that we‘re girls and bring the playfulness back into our marriage.  It‘s the playfulness, not all the Sturm und Drang about who is mad at what, and we have to go over my feelings and you‘re not doing this, but bring the playfulness back. 

It‘s amazing how much more cooperative each will be with each other when they have a good time with each other first. 

SCARBOROUGH:  How hard is it to—and we have other callers, but I have got to ask you this question.  How hard is it—we were talking about moms staying at home with the kids.  So a mom stays home.  She wakes up at 6:30 in the morning.  She changes diapers.  She feeds kids.  She gets some kids off to school.  She takes care of kids all day.  The husband is at work.  He comes home at 5:00 or 6:00 at night.

They eat, put the kids to sleep at 8:00, 9:00 at night.  It‘s kind of hard to be playful after that kind of schedule, isn‘t it? 

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, that‘s why I say think in advance. 

When you‘re thinking about, for example, going out and playing tennis, you thinking about, I have the tennis shoes, I got the right socks.  You start practicing your swing.  You start getting in the mental mood.  So I suggest to women, you look at the clock.  You see he‘s going to be home in a half-an-hour.  You get the kids doing something.  You go take a nice shower.  You get ready.  He walks through the door.

You say, hi, honey, I missed you.  We‘re going to get the kids to bed.  You take a shower together.  You may not be peppy each and every time.  But you plan it, you do it, because is amazing.  If you wait for the mood to move you, you‘ll probably never do it.  And the less you do it, the less you‘re going to do it.  But if you put the action, the mood will follow it.  When you‘re in the shower talking cutely and playing with each other—provocative again—suddenly, the mood comes upon you. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, I‘ll remember that. 

(LAUGHTER)

SCARBOROUGH:  We have Suzanne from Alabama. 

Suzanne, you‘re on with Dr. Laura.  You there, Suzanne? 

CALLER:  Yes.  Yes, I am. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Go ahead. 

CALLER:  Hey, Dr. Laura.  I‘d like for you to get real. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Hi.

CALLER:  Yes, I am.

Dr. Laura, I would like for you to get real.  Most families live in a dual-income family.  And the wife and the husband have to work just to meet the house payment.  Now, you‘re making the man feel badly because he doesn‘t make enough money because his wife has to work.  You‘re making the woman feel bad because she is a mother and she‘s being a bad mother because she works.  Now, this is a relationship between two people that needs to be worked out.  This is not something where one person gets to work and make all the money and one person has to stay home.  Why can‘t they work it out together? 

SCARBOROUGH:  Dr. Laura, respond to that. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Well, I am real.  And I‘m more real, I‘m sorry to say, than your caller.  And I don‘t mean to be rude, because I‘ve been on the air over a span of 25 years. 

Between the conversations, the individual interactions that I have when I go places and meet thousands of people at a time, the letters, the e-mails, I‘m here to tell you that I have my finger on the pulse of what‘s reel.  And it‘s remarkable to me how little will is to structure families anymore where the mom is taking care of the kids and the dad is doing what men have in their DNA to do, by and large, although they‘ve been distracted by a movement that says we don‘t need them for marriage, we don‘t need them for child raising. 

Men love, they live to protect and to provide.  And women live to nurture and create.  And together, they work together to do that.  And I have just about always worked, but I always worked myself around my mothering.  So when my kid went to bed at 9:00, then I‘d go on radio.  So I‘ve lived it.

And what‘s been remarkable to me is, the people with the most modest means, it has been my experience that these are the people with the value system in place who make the adjustments it takes in order to do this.  It‘s the people of modest means that learn how to struggle because of their own attempts to make it happen.  That is the real world and it‘s happening more and more. 

And the women are appreciating their men more when they see that their men are taking care of them.  The men are appreciating their women more because they see them raising the kids and having a home that they can all enjoy at night.  That is the real world and people are working to make that happen. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, Dr. Laura gets real.  And the book is “The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands.”

Dr. Laura, as always, thanks a lot for being with us.  We greatly appreciate it and hope you‘ll come back. 

SCHLESSINGER:  Any time.  Thank you for having me.  I appreciate how -

·         that you let me finish a thought, which is so rare on television these days. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Exactly.  Exactly.  It‘s because you speak so much better than I do.  So thank you for being with us. 

(LAUGHTER)

SCARBOROUGH:  And don‘t forget to log in for tonight‘s SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY poll. 

Remember, we‘re asking, is Iraq going to be George Bush‘s Vietnam?  Weigh in on the debate at Joe.MSNBC.com.  And we‘re going to show you the results and hopefully get that ugly picture of me off the screen by the end of the show. 

And just ahead, a little girl is strip-searched at school.  But it‘s the school bum-heads who end up with a red face. 

And “The New York Times” is at it again, calling a law that respects women and their babies disrespectful to women.  I‘ve got issues just ahead.

ANNOUNCER:  Tonight‘s SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY challenge, who coined the slogan, “It‘s the economy, stupid” for the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign?  Was it, A, James Carville, B, George Stephanopoulos, or, C, Paul Begala?

The answer coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER:  In tonight‘s SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY challenge, we asked, who coined the slogan, “It‘s the economy, stupid” for the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign?  The answer is, A, James Carville.

Now back to Joe.

Hey, baseball is back, the Red Sox are losing, and I‘ve got issues. 

This week, the United Nations once again revealed the ugly truth, that it has no legitimacy when it comes to human rights after naming the repressive regimes of China, Cuba, and Sudan to the Human Rights Commission.  Now, as you know, China has killed up to 50 million of its own people over the last 50 years.  Cuba still tortures its citizens for speaking freely.  And Sudan has murdered two million of its own while reinstating slavery in its country. 

Yes, these are now the countries who will judge all other countries on human rights.

Issue No. 2, “The New York Times” defense of women‘s rights.  “The Times” editorial page blasted President Bush today for showing—quote—

“a profound disrespect for all women.”  So what did the president do, say that a woman‘s place is in the home or suggest that all women should be barefoot and pregnant?  No, actually, he sign two bills, ones that bans partial-birth abortions and another that charges people like Scott Peterson with killing two people when the mother and her unborn child are killed in a violent act.

It also charges those who violently attack a woman, but who survives, but whose unborn child is killed.  Hey, leave it to the editorial page of “The New York Times” to take the extreme position that protecting a pregnant woman and her fetus to be disrespectful of all other women. 

And Issue No. 3, the U.S. economy.  Do you know how you can tell when a Republican is in the White House?  Because most of the great economic news is being ignored.  Watching the news every night, you could be forgiven for not knowing that the economy is growing at the fastest rate than any time in the past 20 years, that productivity is at all an all-time high, that American household wealth is at an all-time high, that inflation is at a 30-year low.

And on Thursday, naysayers were slapped with more bad news, more actually great news for the rest of us, that more jobs were created last month than at any time over the past four years.  And whether the media elites and the president‘s enemies like it or not, America‘s economy is roaring full steam ahead.  And that‘s great news for middle-class Americans everywhere.  Over 300,000 new jobs were created in the month of March. 

That‘s the largest number of new jobs in four years.  Economic growth has surpassed even the most optimistic predictions.  But John Kerry said this in a radio address Saturday. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  For three years, President Bush‘s administration has stood by while we‘ve had the greatest job loss since the Great Depression.  The Republican Congress has passed just about every economic plan that George Bush has proposed.  And what do we have to show for it?  Nearly three million jobs have disappeared or been sent oversees. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCARBOROUGH:  With me now is Lawrence Kudlow.  He, of course, is the host of CNBC‘s “Kudlow & Cramer.”

Lawrence, let me ask you, who is right, John Kerry or me? 

LAWRENCE KUDLOW, CO-HOST, “KUDLOW & CRAMER”:  I think you‘re on a roll.  I just think you should continue.  In fact, I‘ll give you two more stats.  We had a blowout manufacturing report last Thursday before the jobs report. 

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Larry, wait.  The manufacturing sector is just—it‘s all been shipped to China. 

KUDLOW:  Yes, well, not exactly.  If you look at the data carefully from the Institute of Supply Managers, we are just blowing out every aspect, production, orders, deliveries.

In fact, even the employment component is showing enormous strength.  And today we had a blowout number on services.  So you‘ve had manufacturing, total jobs, services.  The stock market is up a couple hundred points.  And the economy, as you correctly put it, is on a tear. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Let‘s break down the news on the numbers, just how good they were in March.  Over 300,000 now jobs were added to the economy, the biggest monthly jump since April of 2000.  Productivity and household wealth, all-time highs, economic growth and manufacturing output, manufacturing, there we go ahead, the highest that they‘ve been in 20 years. 

That‘s very bad news for any candidate, be it John Kerry or anybody else, who wants to run this fall saying it‘s a bad economy.  So my question is this.  Why don‘t we hear this good news in the media? 

KUDLOW:  Well, I don‘t know.  That‘s a different—that‘s a trickier subject. 

The jobs report was pretty front page, although it was a Saturday because the number was published on Friday.  But I think, you know, John Kerry, very cleverly, Kerry Democrats, have emphasized the very sluggish recovery of so-called business payroll jobs, because it was the only number that wasn‘t responding to the Bush tax cuts.  Every other number was a complete blowout number and has been, including 6 percent GDP in the second half of last year. 

But the lagging number, as is typical in a recovery, was nonfarm payroll jobs.  And the March number, 308,000, kind of ends that lagging number.  And I think we‘re going to get a lot more.  I look for at least, Joe, at least a couple hundred thousand new jobs per month on payrolls, could be even better than that.  In fact, Greg Mankiw, Bush‘s economic adviser, predicted 2.6 million new jobs this year. 

Unfortunately, the president walked away from it.  He shouldn‘t have. 

He‘s hanging in there. 

SCARBOROUGH:  One final question.  If this year, the election is over the economy, if it‘s the economy stupid, who wins, Bush or Kerry? 

KUDLOW:  Well, there‘s no question it‘s going to be President Bush. 

A Yale professor who does not like Bush, Ray Fair, who has a model of the economy and elections, he is expecting 4 percent growth this year, which translates to a 58 percent Bush popular vote.  I don‘t know if Fair will be dead-on right, but I think the momentum, I think the general thrust is exactly right. 

And if I could add one little thing, the tax cuts worked.  Now it‘s time for the president to show the public that we can cut spending also.  Scott Rasmussen‘s polls show spending cuts are very important.  Don‘t let Kerry get to that issue before Bush. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Lawrence Kudlow, I agree with you.  And you‘re going to have to read my book when it comes out in a couple months, because that‘s exactly what I say. 

Hey, as always, we appreciate you being in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY tonight. 

KUDLOW:  Thank you, Joe. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right.

And still to come, another teacher has gotten fired over “The Passion,” but this one didn‘t even show it to the class. 

Plus, a little girl is strip-searched at school and you‘re not going to believe why.  That‘s straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Tomorrow night in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, she‘s been a close personal adviser to President Bush, but now the former White House counselor Karen Hughes is back.  And she‘s going to be giving us the story behind the story on the Bush White House.  That‘s tomorrow night.

But we‘ll see you ahead in just a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCARBOROUGH:  Hey, it‘s time for our flyover of SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.  That‘s a look at some of the stories in the flyover space between Manhattan and Hollywood, the parts of the country the mainstream media ignores.

In Louisiana, a substitute teacher accuses a 10-year-old girl of stealing $120 from her, so she had the little girl strip-searched.  The third-grader‘s mom says her daughter was humiliated after being forced to take off all of her clothes in front of several adults.  And the girl didn‘t have the money.  I‘ll tell you what.  Somebody has got to be fired over this one. 

And near Sacramento, California, a Catholic schoolteacher says he was fired for encouraging his students to see Mel Gibson‘s “The Passion of the Christ.”  The teacher gave the seventh-graders extra credit for seeing the movie.  School administrators say they have a strict policy against encouraging kids to see R-rated movies.  I wonder if the teacher would have been fired for telling the students they should go see “Schindler‘s List.”  I doubt it.

Let‘s check in our SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY poll.  We asked you if you think that Iraq is the Pentagon‘s Vietnam.  Well, we have got a statistical dead heat:  50 percent of you said yes; 50 percent of you said no; 100 percent of you said I look sick and ghastly in that photo.

Well, do you miss SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY on the weekends?  Well, you‘re in luck, because our Friday show is going to move to Sunday night.  You can catch up on all the week‘s news and get a jump on Monday.  That‘s Sunday night at 10:00 p.m.

And don‘t worry.  You still have something to be excited about on Friday nights.  Lisa Ling is going to be hosting National Geographic‘s “ULTIMATE EXPLORER” on Friday. 

Hey, we‘ll see you tomorrow night with Karen Hughes.  Have a great night. 

END   

Copy: Content and programming copyright 2004 MSNBC.  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.  Transcription Copyright 2004 FDCH e-Media, Inc. (f/k/a/ Federal Document Clearing House Inc., eMediaMillWorks, Inc.), ALL RIGHTS  RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user‘s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon MSNBC and FDCH e-Media, Inc.‘s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

Discuss:

Discussion comments

,