All Episodes
Previous Next
June 5, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:53
June 5, 2006, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Fox is now doing a show.
It's the U.S.-Canadian border gateway for terrorists.
I guess it's good.
I mean, at some point, you've got to realize it's a good sign that some people start getting concerned about border security.
Greetings, ladies and gentlemen.
Glad to have you back.
Rush Limboy here behind the Golden EIB microphone at the Limboy Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
A telephone number, if you'd like to join us today, 800-282-2882, and the email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
So the Minnesota Republican Party straw poll Friday night, Newt Gingrich ran away with it, presidential straw poll.
40% of the 540 votes cast.
And as the last percentages, the bottom of the barrel was Connollyza Rice and John McCain, each with about 10%.
And this confirms, says the Minneapolis Star Tribune, once again, that party activists are considerably more conservative than Republican voters and the public in general.
It's just the opposite of that.
But I don't want to go into their template and how it's wrong.
I did that in the last hour.
What's interesting about this, I was on a golf course yesterday, as I mentioned, and it's not hard to run into unhappy Republicans out there.
They're everywhere.
And all of them look like it's my fault.
Or I have the answers.
Why is this going on?
Why didn't that happen?
Why aren't they doing this?
Why are they doing everything?
As though I'm not giving them the right marching orders or something.
As I patiently explain this to him, and it's become a favorite theme of mine, and that is there's no conservative leadership in Washington.
And that retort, or that then gets the retort, well, there are a lot of conservatives in Washington.
Why aren't they leading?
I said, well, one guy cited Newt.
One of my friends said, look at Newt.
I mean, he might have gone too far in some things, blah, blah, blah.
But look at what Newt was able to do.
I said, well, there's a key difference between Newt and any other conservative in Washington right now.
What's that?
Well, Newt was able to anoint himself the leader of the Republican Party because there was a Democrat named Bill Clinton in the White House.
And so Newt was able to carve out that leadership role and produce an agenda and provide that leadership that got people in line behind it.
Today, we don't have a Democrat in the White House.
We have a Republican in the White House who's not, this is no complaint.
I mean, it's just the way things are.
President Bush does not look at himself as a leader of a conservative movement.
He's a Republican, and he's the president, and he has his job description in his mind, and he's out doing what he thinks best in a number of areas.
But not all of the things that he does are conservative, and certainly not representative leadership.
So Republicans in the House, particularly, are not going to go out and work against their own president.
Now, they may start to in the last two years of his second term when official lame duckness sets in.
But prior to that, it just isn't going to happen.
In fact, just the opposite.
Many of the House Republicans have had to advance legislation that they abhor.
They weren't crazy about the Medicare prescription drug bill.
They weren't crazy about all this spending.
It's certainly not crazy about the president's stance on illegal immigration.
They weren't crazy about steel tariffs early on.
They weren't crazy about letting Ted Kennedy write the largest education bill, but they had to sit there and bite the bullet.
But at some point you have a breaking point or a tipping point, the straw that breaks the camel's back, and this immigration bill in the Senate looks like it's it.
And so it's tough for these guys to provide the kind of conservative leadership that we were used to all during the 90s because it was easy to do that with the enemy controlling the White House.
But you can't go off the reservation and sabotage your own president and survive as a conservative or anything because you are in the Republican Party along with the president at the same time.
But that's going to go out the window here for the last two years of Bush's term when official lame duckness sets in.
Now, these results in Minnesota, and they've been pretty much the same.
Even in Tennessee, when Bill Frist won, that's favorite son vote.
But Frist is on a balance sheet would be considered to be more conservative than he isn't.
And so he won in Tennessee, obviously.
But every one of these straw polls has taken place.
I think without exception, I could be, I'm not sure what happened here in Florida, but I think McCain is middle of Packer down at the bottom.
He's not there.
None of these moderates are showing great strength because this party is dominated by conservatives.
And they too are hungry for this elected conservative leadership.
And they're saying so in these straw poll votes.
And I think it's just peachy keen if the media wants to misunderstand it and think that this is an executive.
They're trying to compare the Republican conservative base with the Democrat kook fringe, the blogosphere out there, the moveon.orgs and all that.
And there's no comparison.
The Washington template is that most of the country is a bunch of reasonable independents and moderates.
And you've got your wackos on both sides.
And candidates have to go out and first get the wackos and then move to the center and so forth.
But that's not what's been winning elections.
Do you think it's any accident?
I know it's going to make some of you people mad out there.
Do you think it's any accident that all of a sudden we're talking about gay marriage again and having a constitutional amendment banning it?
Does anybody think there's anything other than an attempt to rally the base going on here?
It always happens.
I'll tell you what, conservatives, some of the base believe fervently in the amendment and they're happy it comes up whenever and want something done about it.
But the idea that this comes up at opportune times, I could have predicted that, and there'll be more of this as we get closer to the election.
There'll be more attempts by every Republican in Washington to make him or herself appear to be conservative because they know who it is that elected them.
They know who it is.
I'm not talking about the Senate.
The Senate's there.
You've got a bunch of liberal Republicans there, but the conservative Republicans from states that have a predominantly conservative majority in the Republican Party are going to be doing the same thing, those senators that are up.
And you can see it.
You can see it in the immigration bill.
And we're not talking about primaries here, folks, coming up in November.
You know, we're not, these guys in Minnesota have got this all wrong.
The media up there, this is a presidential straw poll, and that would be looked at perhaps in primary.
But the real elections, these are not primaries coming up in November.
They're the real thing.
And the whole Republican majority and apparatus in Washington is going to shift itself now to try to make it appear as though they are conservative as they promised they would be the last election and the election before that.
Now, what all this means for Newt, I haven't the slightest idea because I don't know what his intentions are.
I don't know if he seriously contemplating a presidential run or not.
And I don't know how he ended up on the ballot.
I don't know if he got himself on a ballot on purpose.
I have no clue how this happened.
But it doesn't surprise me that if he was on the ballot, that his name would come in first because I know, because I have my finger on the pulse, I know what conservatives in this country want.
And right now, the list of people that were on the ballot, you'd have to say Gingrich has far more name ID than George Allen, who came in second.
He was a distant second, 40 to 15 percent.
But nevertheless, the two big winners, the top two positions in that straw poll are conservatives without question.
Gingrich and, of course, George Allen.
Now, a little-known story here, and you haven't seen this much in the drive-by media today, folks.
And I don't know if you saw it over the weekend.
This story came out on Friday.
And it's just sitting there and it's being ignored.
I don't think it came up on the Sunday shows at all.
Hillary Clinton could have trouble carrying Florida in the 2008 presidential race, despite having a popular pick among the state's Democrats.
The Quinnipiac University poll released numbers that point to Clinton's inability to poll better than 50% against two potential and unknown Republican candidates who aren't well-known in Florida, Senator George Allen and Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.
Quinnipiac Polling Institute assistant director Peter Brown interprets the numbers as bad for Hillary.
He says that not being able to top 50% in a poll far before an election by a well-known candidate against an unknown has historically indicated potential problems for the better-known candidate.
And when they put up well-known candidates against Hillary in this poll, she did even worse.
Florida voters preferred Rudolph Giuliani or Arizona Senator John McCain.
Then there's a story that accompanied this, and I forget what publication this was in.
Can Hillary win Florida or Ohio?
If Hillary is such a shoe-in for her party's presidential nomination, then a new Florida poll is something for Democrats to worry about.
More than 30 months before the election, Senator Clinton cannot get more than 50% of the vote when matched against either George Allen or Mitt Romney.
And you'd have to say in Florida, those names would not rank high on the name recognition list.
This has got to just have the Democrats twisting and turning and trying to figure things out because you've got certain people in the drive-by media now writing stories about if not Hillary who.
They're going all nuts about Al Gore and John Kerry.
And my only point to you folks is that the conventional wisdom on all this stuff, particularly this far out, is often untrustworthy.
Hillary has been the de facto nominee for every presidential race since Clinton left office in 2001.
And it's just been assumed, and many of you have been out there biting your fingernails and worrying yourself sick and putting yourselves in all kinds of angst over the possibility.
And I, you know, it, to me, doesn't look like it's going to be a slam dunk for her.
And I've never bought into the, as you know, I go against conventional wisdom each and every chance I get.
Got to take a little break here.
We'll be back and continue right after this timeout.
Okay, back we are.
El Rushball, I just want to say one more thing about all this.
All these media people that drive-by media look at the Republican Party and they see disarray and they see tumult and they see chaos and they say, wow, it's just it.
The Republican Party, it's going to fall.
The AP had a story on Saturday listing all the new Democrat committee chairman lady.
I know we did it months ago, but I didn't do it in the context of panting away, hoping for it to be true.
The AP salivating over all the new committee chairmen in the House and talking about how many of them would be black.
Oh, how fair are we?
Just excited as they can be.
Only one little problem.
They point out Democrats have to win the election.
Yeah, well, don't they figure that's already happening?
The tumult and the chaos and the real disorder and angst and even anger simmering underneath the cover of everything is over there on the Democratic Party side.
And because they only recognize that when it gets to a breaking point in the drive-by media, and then they'll start doing stories on advice, how to change fortunes and so forth.
Because don't you know?
I mean, the whole point of the mainstream drive-by media is to get Democrats back into office.
That's the natural order of things.
Paul in Chicago, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the EIB network, sir.
Rush, good afternoon.
How's it in Midtown?
Good?
I was going to ask you a question about your comment about the woman out in San Diego.
I have no idea what her background is.
But the fact that, you know, I think you're being a little bit manipulative.
I wouldn't say manipulative, but you're distorting.
I mean, how she said it is not encouraging people to, you know, she's not saying on government stationary, if she ever became elected, to send us your illegals, your poor, your huddled masses.
That's the only way I'm going to get elected.
I mean, I used to work when George Allen was a representative in Charlottesville, and I worked for Eric Cantor in Henrico County.
And we were employing people who were unregistered voters.
They weren't illegals, not that I know of, but they were helping out.
And if anyone misspoke like that, I mean, this woman has far bigger problems than a statement like that, which I doubt very much she's saying, oh, yes, please send me your illegals.
Because this election, as you pointed out, is pretty close.
I mean, the San Diego Tribune out there probably has it at 50-50.
I mean, she's not going to encourage people and then have a recount and lose.
So, I mean, I just, I think you were a little bit off on that.
Well, I appreciate the comment.
I'm sure you do think I was off, but let me tell you, my guess is this is not the first time she's encouraged illegals to go out and help her out.
I think she's probably been doing it a lot.
This is the first time there happened to be a recorder.
Don't forget out there, Paul, you know, Bob Dornan was an incumbent in his Orange County district, and Loretta Sanchez emerged victorious, stunning and shocking everybody.
Dornan lost that race because some illegal aliens, it turned out, voted in that election.
I mean, the idea, I'm sure that you probably don't think it possible Democrats would ever engage in encouraging illegals to work on their campaigns and maybe even vote for them.
But I do.
In fact, I know they're out there soliciting membership of the Democratic Party out there recruiting at all these protests.
I'm going to have to find this story about what Al Gore did back in 1996.
I should have put this in the, maybe I did put the immigration stack here.
I mean, the here's another one I can use to bolster the same point.
And here it is.
Yes, sirie, Bob.
All right.
By the way, whatever she wants to spin out there, I wasn't urging them to vote for me.
I just misspoke out there.
The bottom line is Francine Busby was asking, was suggesting that illegal immigrants campaign for her.
It's on tape.
were asking, she was asking them to work and encouraging them to work for her election.
And whether she wants to spend it as, well, I didn't say that he wanted vote illegally, doesn't matter.
She was soliciting their assistance and it is instructive.
It tells us all we need to know.
Here's the story, and it's actually a column that the Wall Street Journal has reprised by David Shippers from August 23rd of 2000.
Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore has been talking a good game recently about integrity in politics, but that's not how he always plays it.
In June of 1998, as part of our oversight investigation of the Justice Department, my staff and I, reporting to the House Judiciary Committee, were looking into the White House's use of the Immigration and Naturalization Service to further its political agenda.
The most blatant politicization of the agency had taken place during the 96 presidential campaign when the Clinton Gore administration pressured the INS into expediting its citizenship USA program to grant citizenship to tens of thousands of aliens the White House considered likely Democratic voters.
The handling of this pressure campaign, the end result of which was the circumvention of long-established policies at the INS, was left to Al Gore.
He and his office were responsible for keeping the pressure on, a job they did admirably, as emails we recovered clearly showed.
The White House's INS campaign started early in the election year, but ran almost immediately into a roadblock.
Commissioner Doris Meissner didn't want to speed up the naturalization process, and she warned the White House that such a move might be viewed as politically motivated.
Undaunted, the White House asked Douglas Farrbrother of Mr. Gore's recently formed National Performance Review staff to look into removing barriers to citizenship.
And as early as March of 1996, Farrbrother was reporting his efforts and results to Gore's office.
In fact, at one point, Mr. Farrbrother sent an email updating Elaine K. Mark, an official in Gore's office.
Ms. K. Mark responded in all uppercase type: the president is sick of this and wants action.
If nothing moves today, we'll have to take some pretty drastic measures about speeding up this process of naturalizing tens of thousands of aliens and their citizenship, the naturalization of it, so they could go out and vote Democrats.
So the idea that Francine Busby or any other Democrat would not be encouraging illegal aliens to go out and either vote or work in their campaigns, it would be much harder to believe that that's not happening based on history, recent and not so recent.
So don't think I was out of context at all.
In fact, I probably was not hard enough on Ms. Busby.
Should have asked originally how many other occasions are there like this where she has made similar requests of similar people.
Rushlinboy, your guiding light, the EIB network.
As long as we're on the subject of immigration here, this is an interesting story from the Associated Press.
Millions of illegal immigrants in our country never jumped the U.S.-Mexico border where Congress wants to erect walls, and President Bush is sending National Guard troops to patrol.
They never sneaked in at all.
The little-acknowledged reality is that nearly half the estimated 12 million undocumented foreigners in the U.S. entered on bona fide U.S. visas, simply never left.
Authorities call them overstays, who have been largely overlooked in the vitriolic debate on immigration.
Dean Boyd, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Washington, said the southwestern border gets all the attention, but it's staggering the number of people who came or come and overstay their visa.
It is a very large-scale problem.
All right, now I know what this is.
This is an attempt to deflect attention away from the illegal immigration.
They're not that big a problem, really.
Fuck Rushie.
I understand it.
They're not that many pouring across the border.
These people came here legally and they just overstay in their visas.
All right, fine.
If that's what you want to try to do, I'll deal with it both ways.
First place, any illegal immigration, if it's just half, even if it's 6 million, it's too much.
But number two, and the most important thing is would somebody explain to me how any enforcement provision in this new worthless Senate immigration bill is going to be enforced or used if we now have a story that over half the illegals here are overstays on visas that have expired and they just haven't left.
Who's enforcing that?
In fact, you have ICE out there.
Yeah, major problem.
Fine, do something about it.
No, it's too big now to deport all these people.
We can't deport 6 million people.
Oh, I thought it was you can't deport 12 million.
Well, we can't deport anybody.
We need these people.
Employment problems, labor problems.
So an attempt here to deflect attention from the amount of illegal immigration to something else simply points out the failures in this whole area.
Because if we got people here on visas that have expired, it's obvious nobody's tracking them down.
So any provision in this Senate bill that deals with enforcement is worthless, as I have been telling you from the first days this bill started being debated.
Steve in Baltimore, you're next on the EIB network, sir.
Glad you waited and welcome to the program.
Thank you very much, Rush.
You know, I agree that the Defense of Marriage Amendment they're debating is nothing but a base rallying ploy.
But, you know, that means it's campaigning and it's illegal to use office resources for campaigning.
We're paying them a salary.
It's a waste of time.
And I thought it was interesting that you brought up Newt Gingrich in that context because talking about defense of marriage, he left his wife while she was getting chemotherapy for his lobbyist girlfriend.
You know something?
I'll tell you something, Steve.
It's interesting that you bring up Newt Gingrich in this.
Well, let's go back to what you said about gay marriage being a waste of time in the Senate.
The simple fact of the matter is that anytime the Senate is doing something that's worthless, we are all the beneficiaries.
If they are wasting their time, and of course, that's a definition that is for grabs, then you can different definitions of worthless.
But if they're debating something, it doesn't have a chance of being passed, if they're debating something that is mindless, mere campaigning, then that to me is a plus because it means they're not putting together rotten legislation like an immigration bill or other or Sarbanes Oxley or some other thing that's absolutely onerous, unworkable, and oppressive.
Dan in Annapolis, Maryland, you're next on the EIB network.
Glate to have you with us, sir.
Mega Dittos, Rush.
Thank you, Dan.
I just wanted to say I think Newt, whether he is completely set on running in 2008, I think he's definitely posturing himself for a potential run in case he decides to right now.
I think he's been building the groundwork for months, maybe even a couple years now with the book and his website and everywhere he's talking.
He's going everywhere.
It's almost like he's on a campaign now.
I mean, obviously he's making money doing this, but that couldn't possibly be the only reason he's up to all this.
Well, you're more informed than I.
I don't really know what his intentions are.
Newt is a guy with big ideas.
He always has been a guy with big ideas.
And he's increasingly smart.
And he's been in the rehab circuit.
He's been rehabilitating himself from the controversy days.
But he's, you know, Newt has, if he's doing this, they're going to have a couple of photo ops that he's going to have to explain to people standing side by side with Hillary and talking about how her health care plan is one of the smartest things that the country could do.
And he explained that, well, you know, people have good ideas.
We've got to work together.
I think he threw that up against the wall, a little trial balloon to see how it fell out because he hasn't appeared with her again since that.
But we'll just have to wait and see.
I know that one of the things I know he's, if you see him on television in the future, one of the things I know he's going to be really upset about, as we all are, is this Haditha thing because this Haditha story, this Haditha instance, incident, whatever, this is it, folks.
This is the final big push on behard of the behalf of the Democratic Party, the American left, and the drive-by media to destroy our effort to win the war in Iraq.
That's what Haditha represents.
And they are going about it gleefully.
They are ecstatic about it.
And this is a time where we all need to come together and stand up for the U.S. military, the men and women who serve, who volunteer.
Because I told you last week, the officials that know whatever in the process of this investigation cannot say a word for fear of having any conviction or any verdict thrown out because they've been involved in shaping opinion about it.
So it's going to be a one-sided story.
The critics are going to have a field day, and the critics are going to be able to make things up.
The critics are going to be able to go out there and tell you things happened that they don't know happened.
They're going to be able to use all these anonymous sources.
And it's going to be, let me just put it in graphic terms.
It is going to be a gang rape.
There is going to be a gang rape by a Democratic Party, the American left, and the drive-by media to finally take us out in the war against Iraq.
Make no bones about it.
Holly in Manchester, Connecticut.
Nice to have you on the program.
Welcome.
Hi, Rush.
I just wanted to go back to the abortion story, make a quick comment.
Which, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Which abortion story?
The woman who said she couldn't get the day after pill, it was too hard.
Okay, because, well, no, she wasn't too hard because Bush administration conservative policies made it impossible for her to get in the 72-hour timeframe that she had.
Exactly.
She could have very easily walked into any Planned Parenthood without an appointment or insurance or anything and have gotten that pill the very next day.
And I just think it's ridiculous for her to say she couldn't do that.
Well, she writes in her piece that trying to find an abortion doctor was tougher than finding a pharmacist this pharmaceutical.
She should go to Planned Parenthood and get an abortion.
I mean, they're open, like, they're open on Saturdays, even.
I thought they were open 24-7, even on the holidays.
Yes, it would have been very simple for her to do that.
Well, there has to be a reason why she didn't do it because she obviously would know.
Most women do know, so I don't really, I don't really understand.
Like I said, she could have gone to school nurse.
Well, school nurses, school nurses required by law now, aren't they?
If the teenager comes in, says I'm pregnant, they go, okay, bam, here's the van.
We'll call somebody, and parents will never find out about it.
There's any number of places she, I know, it's just it's folly, and it's, you know, don't forget, she starts out by saying she and her husband were busy lives.
They hadn't seen each other in a long time.
This is a Washington Post column yesterday, folks, by Dana L, a lawyer in Virginia.
We'll link to it at rushlimbaugh.com.
You can go to the Washington Post website.
It's in their, they call it Outlook.
If you want to go to their website, find the Outlook section and go there rather than the editorial op-ed section because Sundays it's all in the Outlook section.
You can go read it now if you want to.
But she talks about how her husband is very active lives and they just don't have much time together anymore.
And they found themselves back in March with some couple time.
And they were so excited, so eager that she forgot to use her diaphragm.
And that, of course, Bush's fault.
Bush should have been standing there.
Bush should have been at the house.
Bush should have reminded her: hey, remember, you don't have much time.
There's a diaphragm, and there's a reason you're using it.
You're 42 years old.
And so Bush was not there to warn her.
And then she had to take her kids to school, a bus stop or what have you, instead of hunting around an abortion doctor or pharmacist that would prescribe Plan B.
And of course, that's Bush's fault because if there were government programs to pay for getting her kids from the house to the school bus and vice versa, then she would have had time to go out there and take care of the problems.
Everything came first, except her problem.
This she couldn't find an abortion doctor, couldn't find a pharmacist, and so she had no choice.
But she had to go get an abortion.
She figured if she ran out of time, 72 hours, just roll the dice.
I'm 42.
What are the odds that I can get pregnant anyway?
They were pretty good because she did.
So the idea that being so angry that you want to write a story about this for all the sea in the Washington Post.
Back after this, folks.
Stay with us.
As usual, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have Rush Limbaugh, a highly trained broadcast specialist, showing the world how it should be done.
800-282-2882, a military investigation into allegations that American troops intentionally killed civilians in Ishagi, a village north of Baghdad, has cleared them of misconduct, the United States said on Friday, even though it acknowledged the deaths of up to 13 Iraqis in the March raid.
Meanwhile, a lawyer representing families of some of the two dozen unarmed Iraqi civilians allegedly killed by Marines in Haditha said three or four Marines carried out the shootings while 20 more waited outside the homes.
He also said the victims' relatives turned down a request by U.S. investigators to exhume the victims' bodies for forensic tests.
Now, the investigation of the March 15th attack at Ishaki concluded that the U.S. troops followed normal procedures in raising the level of force as they came under attack upon approaching a building where they believed an al-Qaeda terrorist was hiding.
Caldwell, the U.S. military spokesman William Caldwell, Major General, also acknowledged that there were possibly up to nine collateral deaths in addition to the four Iraqi deaths that the military announced at the time of the raid.
The results of the investigation released after questions were raised about the original U.S. report as television stations aired AP television news footage of a row of dead children in the aftermath of the raid.
Now, I remind you of this simply because nobody yet knows what happened in Haditha.
All there are are the horror stories right now.
And if there are charges, there will be a defense.
And I just, I can't, I cannot emphasize enough, ladies and gentlemen, the efforts that are underway and will be continuing to use this Haditha story as the absolute final drill to destroy our effort to achieve victory in Iraq altogether.
You can just, you can see it, you can hear it.
By the way, the president is speaking now about the same-sex marriage amendment saying that marriage should not be redefined by activist judges.
We are rolling on this rather than jipping it because he started late.
He had commercials coming up we can't miss.
So we'll roll on this.
And if there's anything new in it, we'll have it for you in the next hour.
Now, get this.
This is an absolutely, this is just sick.
Nearly one in five students at two Ivy League schools say that they have purposely injured themselves by cutting, burning, or other methods, a disturbing phenomenon that psychologists say they are hearing about more often.
For some young people, self-abuse, and by that, again, we mean purposely injuring themselves, cutting, burning, other methods of self-abuse is an extreme coping mechanism that seems to help relieve stress.
For others, it's a way to make deep emotional wounds more visible.
The results of the survey at Cornell and Princeton are similar to other estimates on this frightening behavior.
Counselors say it's happening at colleges, haskruls, and middle schools across the country.
Separate research found more than 400 websites devoted to the subject, including many that glorify self-injury.
Some worry that many sites serve as an online subculture that fuels the behavior.
So, my gosh, one-fifth of Ivy League students are nuts.
I always thought that anyway, but for other reasons.
You know, for what they were being taught and what they graduated believing, 17% in a survey said that they had purposely injured themselves.
Among those, 70% had done it multiple times.
The estimate is comparable to previous reports on U.S. adolescents and young adults, but slightly higher than studies of Haskrule students in Australia and the United Kingdom.
Repeat self-abusers are more likely than non-injurers to be female and to have had eating disorders or suicidal tendencies, although self-injury is usually not considered a suicide attempt.
No, it's a desperate call for attention.
According to the analysts here, it's a coping mechanism.
It seems to help relieve stress.
For others, it's a way to make deep emotional wounds more visible.
So if you're hurting inside, if you're really hurting, if somebody's done you wrong, the way you let it know, you slice yourself up and you bleed all over the place so that people will know you're hurting rather than you have to run around and complain.
Do I believe it?
Well, I mean, it's in the drive-by media.
It's the AP medical writer here.
Name is, or could be him, Lindsey Tanner.
It sounds pretty common out there.
I bet if this, I don't know, have you seen a story like this before?
I haven't either.
This is the first time I've seen it.
In the story, it says this.
Psychologist Richard Lieberman, who coordinates a suicide prevention program for Los Angeles, said that one school recently reported several fourth graders with burns on their arms and another seeking help for 15 hysterical seventh grade girls in the office, and they all have cuts on their arms.
What do you bet that at some point, you know, this phenomenon will be examined further.
There'll be in-depth studies.
There'll be grant money used.
It'll be tied to the stress and the uncertainties of life in America under the Bush administration.
Seems that Dana L of the Washington Post is doing a chat right now on the Washington Post website.
And she admits that, yep, Planned Parenthood, you can get the Plan B prescription, the drug, any Planned Parenthood office in her condition, in her nervous state.
She just forgot that.
We'll have more details when we come back.
Stay with us, my friends.
▲
Export Selection