By now everyone has heard of poor lil’ Sandra Fluke. A 30 year old feminist activist posing as some lowly coed who can’t afford contraception and is saddened to see the looks of woman frazzled with sunken eyes, and long faces, tortured by the very thoughts that they may not be able to get laid 2.7 times that day due to lack of funds for contraceptives.
Sorry, I do not feel your pain Ms. Fluke. Yes I am a guy. So I know in your mind that should prevent me from having any opinion on the matter. To that I say Fluke You and the concocted little controversy you road in on. I am a married man with a daughter. So I do have some skin in the game. Our daughter finally arrived after four long hard invitro cycles, something the Catholic Church does not believe in. We did not hold it against the church, nor would we demand they should pay and execute the procedure. It’s called tolerance for ones views and not imposing your needs against another’s ideals. Maybe a little reflection is in order, if you can somehow manage to find the time.
See Sandra, back in the day, when apparently men and woman were more resourceful we didn’t rely on anyone to pay for our contraceptives. Woman tried to hide the fact that they needed it. Every male over the age of 14 had a well-worn circular ring on the back of their leather wallet. It was a sign of perpetual optimism. That can-do spirit and the Boy Scout willingness to always be prepared. If the stars aligned, you got to use that condom before it became unusable due to going past its expiration date. If we needed another one, 4 quarters in the nearest gas station bathroom got you resupplied and French Tickler for you and your buddies to marvel at. Here you are claiming to need a thousand dollars yearly of other people’s money so that you can get your groove on. How about this, why don’t you charge admission of one condom per visit. Any young man with a reasonable sex drive of a male aged 18-50 should be more than willing to pay the freight. Easy Peezy Lemon Squeezy right?
No its not is it? Your little crusade at Georgetown University has nothing to do with your worries for your fellow female comrades. It’s all about a selfish little cause. You came to the college strutting your liberal stuff looking for a party. The whorish thing about this all is not that you’re a slut, I wouldn’t know, I really don’t care, you’re a political whore for shopping yourself out to the Democrat Party to be used as a pawn in a presidential election. Bought and paid for, money left on the night stand, no cigarette needed. Your activist credentials are coming to light, your little moment in the sun is about to end. You are now going to be the butt end of all matters of tasteless adult jokes. Welcome to Monica Lewinski’s world darling. Unlike her, you earned it.
P.S.
Note to President Obama:
Since you seemed to find the time to call Ms. Fluke to tell her how brave you thought she was and how proud her parents must they must be, maybe you should consider doing the same for every U.S. Service member who lost their lives protecting Ms. Fluke from the hordes of religious fanatics who would stone the woman to death for committing the sin of being raped. Somehow I don’t believe they would ask Ms. Fluke if she had adequate contraception before their endeavors nor would they care about who would pay for it.
Eh-Yup!
He is just a fat guy in Maine.
+1000
The unfortunate part about this whole Fluke controversy is that she is really nothing more than a distraction, a “shiny object” to distract people’s attention away from the larger issue of Emperor Baracka I abrogating the 1st Ammendment of the US Constitution. This distraction has most likely exceeded all expectations that the leftys had.
@Anti-Socialist:
Proof that you are right:
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/07/video-after-blasting-rush-limbaugh-dem-reps-sheila-jackson-lee-jan-schakowsky-refuse-to-condemn-bill-mahers-palin-comments/
It seems to be pronounced “fluck.”
LOL
Media Standards:
Acceptable: Calling conservatives “Tea Baggers” even though they have nothing to do with homosexual activity.
Unacceptable: Calling a 30-year-old women who goes before Congress with her sexual excesses wants all of America to pay $3,000 for her contraception a “slut.”
Damnit, why don’t you tear apart the stupid stuff she actually said, like the bit about the lady who was raped and didn’t go for an STD check because she thought it wouldn’t be covered because contraception was covered.
Or tear apart the bit about the woman who felt ‘powerless’ when she found out her contraception wasn’t covered by insurance and, in Fluke’s words, “have no choice but to go without contraception.” Perhaps because she’s never heard of free condoms, planned parenthood, or $9/month state contraception programs. Tear apart the married woman who couldn’t fit contraception in her budget. Condoms are free. Pills are $9/month, if you don’t want the free ones. Skip a latte, lady.
Fluke never posed as ‘some lowly coed who can’t afford contraception’. At the beginning she distinctly said she wasn’t going to talk about herself. She didn’t mention her sex life, her cost of contraception, or whether she was on contraception or wanted to be on contraception.
We could tear apart the ridiculous stuff Fluke said if we quit saying crap about things Fluke didn’t say. Every time you do that, we lose.
@Stick to the facts, please:
She did pose as a lowly co-ed who just wanted to talk about the plight of her fellow students.
The fact was she is a feminist activist and has been for some time.
We have also mentioned elsewhere on other threads her dubious stories and how the blame is on those women’s asumptions about coverage and not the university or it’s insurance.
Peruse the site if you haven’t and you’ll see what I mean.
I believe your math is off a tad. I was able to find condoms in bulk (100) and fyi not the cheapest or greatest quanties either, that would allow Ms. Fluke to get laid 10x day and still be under budget. While I’m sure she is an intelligent young lady (being nice here) her math skills are right in line with our Dear Leaders. It’s painfully obvious that she didn’t think (liberal, what else is new) that anyone would check and do the math much less do any real research.
Talk about bad at math!
David Limbaugh:
You really lost 28 sponsors?
Rush Limbaugh:
No, we have not lost 28 sponsors.
David Limbaugh:
Well, how can they say it?
Rush Limbaugh:
Because they lie and because they don’t understand how it works, and that’s what I want to try and explain. In fact, folks, we have three brand-new sponsors that will be starting in the next two weeks.
Two of the sponsors who have canceled have asked to return.
So this “28 sponsors” numbers are coming from Media Matters.
They are not our sponsors.
They are not even canceling their advertising on the local station.
They’re just saying for the time being they don’t want it run from noon to three.
And let me tell you, this happens every day.
It’s been happening for 23-plus years.
And it’s not just to me.
There are clients, advertisers, that tell stations, “I don’t want this to run in Beck’s show.
I don’t want it to run in Hannity’s.
I don’t want it to run in Howard Stern’s.”
It’s all part of the business.
There are not 28 advertisers who were paying us who aren’t anymore.
They are local commercial buys.
Many of them may not even be running in my show to begin with.
The advertisers are just saying, “If they are, pull ’em.
We don’t want ’em in there for now,” but they’re staying on the local stations.
These advertisers are not abandoning EIB affiliates.
Nobody is losing money here, including us, in all this.
If we added up all of our affiliates (let’s choose the number 600) and we assumed that each of those affiliates had 30 such sponsors in the course of our three-hour program, there might be — all across this country — as many as 18,000 different sponsors of this program.
Let me put it another way: There might be 18,000 different people buying advertising within this program alone.
Twenty-eight sponsors out of 18,000!
That’s like losing a couple of french fries in the container when it’s delivered to you at the drive-thru.
////////////////////////////////////////////What’s funny is that I actually heard two men talking about, “the 28 sponsors who quit Rush’s show so he’ll be closing up shop real soon,” just today!
Must be like Fluke, going to Media Matters for their ”facts.”
Ding dong…you teabaggers do realize contraception is not just about sex, right? It’s also life saving medication in many cases. Hell the right is even trying to eliminate life saving amniocentesis from coverage and that does save lives!
But go ahead, keep defend a pig like Rush. The Dems just got the women vote in 2012 thanks to you! Keep it up!
But, nice try at deflection. Right one cue with Faux News. Baaaaah, baaaahh!
The statement read by Sandra Fluke was (1) brilliant; (2) dishonest and (3) classically liberal. Liberals cannot come out and unabashedly tell you what it is that they want. This woman wants free contraception from this Catholic University, in part, to tweak Catholics and, in part, because she is a liberal activist. And, in what Rush Limbaugh did on Thursday and Friday of 1.5 weeks ago, was exactly right. She wanted sex without any consequences. She did not want to pay for it; she did not want to have any responsibilities whatsoever. But, nobody is going to buy into that. If she came out and said any of this, she would get no media and, those who heard her would oppose her 80–20. So, she has to come out and talk about a non-contraceptive use for contraceptives, which apparently, such an application exists. Now, from what I could pick up, with proper documentation, a woman could get contraceptives under these circumstances at Georgetown (although Fluke was intentionally vague here). So, she takes the exception to the rule and puts that out there like that is what this is all about. The same is done with food stamps, housing, breakfast and lunch for the poor school kids, abortion and medical marijuana in California. Let me explain what abortion people want: abortions at any time for any woman who wants it, no matter what. However, whenever you argue this with them, they will always talk about rape and incest, which make up 1–3% of abortions. Medical marijuana: there are apparently some instances when medical marijuana is a reasonable medical help for some ailments. However, as everyone in California knows, it is all about getting dope legally. Probably not 1% of those with a marijuana prescription actually really need it, medically speaking. The other 99% just want to get high. So that is what Fluke’s statement was all about; the fact that liberal politicians were able to turn this into a Republican “war on women” was an added benefit.
@Michael: Great post – well written!
@Everyone else – Please don’t feed the troll – just ignore liberalmann and when he rolls into town liberal(objectivity). They have nothing constructive nor intelligent to add to the conversation.
@Brother Bob:
Sorry, Brother Bob. I won’t feed him, but he does owe me a big apology. Now, I don’t necessarily expect to get it, but I will hound his posts on here for the time being.
For reference, he owes me an apology for this;
http://floppingaces.net/most_wanted/leaked-bin-laden-not-buried-at-sea-body-moved-on-cia-plane-to-us/#comment-362998
Be sure to read my response to him.
liberalmann@#10 – These medical ‘exceptions’ are already covered by Insurance…and no, they do not cost $3,000 a year. The $3000 cost is just added ‘drama’ [rhetoric]… as usual.
This is about [Liberal/Prog] Government control… and votes.
Oh, and it’s great theater for [distracting] the American People from the more pressing issues at the moment…this Administrations failing the American People…on oh, so many levels…
@FAITH7:
Didn’t you get the memo? liberalmann obviously did. The Dems have locked up the women’s vote for 2012. I certainly don’t envy you having to vote for Obama now.
Acceptable: Calling conservatives “Tea Baggers” even though they have nothing to do with homosexual activity.
@Brother Bob: I would say that constantly telling everyone else not to comment on the libtard brothers’ comments is, well, commenting on them and by your logic – feeding the trolls.
@liberalchild: You ought to quit using the term “teabagger.” I mean it is easy to see that your speak from experience on the subject, but stop embarrassing yourself.
Like I keep saying, you ought stick to attacking fatherless infants, other than gay sexual references, it is your forte.
This dumb broad is being used as Cindy Sheehan once was used; after she’s outlived her usefullness, they drop her like they did Sheehan.
She’s too dumb to understand that!
Here is a liberal on Consevative women. Feel the civility.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/08/liberal-radio-host-rants-repossess-conservative-womens-ovaries-cut-em-off/
@ Johngalt: I meant to comment in that post – great response. liberalfooll owes a lot of apologies. And I meant to ask – do you have a link for that tax increase data? I’ll probably want to
stealcite that at some point.@antisocksrocks: Touche, my friend. Touche.
My hope was that my simple boilerplate response to those idiots would keep the rest of us from wasting our time and getting angry over their stupidity. I guess it’s time to take my own advice and follow the wisdom of Indiana Jones’ father: “Let it go, Junior. Let it go.”
Remember Anita Dunn?
She looked up to Mao and served on Obama’s Cabinet (or as a ”czar”).
Well, her PR group is who shops Fluke around to the compliant media ONLY.
They do not call back the folks at Fox or any who will have tough questions for her!
@Brother Bon:
Here is the link;
http://www.atr.org/comprehensive-list-obama-tax-hikes-a6433
It’s a little more involved than what I posted.
Thank you!
I think you miss the value of low grade O’faithful, and their drive by nouns and verbs, Brother Bob. Look, for example, all the info you learned from JG on the O’tax increases… all because of a question by libdud.
libdud is also spreading the rumour of the 350% increase in oil production… and that made me provide documentation proving that talking point was O’fantasy.
There are instances of all of us doing that all over this blog. And while libdud is incapable of education, those reading his talking points – and our rebuttals debunking them – learn something new when they interface with liberal friends in the real world.
Look at it this way… even a lowly gnat has value in the food chain. libdud is living cyber proof of that.
@Brother Bon: 🙂
@cali:
Or like the women who attacked Herman Cain or like that maid brought out by Gloria Alred in the last California governor’s election (and I believe she was possibly even the person who changed the election for Jerry Brown).
And now for the OTHER backlash.
Advertiser begs Limbaugh take me back!
Limbaugh says NOPE.
California mattress company Sleep Train’s departure from the program had been billed by some observers as particularly significant because the mattress retailer had been with Limbaugh show for 25 years.
Last Friday Sleep Train said in an official statement, “We have currently pulled our ads with Rush Limbaugh.”
A Limbaugh spokesman said that California mattress company Sleep Train asked to restart a “voiced endorsement” from Limbaugh that it had publicly cut off last week. The company said at the time that it “does not condone such negative comments toward any person.”…
…Limbaugh spokesman Brian Glicklich on Thursday forwarded a copy of an email that he said had been sent to Sleep Train Chief Executive Dale Carlsen. In it, Glicklich wrote that Limbaugh had personally received the company’s requests to resume advertising on his show.
“Unfortunately,” Glicklich wrote, “your public comments were not well received by our audience, and did not accurately portray either Rush Limbaugh’s character or the intent of his remarks. Thus, we regret to inform you that Rush will be unable to endorse Sleep Train in the future.”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2012/03/rush-limbaugh-advertiser.html
Rush Limbaugh to advertiser: I don’t want you back
Pretty funny video:
@John Cooper: ROFLMAO!!! Thanks for posting that, JC.
Where does it end?
Fluke said females need $3000 worth of birth control over 3 years.
But the bare minimum to actually prevent pregnancy and DISEASE cost far less.
So, why the disparity?
Because the Left is like a hungry baby bird in the nest…..never satisfied.
If condoms would work, they will insist on the finest condoms.
Did you know that, for extra money, condoms can be ribbed, super-smooth, super-thin, lubed, with added other ingredients flavored and colored?
Which ones should be free?
All of them?
@Mata: LOL – great point – you’ve convinced me!
Everyone, please join me in raising whatever beverage your holding in a toast – here’s to the lefty trolls!