text:
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on March 02, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
Title: Sandra Fluke: Liar/Slut/Whore/Communist/Leftist/Leech/Fake/Fraud
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 02, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
Stunner. Georgetown "Coed" Sandra Fluke Is a 30 Year-Old Women's Rights Activist
TheGatewayPundit.com ^ | March 2, 2012 | Jim Hoft
Posted on Friday, March 02, 2012
What a shock! It was all a BIG PRODUCTION! The Democrat's token abused college coed is actually a 30 year-old hardcore women's rights activist.
Sandra Fluke is also the past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.
Jammie Wearing Fool reported:
"I put that in quotes because in the beginning she was described as a Georgetown law student. It was then revealed that prior to attending Georgetown she was an active women's right advocate. In one of her first interviews she is quoted as talking about how she reviewed Georgetown's insurance policy prior to committing to attend, and seeing that it didn't cover contraceptive services, she decided to attend with the express purpose of battling this policy. During this time, she was described as a 23-year-old coed. Magically, at the same time Congress is debating the forced coverage of contraception, she appears and is even brought to Capitol Hill to testify. This morning, in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show, it was revealed that she is 30 years old, NOT the 23 that had been reported all along.
In other words, folks, you are being played. She has been an activist all along and the Dems were just waiting for the appropriate time to play her."
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke: Liar/Slut/Whore/Communist/Leftist/Leech/Fake/Fraud
http://lsrj.org
Post by: Shockwave on March 02, 2012, 02:45:17 PM
Epic. Bet it wont be covered ANYWHERE.
Quote from: Shockwave on March 02, 2012, 02:45:17 PM
And the leftists and slumbama embrace this slut as a victim of poor limbaugh who is again vindicated.
Sandra Fluke's Appearance Is No Fluke
Posted by Just a Grunt on Mar 02, 2012 at 10:49 am
For me the interesting part of the story is the ever-evolving "coed". I put that in quotes because in the beginning she was described as a Georgetown law student. It was then revealed that prior to attending Georgetown she was an active women's right advocate. In one of her first interviews she is quoted as talking about how she reviewed Georgetown's insurance policy prior to committing to attend, and seeing that it didn't cover contraceptive services, she decided to attend with the express purpose of battling this policy. During this time, she was described as a 23-year-old coed. Magically, at the same time Congress is debating the forced coverage of contraception, she appears and is even brought to Capitol Hill to testify. This morning, in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show, it was revealed that she is 30 years old, NOT the 23 that had been reported all along.
In other words, folks, you are being played. She has been an activist all along and the Dems were just waiting for the appropriate time to play her.
While she is described as a "third year law student" they always fail to mention that she is also the past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.
Does your campus's LSRJ chapter face opposition in regard to facilitating a comprehensive conversation about reproductive justice? Well mine definitely does! While my campus has a mix of people with different backgrounds, and a rich liberal arts community, the Midwest doesn't exactly scream bleeding liberal. Some LSRJ chapters at conservative campuses face opposition in the form of other, more conservative, student run organizations; some face it from their administrations, and others from their peers, or the community in general. Whatever the opposition is, it can be incredibly frustrating and disheartening.
The question is, how do we combat this conservative opposition and oppression, in order to facilitate a discussion and educate others about the RJ movement? I am obviously not alone in facing these problems, as Sandra Fluke of Georgetown lead a packed room in a discussion on this question at the first Issue Caucus that I attended at the Leadership Institute, LSRJ's national conference at Berkeley.
While no solution was definitively reached, and I personally don't begin to have the "right" answer, I was really charged by the discussion and feel many great ideas were presented. Some campus chapters decided to take an adversarial approach, feeling it important to use those "scary" words the opposition fears.
Further background research on Ms Fluke reveals that she got her start in government in New York in 2009.
Sandra Fluke's professional background in domestic violence and human trafficking began with Sanctuary for Families in New York City. There, she launched the agency's pilot Program Evaluation Initiative. While at Sanctuary, she co-founded the New York Statewide Coalition for Fair Access to Family Court, which after a twenty-year stalemate, successfully advocated for legislation granting access to civil orders of protection for unmarried victims of domestic violence, including LGBTQ victims and teens. Sandra was also a member of the Manhattan Borough President's Taskforce on Domestic Violence and numerous other New York City and New York State coalitions that successfully advocated for policy improvements impacting victims of domestic violence.
As the 2010 recipient of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles Fran Kandel Public Interest Grant, she researched, wrote, and produced an instructional film on how to apply for a domestic violence restraining order in pro per. She has also interned with the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking; Polaris Project; Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County; Break the Cycle; the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project; NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund; Crime Victim and Sexual Assault Services; and the Human Services Coalition of Tompkins County.
Through Georgetown's clinic programs, Sandra has proposed legislation based on fact-finding in Kenya regarding child trafficking for domestic work, and has represented victims of domestic violence in protection order cases. Sandra is the Development Editor of the Journal of Gender and the Law, and served as the President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, and the Vice President of the Women's Legal Alliance. In her first year, she also co-founded a campus committee addressing human trafficking. Cornell University awarded her a B. S. in Policy Analysis & Management, as well as Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies in 2003.
My only question is, how does someone go from being a champion of domestic violence issues to an expert of women's reproductive health issues?
Post by: blacken700 on March 02, 2012, 03:22:56 PM
where are you getting your information :D
Cornell University awarded her a B. S. in Policy Analysis & Management, as well as Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies in 2003.
past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, whats the big deal
Quote from: blacken700 on March 02, 2012, 03:28:37 PM
Quote from: 333386 on March 02, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
still want to know the big deal
:). She is a prop and a fraud there to advace obamas war on catholics.
Post by: Straw Man on March 02, 2012, 03:54:13 PM
Repubs were FOR a mandate for contraception in health insurance just a few years ago so why are we supposed to believe they suddenly find it to be a problem?
LOL @ War on Catholics
You know what's even funnier than that.... Repubs have hearing on woman's contraception and not allowing single woman to speak on the subject.
Our current batch of Repubs would fit in quite nicely in Iran or Saudi Arabia
how is she a prop or fraud
Post by: 240 is Back on March 02, 2012, 04:04:44 PM
i dont care if she's 23 or 30 or 70.
Rush called her a slut. women don't like it when fat bald guys call women sluts.
who said she was 23 or hiding she was past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.
good Q. 33, where was her original claim?
i think he's getting more news from india :D :D
Post by: Fury on March 02, 2012, 04:22:23 PM
What's this whore's going rate? I'll admit I'm intrigued at the prospect of seeing how a future Nancy Pelosi performs in the sack. My guess is it's all about her and she doesn't give head as she sees it as degrading.
Quote from: Fury on March 02, 2012, 04:22:23 PM
more than your mothers
Quote from: Straw Man on March 02, 2012, 04:25:57 PM
Well that makes it more than yours as well. Even the 2-for-1 special with your sister thrown in rings up under $20.00.
Tell that bitch to shave, by the way. Felt like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom down there.
It's cute how butt-hurt you are over this woman. Looks like someone has a crush on this chick. You've been throwing a tizzy over her all day.
they are upset that she has been exposed as a fraud , a liar, and a leftist snake being used to advance obamacare.
The guy sounds like he's ready to fight for her honor. Talk about a douche.
again, how is she a fraud or liar
She is a fraud since she enrolled in the school for the sole purpose of challenging the bc policy.
she is a liar since bc does not cost 1000 a year or more.
Well that makes it more than yours as well. Even the 2-for-1 special with your sister thrown in rings up under $20.00. Tell that bitch to shave, by the way. Felt like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom down there.
LOL - you're the one having the tizzy but good job trying to project it onto me
This entire topic is a joke
since when did you give a shit about contraception until the current crop of Repubs told you to be upset about it
why don't you call your mother and find out her opinion on the subject
my guess is that she get's her contraception from her health insurance plan just like almost every other woman in the country
still haven't shown any proof of that claim, not that things like that have ever mattered to you
how was it a big production,tell us
Browse · Search Pings · Mail Bloggers & Personal
Sandra Fluke Does Not Speak for Me
The College Conservatie ^ | March 2, 2012 | Angela Morabito
Posted on March 2, 2012 3:23:21 PM EST by GSWarrior
I'm a proud Georgetown woman upset about another Georgetown woman who may have no pride at all. How else do you explain - Ms. Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown Law student, now famous for testimony she never gave – jumping up to talk about her sex life (with the Senate Minority Leader and with the liberal media) and ask for the cost of her sex life to be subsidized by other students at a Jesuit School?
Sandra Fluke was declined the privilege (a privilege, not a right) of testifying in front of a Senate Committee on the proposed contraceptive mandate. Her name was submitted too late to be admitted to testify. She's not a lawyer. She's not a member of the clergy – crucial for a hearing on religious freedom, wouldn't you say? That's what Representative Issa said. Her one claim to fame in the reproductive health care debate is…drumroll, please…being a student club leader! You go, Sandra! Hang those posters girl. Wear out those Sharpies.
Me? I love me some extracurricular involvement. The difference between Sandra and me is that I don't think it qualifies me to speak in front of Congress. "The Chair calls to the stand the captains of the intramural ultimate frisbee team!"
Having been told by Congress to more or less shut up and go home, Sandra found a sympathetic ear in Nancy Pelosi. She is not going to find one on the Georgetown Campus. She is wildly out of step.
Senate Democrats needed a show pony for this circus – and they knew they could find a liberal woman on a college campus who would willingly trot around the ring. That's why Nancy & Pals created a photo op with all the props – the microphones, the podium, an air of pretense, and the all-important liberal media – for Sandra to tell her "story." And it is just that – a story, told on a stage.
But Nancy Pelosi and the Liberal Media should know that they can no longer rely on college campuses as an endless source of liberal support. My colleagues and I at TheCollegeConservative are creating a new wave on campuses across the country. Every day we make it a little safer to be conservative – out in public – without fear of bad grades as a result of our views. Sandra should know we have no fear in calling out a classmate for thoughtless liberal ideology.
Sandra Fluke doesn't speak for me. Or for Georgetown.
She doesn't speak for those of us who worked hard to be able to choose to come to a great institution with a great tradition of faith and scholarship. She certainly can't speak for the Jesuits who dedicated their lives to God and Education with a long established set of rules. There are only ten of them, and Ms. Fluke would do well to give them a quick read.
If she wants a more liberal sex life, she can go to Syracuse. (Syracuse, I must apologize – but we are in March and basketball matters – sorry you got caught up in this.) Sandra doesn't even speak for all skanks! She only speaks for the skanks who don't want to take responsibility for their choices. That's a tiny group of people. Hey Sandra! How about next Saturday night, you come hang out with me and my gay boyfriends! Your hair will look fabulous and you'll get to see great musical theatre! Oh, and odds of you getting pregnant? Zero percent.
Even the oh-so-left HuffPo called Sandra out on her media sluttery: "Fluke got the stage all to herself and was hailed as a hero by the crowd and Democratic lawmakers on the panel, all of whom rushed to appear on camera with her at the end. "Excuse me. I'd love to get a picture with our star," Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said as she pushed her way through the packed room to Fluke." Star of what? Star of the bedroom sex tape? When did Georgetown Law start admitting Kardashians?
Sandra, we might be on the same campus, but we are not on the same planet. Sandra told some sob stories about how contraception isn't covered by the Jesuit institution we attend. (Maybe they don't cover it because, you know, they're a Jesuit institution. Religious freedom? Anyone? Bueller?)
A student group called Plan A H*yas for Choice staged a demonstration against the university health plan last year, duct taping their mouths and chaining themselves to the statue of Georgetown's founder on the university's front lawn. Then, a funny thing happened – nothing. We left them there. Now Sandra has chained herself to the sinking ship of Pelosi Liberalism. She will always be remembered as a Welfare Condom Queen. Let's talk priorities here. It costs over $23,000 for a year at Georgetown Law. Sandra, are you telling us that you can afford that but cannot afford your own contraception? Really? Math was never my strong suit, but something about Sandra's accounting just doesn't seem right.
No one forced Sandra to come to Georgetown. And now that she has, Sandra does not have to depend on the university health plan. She could walk down the street to CVS and get some contraception herself. Or, go to an off-campus, non-university doctor and pay for it out of pocket. (Or, you know…maybe not have so much sex that it puts her in financial peril?)
Funny how the same side that cries "Get your rosaries off my ovaries" is the same side saying, "on second thought…please pay for me to have all the sex I want!" The people who espouse "pro-choice" "values" are the same people who say religious institutions have no right to choose.
Imagine if someone else had asked the government to cover a different activity. Let's say I want to go rock climbing. It's my body and my choice and I want to climb all the cliffs I can! Imagine if I went to the government and asked it to pay for helmets and ropes and band-aids I'll need to safely climb rocks every day of my life. What would everyone say? "It's your choice to do that- no one's forcing you to scale cliffs. So, either quit it or pay for it yourself!"
This is the reaction we should have had to Sandra Fluke.
Sandra, I hope you take to heart our school's motto of "Cura Personalis" – care of the whole person. You are so much more than your reproductive organs. Please, have some self-respect and take responsibility for your choices instead of having to beg the government for help. The government should not be able to force a religious institution – like the one we attend – to pay for the things they don't believe in. That is pretty clear in the first amendment. But since you missed the ten commandments I can't expect you to read the Bill of Rights either.
I believe in Georgetown. I love this school. And I know that we are so, so much better than what Sandra Fluke would make us out to be.
Hoya Saxa.
The Democrat's token abused college coed is actually a 30 year-old hardcore women's rights activist.
did she say she wasn't
I hope the hundreds of guys she banged come forward
This woman doesn't speak for Georgetown either
333 - will you be attacking the president of Georgetown next since he basically called people such as yourself "misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student"
http://www.georgetown.edu/message-civility-public-discourse.html
Dear Members of the Georgetown Community:
There is a legitimate question of public policy before our nation today. In the effort to address the problem of the nearly fifty million Americans who lack health insurance, our lawmakers enacted legislation that seeks to increase access to health care. In recent weeks, a question regarding the breadth of services that will be covered has focused significant public attention on the issue of contraceptive coverage. Many, including the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, have offered important perspectives on this issue.
In recent days, a law student of Georgetown, Sandra Fluke, offered her testimony regarding the proposed regulations by the Department of Health and Human Services before a group of members of Congress. She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression. And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position – including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels – responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.
In our vibrant and diverse society, there always are important differences that need to be debated, with strong and legitimate beliefs held on all sides of challenging issues. The greatest contribution of the American project is the recognition that together, we can rely on civil discourse to engage the tensions that characterize these difficult issues, and work towards resolutions that balance deeply held and different perspectives. We have learned through painful experience that we must respect one another and we acknowledge that the best way to confront our differences is through constructive public debate. At times, the exercise of one person's freedom may conflict with another's. As Americans, we accept that the only answer to our differences is further engagement.
In an earlier time, St. Augustine captured the sense of what is required in civil discourse: "Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth. Let us seek it together as something which is known to neither of us. For then only may we seek it, lovingly and tranquilly, if there be no bold presumption that it is already discovered and possessed."
If we, instead, allow coarseness, anger – even hatred – to stand for civil discourse in America, we violate the sacred trust that has been handed down through the generations beginning with our Founders. The values that hold us together as a people require nothing less than eternal vigilance. This is our moment to stand for the values of civility in our engagement with one another.
John J. DeGioia
I'm guessing Limbaugh just hates women because in spite of all his money he can't get laid without having to pay for it
You're the same as him only without the money
Wwwwwaaaahhhhhhhh. I go to a top law school and can't afford rubbers or ask the hundreds of guys I bang to bring rubbers. Wwwwaaahhhhhh.
and you're so fucking stupid you think she went to law school for three years and no doubt paid at least couple hundred thousan dollars in tuition/room/board(or got loans) all for the "sole purpose" of making an issue about contraception
I swear to god man we can watch you getting dumber by the day
where's your information where she was hiding she was a hardcore women's rights activist.
She portrayed herself as some poor sex-addicted student trying to leech off everyone else. The truth is that she is a plant by piglosi and slumbama to advance the increasingly unpopular MengleCare
are you FUCKING JOKING man
are you really this stupid?
what part is wrong?
if you don't know then you're too stupid to understand so I'm not going to bother to explain it
btw - I assume you agree that you portray yourself as very insecure person who hates women
Just the communist leftists parasites and gold diggers like the Fluke.
Post by: Vince G, CSN MFT on March 02, 2012, 06:04:42 PM
Makes no difference. You don't go and call a woman a slut under any circumstances.
True - she wants to be paid for sex. Should call her a prostitute
it's pretty funny that you think Fluke is a gold digger considering when she graduates from law school she'll probably be inundated with job offers that you could never dream of getting
I'd speculate that's why you hate her so much but then you're so literally filled with hatred for so many things that there is clearly a larger problem going on
she never said she wanted to be paid for sex
I do suspect that you can't get laid without paying for it
maybe that's why you're so angry all the time
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 03, 2012, 08:56:13 AM
(Vanity) This is no Fluke, It's More Like a Hydra
grey_whiskers ^ | March 03, 2012 | grey_whiskers
Posted on March 3, 2012 11:01:11 AM EST by grey_whiskers
By now, nearly the entire known universe has at least heard of the controversy over Sandra Fluke. However, a passing acquaintance based on sound-bytes and snippets is never the best basis for action, and is in fact fertile ground for the propaganda ministers of the left. This piece will give a brief recap of the situation, and then discuss the lay of the land. (Pun intended, if you like it.)
Back in the GOP primary debate on January 7, George Stephanopoulos asked Mitt Romney(RINO-Bain) whether he believed that states have the power to ban contraception. This puzzled Romney, and was widely regarded at the time as a "Win The Future" type question. However, the topic was not left alone for long, when it was revealed that the new Obamacare regulations would eliminate the freedom of conscience exception for Catholic organizations, requiring the Catholic employers (explicitly) to pay for abortion services for their employees. (This was neither a fluke (sorry!) nor an accident, by the way. Across the pond in Dhimmi Old England, a British Court has already ruled that Catholic midwives can be required to participate in abortions. More on this later.)
But Obama and his cadre of Marxist bulldyke controllers overplayed their hand: the long-slumbering Catholic Church woke up, and a firestorm ensued. After a few days, Obaama beat a hasty "retreat" : the regulations would be interpreted such that the the Catholic organizations would not have to pay for abortions and/or contraception directly, but their insurance would: forcing the Church organizations to act in loco infanticida, as it were.
As a result of this EPIC FAIL public relations disaster, and coupled with Obama's realization that he needed to shore up core liberal constituencies in order to try to stave off his defeat in the upcoming Presidential elections, the spin teams in the Democratic Party (that is to say, the LameStream Media) decided to re-cast the entire debate from what it was, an attempted destruction of the Freedom of Religion clause in the Constitution, into an UNHoly Jihad for Womyn's HealthTM (1). In a liberal's worldview, both contraception and abortion are functionally equivalent, the only difference being the cost and the convenience to the woman involved, since all moral considerations have already been thrown out the window.
Enter Sandra Fluke. (Yes, I know. Another pun.) She was heralded as a precocious 23-year old co-ed who had just entered Georgetown Law School, who selflessly gave of herself (no, not that way) (at least we hope not) to testify before Congress because of her very genuine distress over what religious extremists were trying to do to womyn's health care in this country.
Yeah, right. And I'm Joan of Arc.
Her facade fell apart almost immediately, in part due to the excellent job Rush Limbaugh did at exposing her and making fun of her before a national audience: to be followed in short order by the entire right, and some of the non-committed, blogosphere.
Her argument, stripped of its sententious fatuity, was this:
1) I (and the womyn I represent) want to sleep around.
2) I'm going to a $40,000/year Law School and I'm too cheap to buy the pill.
3) My boyfriends won't even spring for condoms.
4) I'm too proud to use the Lewinsky method.
5) Therefore I have a right to other people's money to pay for it.
6) By the way, it's $3,000 to pay for it.
7) Pay up, you sexist misogynist Neanderthals.
Of course, this fails on multiple levels. The first (and fatal mistake) was her attempt to be self-righteous over sin. Nobody was judging her UNTIL she put her face on national TV and demanded that other people pay for her sexual habits. And the second FAIL was to lie about the money. This is the Obama economy: and other people have got used to economizing, and were able to tell within minutes that there is no way in HELL that contraception costs $1000 / year: aside from the "free" clinics which her ilk had already agitated for, generic birth control pills are available at discount stores for $9 / month. Unless of course she was using condoms, in which case, based on retail prices, she would be having sex somewhere between three and seven times A DAY, every day, to incur these costs. (And even if she were, why can't the guys who are doing her pay for it, speaking of disrespecting womyn?)
And just as her argument fell apart almost immediately, so did her front story.
According to Gateway Pundit, and other sources, Sandra Fluke is a 30-year-old women's rights activist and President of the "Law Students for Reproductive Justice" (whatever that is!) who decided to attend Georgetown for the express purpose of changing their policy on providing contraceptives.
In other words, in addition to being a whore in her personal life, per Limbaugh's definition, she's a political whore, too.
But Sandra Fluke's personal life, purported public image, and scripted talking points are only a few of the heads on this hydra. Remember, the real movers behind this are committed Marxists, who don't let a trivial thing like a few decades stand in their way.
Let's look at quotes from some of the players in this game, and consider the ramifications of the provisions of Obamacare, in addition to past historical Marxist / Feminist practice, to get a feel for where this might be going.
First, Obama's secretary of Health and Human Services, Darth Sibelius, going by the given name of Kathleen. Remember her? She's the one who had ties to the Kansas abortionist George Tiller (see Human Events, and Real Clear Politics for more).
Oh, and by the way, she is also the one who had her nomination to the Cabinet pushed through on an emergency basis, ostensibly because of the dire threat of Swine Flu.
Did I just say Swine Flu? Cricket flu is more like it, because we haven't heard another thing about it since then.
So that's who Sibelius is. What are her views?
Look at the following exchange between Sibelius and Rep. Tim Murphy(Who?- PA), as reported on the *liberal* site thinkprogress.org:
MURPHY: So you're saying by not having babies born, we're going to save money on health care?
SEBELIUS: Providing contraception as a critical preventive health benefit for women and for their children reduces health care.
MURPHY: Not having babies born is a critical benefit? This is absolutely amazing to me.
Now, taken in isolation, this might not be so bad: pregnancy costs are in fact considerably more than contraception — even though in truth, some of the blame for that can be placed on Democrats such as former Democrat Vice Presidential Candidate John Edwards, who more or less claimed before a jury in a malpractice trial that he could hear a baby in the womb. (Even aside from Rielle Hunter — and by the way, why didn't he push for *her* to have an abortion?), this proves that politics really does make for strange bedfellows!)
So we have the cost containment issue for pregnancy.
But we also have the government moving in to consolidate gains over family life in other areas, such as the recent case of an anonymous "inspector" confiscating a young child's lunch of turkey and cheese on white whole wheat, chips, and apple juice in favor of...breaded chicken nuggets? The usurpation is bad enough (and did anyone check to see if the food service company had given contributions to the local Democrats?), but it reinforces the idea that the government knows best, when it comes to *having* children, to the *raising* of children...
Now combine this with the past practice and historical roots of the abortionists: Margaret Sanger, who gave an *invited* speech to the KKK, was a staunch advocate of eugenics. Nor indeed, were her ideas limited to the ineffectual kook fringe: one of her associates, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard PhD who actually visited Nazi Germany and visited a German court which decided which people would be involuntarily sterilized. Far from being scandalized, he thought they were too conservative in their opinions: he said that the eugenics laws were "being administered with strict regard for its provisions and that, if anything, judgments were almost too conservative", and that the law was "weeding out the worst strains in the Germanic stock in a scientific and truly humanitarian way". (Yes, it's from Wikipedia, but the quotes are linked to books from Oxford University Press and University of Vermont press, with ISBNs which check out. Incidentally, the photo of Stoddard on Wikipedia bears an uncanny resemblance to Snidely Whiplash.)
And if you don't like Godwin's Law, you can revisit Merrie Old England. In addition to the court ruling above requiring Catholic midwives to participate in abortion
"The nature of their duties does not in fact require them to provide treatment to terminate pregnancies directly," she said.
"They are sufficiently removed from direct involvement as, it seems to me, to afford appropriate respect for and accommodation of their beliefs."
we have the bioethicists quoted in the U.K. Telegraph who say that
parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are "morally irrelevant" and ending their lives is no different to abortion.
Remember: Obaamacare is about containing costs; and the central contention of the government with regard to Obamacare, is that it's just fine for the government to compel you to buy things against your will, for the greater good. It's all about healthcare!
From that point, and combining with the idea that contraception is a "health-care right," how long will it be before the chance to give birth is itself regulated? ("You don't have the money to provide a happy home" to "you are ideologically unfit" to "one child per family — we have to save the planet, you stupid breeder!")
Post by: Straw Man on March 03, 2012, 09:20:19 AM
333 - the amount of irrational, uninformed hatred you have is just sad
the really sad part is you have a long life of feeling enraged at everything all the time (unless of course you drop dead like Breitbart)
that really has to be a shitty way to go through life
Quote from: Straw Man on March 03, 2012, 09:20:19 AM
Lol. Wwwwwwwaaaahhhhh - pay for my BC - I go to Georgetown and am a whore and you should pay for it. It's my rights. Wwwwwaaaahhhhh
Quote from: 333386 on March 03, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
I'm going to the gym in a few minutes
I assume you'll continue to be here bitching and moaning and literally not understanding the the topic you've devoted hours to bitching about
Why do you feel the school should change it's policy to accommodate fluke?
I honestly don't care either way
she has a right to express her belief without being called a prostitute and a slut
wanting a healthcare plan to cover contraception does not mean she wants to be paid to have sex or that she's a slut
if that were the case then everyone who receives contraception in that manner (such as your mother or sister) should also be considered a prostitute and a slut
only a bitter asshole would make such a statement and only a moron would spend hours on a message board starting threads and promoting such an insane and false belief
No one could really miss the drama being played out in the media about Sandra Fluke and her "testimony" before the democrats. In case you missed it the Democrats were angry that the hearing on the HHS mandate regarding religious organizations had no women on the panel. Their basic complaint was since it is women and only women getting free stuff from Obama shouldn't they have a say? In response to this outrage Nancy Pelosi decided to have her own hearings on why religious organizations should be required to give free stuff to women.
The star of the show was Sandra Fluke described as a 23 year old student attending a $50,000 dollar a year university who has sex so much she can't afford birth control and needs her free stuff.(Note: birth control from Wal-Mart $10,00 per month) Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh called her a slut on his show. He asked if her parents were proud of their daughter letting the world know what she does in the privacy of her bedroom and wanting taxpayers to subsidize it. This caused a flurry of righteous indignation in the liberal media. It is one thing to call conservative women names but don't call our latest victim any names. Her bona fides as a victim were good enough to put her education on hold and attend the talk show circuit to decry those awful conservatives. It even garnered her a call from the man with our stash, Obama.
Unfortunately for Sandra the bright lights of fame also show all your faults. What started as a liberal resume enhancer has turned into a problem for Ms. Fluke. It seems her and her handlers at the Democratic victim talent agency were not quite truthful in their presentation. You see Ms Fluke is not 23 but actually 30 now most women lie about their age but posing as a student is bordering on cougarsium. She also neglected to mention her linkedin profile as a lawyer, her BS from our own Cornell University for Policy and Management and Feminist & Sexuality Studies awarded in 2003. She never mentioned her work in our own New York government working for Sanctuary for Families in New York, and Manhattan Borough President's Taskforce on Domestic Violence. It probably just slipped her mind that she is editor of The Journal of Gender and the Law. She did admit that the reason she enrolled at Georgetown was that the university did not give free stuff to women and she wanted to correct that oversight.
Nancy Pelosi's attempt to make sure the nation is talking about birth control and not the Democratic failed policies that are ruining our country and Obama's chance of reelection worked for a day or so. But make no mistake the Democrats feel this is a winning strategy or they would not have put such an effort into it. Expect to see more because the only other option is to run on their record. Let us not be played the fool by those in Washington.
Nancy Pelosi meeting Sandra from "Victims-R-Us"
can't you speak for yourself rather than copying and pasting something (and without even attributing the author)
Hypocrisy on Capitol Hill: Deconstructing a Dishonest Speech About Birth Control
http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/02/29/hypocrisy-on-capitol-hill-deconstructing-a-dishonest-speech-about-birth-control/
by Charles C. Johnson
As a student at Cornell and treasurer of a a pro-choice organization at the school, Sandra Fluke, helped shut down a pro-life speech on Cornell's campus by counter protesting. She argued that a pro-life organization at Cornell was about "manipulating [students'] emotions" with misleading statistics about abortion. But when it is her turn to speak on Capitol Hill, the third-year Georgetown Law Student demands she gets her say in a hearing that has nothing to do with birth control.
Fluke, who was awarded a B.S. in Policy Analysis & Management, and a Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies degree from Cornell in 2003, has since become a cause celebre among the political left-wing because she wasn't allowed to testify in a congressional hearing. The Washington Post has even called her an "expert witness."
But what is she an expert in? "I'm an American woman who uses contraceptives," Fluke said, when asked Thursday by Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., about her qualifications to speak at the hearing. Well, there you have it. We are told by congressmen that she speaks for "millions" of women, so let's have a listen to her testimony before the Democrats on Capitol Hill:
Though Fluke wouldn't have you know it, most women don't need birth control. Indeed, if the cost of keeping her ovary was a mere $3,000 a year, why couldn't her gay friend–assuming she actually exists–take time off of law school to save up for her birth control? Why couldn't we mandate coverage for women who have the disorder of polycystic ovary syndrome? And if her insurance won't cover it, why can't she go and pick up a pack of $9 a month pills from Target? What's more who said she had to go law school at Georgetown, a Jesuit law school? If birth control were such a serious criteria in one's life, wouldn't you choose your law school accordingly? Fluke says that women should refuse to choose between their health and a quality education, but adult life is about making just such choices.
And if this problem is such a real one why don't we hear from the women themselves, rather than Fluke, about their medical problems? Maybe if Planned Parenthood and other organizations ostensibly dedicated to women's health weren't so busy profiting from abortions, they could take some of their nonprofit largesse and give it to women in need.
Ah, but you see, college and law school, like birth control, is a right that comes, if not from our Creator, than from Obama, the creator of our laws.
This whole thing is sham and scam of the far left communists like the Fluke.
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Meet law student and feminist hero Sandra Fluke
The Daily Caller ^
Posted on March 3, 2012 7:51:28 PM EST by Sub-Driver
Meet law student and feminist hero Sandra Fluke 6:24 PM 03/03/2012
The country knows Sandra Fluke as the beleaguered third-year Georgetown University Law Center student who has been criticized by conservatives — notably radio giant Rush Limbaugh — for her recent testimony about co-eds' contraceptive needs before Congressional Democrats.
But the 30-year-old student who stirred the debate is no novice to the political arena. Fluke has a long history of feminist advocacy: The Washington Post reported Fluke entered Georgetown Law well aware that the school's insurance plan did not cover contraception, only to spend the next three years lobbying the school to change its policy.
Fluke attended Cornell University from 1999-2003, where she received a B.S. in Policy Analysis & Management and Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies.
While at Cornell, Fluke's organized actives centered around the far-left feminist and gender equity movements. Fluke participated in rallies supporting abortion, protests against war in Iraq and efforts to recruit other womens' rights activists to campus.
During that period, she gained experience engaging in disputes concerning abortion with religious organizations.
"We feel that the information [Cornell Coalition for Life] has out is reactionary and it's not based on giving people information about their choices, but manipulating their emotions," Fluke, then the treasurer of Students Acting for Gender Equality (SAGE), told The Cornell Daily Sun during a protest of a pro-life display at the school's Ho Plaza. "We want to show people they should have a choice about a decision this important and whatever choice they make, we'll support it," she said.
After college, Fluke put on her career-woman hat and worked at Vintage New York for nine months before settling in at the Sanctuary for Families in New York City, where she stayed until she began law school in 2009.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
333 - you're a little behind the curve
your fat, drug addled hero apologized
he still hasn't bothered to explain why he thinks he's paying the monthy premiums for the group insurance coverage at Georgetown (remember this was his bitter rationale on why woman should post videos of them having sex - presumably so this fat loser could masturbate since he can't seem to hold onto a wife)
nor has he explained why he thinks frequency of sex = higher cost of contraception given that a woman takes the same amount of contraception (the pill) whether she has sex 0 times or 100 times
I'm not apologizing. She is a communist girl.
you should like her then since you're the biggest commie on this board
If You Ain't Got No Condoms, Take Your Broke Ass Home March 2, 2012 By KJ
A law student at Georgetown wants us to panic, because if she doesn't have access to free birth control, it's going to cost her $3,000 a year! My God, how do the common people function without their diamond encrusted platinum diaphragms? I went to a state school, so my government diaphragm was only sterling silver with turquoise. I know, right? Deprived!
No, actually, when I was in college, I worked at the Student Health Center, where we had a giant silver cannister of free–count 'em–FREE condoms for anybody to grab who walked in the center. Most student health centers do, so if you need free condoms, put your cap on backwards and pop into your local university's clinic. Nobody will question you. Just grab a handful. I did. I brought bags of free condoms back to the dorm for the girls who were too shy to obtain them. They were even the fancy spermicide coated rubbers. And that was the magical year I discovered I was allergic to Nonoxynol-9. Oy vey.
If you feel like a heel taking free condoms from college health centers, the drug store and even your local gas station has them. They're not terribly expensive. They sure don't add up to $3,000 a year, so I'm not sure where this supposedly highly educated person got this number. I used to buy a couple of boxes of condoms and put them in a dish amongst the crudites at any party I threw once I made enough scratch to have parties with crudites. I would make a dear little sign that said "Take As Many As You Need!" I was a college student working as a receptionist in a doctor's office. Buying two boxes of condoms for a party didn't break me. How would it break a law student?
"Oh, that's an isolated incident," my very knowing and considerate Lefty friends say. "You know that most people who can't afford contraception are not law students, and they don't spend $3,000 a year on anything. Do you want people who can't afford to have children to get pregnant?" As a small government conservative, I want people to do whatever floats their boat, as long as it's not hurting anyone. I do expect them, just as they expect me, to be responsible for their own choices. This particular choice starts with a male partner. So I am here to ask my fellow females a very simple question:
Why in God's name would you want to have sex with a man who can't afford a condom? If the mention of God makes you uncomfortable, I'll rephrase the question. WTF, my girls? WTF?!
"Oh, I don't care about material things. I love a man for his soul," you titter, batting your eyelashes and maybe stroking your rose quartz crystal necklace. The hell you do. Look, girl, we both know that as much as flashy wealth repulses many of us, none of us grows up hoping to fall in love with a man who gleefully wallows in the mire of abject, irresponsible poverty. If he can afford the dollar menu at McDonald's on your date, he can buy a damn condom. For that matter, so can you.
I'm not even asking you to abstain, because you've already told me you won't. I'm asking you to have a thimbleful of respect for your vagina. I'm asking you to avoid veneral disease, as that's even more likely than a lovely baby.
"Oh, I'm in a committed relationship. I don't like condoms. Condoms fail a lot. I want the pill." Then get the pill. Your student clinic, the free clinic, and even your family doctor can provide you with a prescription for the pill at such low cost, you'll only have to skip a couple of Starbucks runs to afford it. How an educated young woman could not know this is of profound concern to me.
HOW CAN SHE NOT KNOW THIS?! Is there a super secret one-percenter form of birth control that costs $3,000 that lower-middle class schmucks like me don't know of? Does it shoot the sperm with laser beams? Laser beams from space? Does it come in gummi bear form and also make you lose weight? Does it turn your vagina from a birth canal into a frozen yogurt dispenser? What is this amazing and expensive technology being hidden by The Man from we working stiffs?! WHY DON'T YOU JERKS SHARE IT WITH US?!
And this is the real problem. Now that I know about $3,000 birth control, I won't rest until I find out what it is. It's got to have some fancy side effect. Maybe if you take it, you do get pregnant, but with lovely pygmy kittens who never grow up into adult cats. Maybe every time you have sex, an ex-boyfriend gets hives. Maybe it makes you not only impervious to sperm, but sunburn, heat rash, and mesothelioma. That's worth $3,000, right?
Meh, I'll just continue to wait around for a guy who's actually worth the trouble.
why do you still believe that she wants free birth control and why do you still believe she said it would cost her 3k a year
Fluke seems to turn nobody away if she needs 3k a year for condoms.
she never said she needed 3k a year in condoms
why would you believe such nonsense ?
I assume you're aware that the students (or their parents) pay their own health insurance premiums and the university doesn't subsidize it at all
Post by: Dos Equis on March 04, 2012, 06:24:48 PM
She shouldn't be given a national platform and needs to go away, but Rush shouldn't have called her a slut.
I like the way you think!
Upthread WilliamofCarmichael noted that the narrative of the LIEberals is to turn it into an attack on the messenger. Your sensible retort with simple math will, no doubt, fall on deaf ears. I look forward to listening to Rush on Monday, to see what he does with this political football.
A Georgetown University grad reflects on why Rush was right in this IBT article:
By Kayleigh McEnany
March 2, 2012 12:28 PM EST
When Georgetown University Law student Sandra Fluke spoke out against Georgetown's contraception policy before Congress, arguing that birth control should be covered by health insurance and religious institutions, Rush Limbaugh countered with a generous proposition: "I will buy all of the women at Georgetown University as much aspirin to put between their knees as they want."
This was Limbaugh's way of offering to pay for the "birth control" Fluke wants the government to force Catholic Jesuits to pay for, despite knowing it is against Catholic doctrine and deliberately choosing to attend a Catholic university.
Limbaugh's solution is straightforward and, let's be honest, an age-old nugget of advice passed on from mothers to daughters; it's the kind of absurd response that Fluke's testimony before a faux congressional committee merited.
I am a graduate of Georgetown University, and, like Fluke, I, too, have been accepted to their law school. But I take a much more sober view of the campus. While walking the dignified grounds of Georgetown, I saw what anyone would see on a typical college campus: students with the dreaded-exam-coming-up face, students with the hung-over nausea of having "one too many" the night before, and I saw teachers with the I-don't-feel-like-grading-any-of-this face.
But I definitely didn't see: "The faces of the women affected by this lack of contraception coverage" who have "suffered financially, emotionally, medically," as Fluke alleges. Fluke must occupy the "one too many" category, for she paints a picture of Georgetown that can only be found deep in the corner of the "Introduction to Women's and Gender Studies" class, where all men are predators, and "no means no," but a liberated woman only says "yes."
Before this pretend congressional committee and the plastic Joker-grin of Nancy Pelosi, Fluke recounted the rare incidences of women needing birth control for medical reasons, as if that's the norm. She then twisted this into a justification for why religious institutions should subsidize women who want to have rampant sex without consequences.
According to Fluke, 40 percent of women at Georgetown struggle with $3,000 contraception bills over the course of law school. Three grand! That's a condom for breakfast, lunch and dinner sex every day for three consecutive years!
Assuming Fluke is the liberated woman she claims to be, it's amazing she had enough time to saunter out of her bedchamber and come to Congress.
In a sane world, Fluke would have earned the ire of the liberal media and feminists for portraying women as helpless wards of the state who have no choice but to submit to men. But this world is not sane, so all guns blazed at the all-knowing, all-feeling, all-seeing, all-everything Maha Rushie.
What did Limbaugh do other than state the obvious? He said: "Well, what would you call someone who wants us to pay for her to have sex? What would you call that woman? You'd call 'em a slut, a prostitute or whatever."
I'd like to supplement Limbaugh's analysis with a few additional descriptions. Fluke is impractical, foolish, and a disgrace to Georgetown. Plus, she has deliberately glossed over the implications of her demands.
If the government forces Catholic institutions to provide contraception against their doctrine, not only are we trampling on religious liberty, but we're opening the door for all sorts of tomfoolery.
Are the Jesuits then obliged to provide pot to distraught, empty-pocketed stoners, vibrators to lonely females, or porn to the sex-crazed teenage boy? Where does it stop? And do her male partners bear no responsibility, or do we have to pay for her cab home, too?
When we demand religious institutions provide coverage of contraception, abortion and sterilization as the Obamacare mandate does, we trivialize what it means to suffer "financially, emotionally, medically." And if we compel insurance companies to supply recreational items like contraception, how can we not make them foot the bill for medically necessitated items like Band-Aids, Neosporin, tampons, pads, and the like?
All of this will be sorted out, likely by the Supreme Court, which will hopefully rule the First Amendment is a law higher than Obama's. But until they decide, I worry that Fluke will continue to fret about who'll pay for her birth control.
The good news is, until she's out of Georgetown, she can take the harmless, loveable little fuzz ball up on his offer of birth control aspirin. But wait, what am I thinking? Fluke must have plenty of aspirin on hand. After all, she's obviously never told a man: "Not tonight. I have a headache."
Kayleigh McEnany is a writer and political activist who graduated from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and studied at Oxford University. She is the founder of www.RealReaganConservati ve.com. She writes every Tuesday for the International Business Times.
Post by: Al Doggity on March 04, 2012, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Beach Bum on March 04, 2012, 06:24:48 PM
Based on this thread looks like she's needed. It's an issue that effects many people across the nation and, as 333 is demonstrating to the point of parody, it's obviously something many people don't understand.
Birth control use doesn't increase or decrease depending on the amount of sex one is having. If a woman is sexually active, she takes the same amount, regardless of whether or not she is in a monogamous, committed relationship or she's shooting gangbang videos on a nightly basis. Why so many Limbaugh supporters don't grasp this is beyond me. It's almost as if they are intentionally obfuscating the issue. ::)
Additionally, she never lied about her age or concealed her activist background when addressing the House panel.
Her opening remarks:
My name is Sandra Fluke, and I'm a third-year student at Georgetown Law School. I'm also a past-president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice or LSRJ. And I'd like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies and all of the student activists with us and thank them so much for being here today.
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/what-did-sandra-fluke-really-say/408191
Various media outlets surmised her age (incorrectly) based on her year in college.
what is reproductive justice when it seems this wench is doing everything possible not to reproduce at all?
Post by: Al Doggity on March 05, 2012, 05:00:35 AM
I think you asked and answered your own question.
Quote from: Al Doggity on March 05, 2012, 05:00:35 AM
No - I pointed out the absolute absuridty of people like Fluke and and her leftist radical collegues demanding free BC and calling it "REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE"
Post by: blacken700 on March 05, 2012, 05:12:07 AM
the fake outrage continues :D :D :D :D :D desperate times for the repubs :D :D :D :D :D
You actually didn't do that, though. Having control over when you reproduce is a reproductive issue. Hence the use of the word "reproductive". That's not rocket science. Or even confusing wordplay. No need to pretend that it is.
Fighting to have birth control covered by insurance is not "demanding free birth control" or socialism.
So she cant make that decision unless someone else pays for her condoms? Ever hear of absitencne and self control?
Post by: Shockwave on March 05, 2012, 07:13:33 AM
Clearly not.
Personal responsability < fucking everyone you want and wanting someone else to pay for it.
Post by: garebear on March 05, 2012, 07:27:13 AM
If you ever have an original opinion, it will die of loneliness.
Quote from: garebear on March 05, 2012, 07:27:13 AM
What I said is 10000000000% truth. The communist left wants no responsibility for anything. always maike someone else pay for their lack of control.
Post by: dario73 on March 05, 2012, 07:36:21 AM
Hmmmm. Slut? Whore?
Those are the same words directed at conservative women by the left. What else is new?
Post by: MCWAY on March 05, 2012, 07:40:44 AM
Quote from: blacken700 on March 05, 2012, 05:12:07 AM
More like desperate times for the Dems. This is about Obama, trying to rally support among women, support he has LOST because of his sorry economic policies.
Quote from: MCWAY on March 05, 2012, 07:40:44 AM
A slowly reviving economy seemed to buoy Obama with the critical bloc of female voters. His approval ratings on the economy and unemployment were ten points higher than in December.
Obama trounced Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. among women in the 2008 election,with women choosing Obama over McCain by a margin of 56 to 43. That lead disappeared among men, whom Obama narrowly won 49-48.
The same appears to be true for the upcoming 2012 election. Hypothetical one-on-one matchups have Obama beating Romney 54 percent to 41 percent and Santorum 56 percent to 40 percent among women, but Obama would be essentially tied with his Republican rivals among men.
Social issues that resonate with women have also gotten more attention recently, particularly with the uproar over the Obama administration's mandate that all employee health insurance plans -- including those offered by religious institutions -- cover birth control. At a hearing on the issue, Democrats lambasted Republicans for not calling a single female to testify.
LOL - no wonder Obama created this entire phoney mess to gin up support.
yea because he's leading,the repubs are to dumb to go after the woman vote. :D last time they thought palin was going to give it to them :D :D :D how did that work ;D
Didn't women vote in 2010? How did that work for the Democrats?
And, the economic crash is what doomed McCain. Or did you forget that McCain was AHEAD of Obama, prior to the crash.
and who are the women rallying behind, i'll give you a hint, it's not rush :D :D :D
Rush ain't running for president.
Most leftists and leeches rally around those who promise free goodies from others so long as they dont have to pay for it.
Nothing new,
i think we all know who he [rush] represents
i think we all know who he represents
Yes - the parasites, ther welfare bums, the guilt ridden white dorks, the union thugs, the professional left, that 93% of brainwashed blacks who sadly think he has their interests at heart, the feminazis, the enviro-radicals, etc.
WASHINGTON -- AOL, the parent company of The Huffington Post, has become the eighth advertiser to pulls its money from Rush Limbaugh's syndicated radio program since he called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, who spoke out in favor of contraception coverage, a "slut" and a "prostitute" last week.
"At AOL one of our core values is that we act with integrity," said Maureen Sullivan, an AOL spokeswoman. "We have monitored the unfolding events and have determined that Mr. Limbaugh's comments are not in line with our values. As a result we have made the decision to suspend advertising on The Rush Limbaugh Radio show."
Limbaugh issued an apology for his comments on Saturday, but that has not stopped advertisers from continuing to sever ties with his program. ProFlowers and Carbonite both left the show after he said he was sorry.
"No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady. Mr. Limbaugh, with his highly personal attacks on Miss Fluke, overstepped any reasonable bounds of decency. Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show," Carbonite CEO David Friend said in a statement. "We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse."
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/rush-limbaugh-aol-advertisers_n_1321260.html
Quote from: tu_holmes on March 05, 2012, 09:52:38 AM
You know that the Republicans are helping him with these types of issues.
The Ultrasound bill in Virginia for instance... Why would you bring this type of thing up during an election year?
You're asking to get trounced.
I agree. They should leave this alone entirely.
But they won't... That's why they are idiots... Where they could win would be the economy... Everyone wants to say it's about the economy... You, me, everyone... I would toss individual liberty in there as a number 2 right?
So why focus on number 2 and actually do the OPPOSITE of individual liberties, and not focus on number 1?
Seems like they are trying their damnedest to fucking lose.
This will blow over in a week or two and will be long forgtten by May/June
you don't fu@king agree,you have probly 30 post just in this thread not agreeing,you are the king flip flopper
Because i am not running for office.
Post by: 240 is Back on March 05, 2012, 10:43:30 AM
$3k a year is a lot on condoms.
we're talking louis vuitton rubbers.
lol @ cantor on morning joe today....
barely endorsing mitt "i take him at his word he will end obamacare" lmao.
oh, and the best part was when he (in an effort to suck up to the crazy base) said it's good we're having so much talk on these social issues, when asked about what he thinks about these issues drowning out talk of the terrible economy.
sucking up to the base, hilarious.
Quote from: 240 is Back on March 05, 2012, 10:43:30 AM
Actually, the claim was $3000 over 3 years, which boils to about $85/month.
jeez. $3 a day on condoms? interesting!
That's the point. I believe she's referring moreso about birth control pills, which is why she kept dredging up the sob story of her gay friend who couldn't get the school to pay for pills, when she has polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
Of course, even those are less than $10/month at Wal-Mart (even less at the free clinics).
she never mentioned condoms but she did talk about how a woman needed the pill as a preventive measure against ovarian cysts
maybe you think she can use condoms for that instead?
333 - I see you have no leg to stand on based on the facts (as usual though odd for someone who claims to be an attorney) so now it's only to picture show playtime?
Let's do a quick review
1. Fluke never asked anyone to pay for her insurance and in fact the students pay the entire freight on their health plan with no subsidy from the school
2. Fluke never mentioned condoms and a large part of her testimony was about the health benefits of contraception including preventing Ovarian Cysts which, if they occur will actually cause much greater expense to the insurance company than the small price of the pill
3. I just found out that Georgetown employees receive contraception coverage in their healthcare plan and since this is an employer sponsored plan it's likely that the university covers some or perhaps all of the cost.
4. I also just heard (and have not yet been able to verify) that Georgetown requires all of their students to have health insurance coverage
5. Rush has been proven to be a liar and he's already known to be an absolute piece of shit human being. How many guys here would allow that fat, drug addled moron to call their sister, mother, daugher, wife, etc.. a prositute, slut, etc...
Post by: headhuntersix on March 05, 2012, 05:08:22 PM
No mention of the fact that she's a plant. But u libs cherry pick the facts that you want...hows that 4 dollar gas working out. Another win for the douchbag libs......
Quote from: headhuntersix on March 05, 2012, 05:08:22 PM
btw - if you have some actual facts then feel free to share
Gimme a break...she just came out of the wood work ::). This girl and thats what I'm refering to her as from now .......has been an activist her whole life. She went to a Jesuit University for this express purpose...but hey, don't let facts get in the way of a lifet wing crusade. All used as a smokescreen for what matters....ur shitbag president has failed.
Leftwing double standard....
But if Limbaugh's actions demand a boycott—and they do—then what about the army of swine on the left?
During the 2008 election Ed Schultz said on his radio show that Sarah Palin set off a "bimbo alert." He called Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut." (He later apologized.) He once even took to his blog to call yours truly a "bimbo" for the offense of quoting him accurately in a New York Post column.
Keith Olbermann has said that conservative commentator S.E. Cupp should have been aborted by her parents, apparently because he finds her having opinions offensive. He called Michelle Malkin a "mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick." He found it newsworthy to discuss Carrie Prejean's breasts on his MSNBC show...
The grand pooh-bah of media misogyny is without a doubt Bill Maher.
Left-wing darling Matt Taibbi wrote on his blog in 2009, "When I read [Malkin's] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of balls in her mouth."
yeah, let's not facts get in the way of you incredible anger
she didn't go to Georgetown for "this express purpose" as you put it
She's actually on record saying she went their IN SPITE of it not because of it
but seriously dude - why all the ANGER?
because she got his rush in trouble ;D
Why....because its another lib smear to distract the public from all the shit you assbag has foisted on us.
ok - well not exactly sure how you've decided that her testimony is a Lib smear
you can read her testimony here and maybe you can point out the so called smear
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf
I'm guessing it won't really matter what she said since you've got so much irrational hatred that you want her to die
Sandra Fluke a Self-Described Professional Pro-Abortion Activist
Life News ^ | March 5, 2012 | Ethika Politika
Posted on March 5, 2012 6:14:36 PM EST by NYer
LifeNews Note: Reprinted with permission from Ethika Politika, the blog of the Center for Morality in Public Life.
Remember the Georgetown Law student, Sandra Fluke, who was forced to suffer through $3,000-worth of protected sex during her stint at law school? Turns out, there's a bit more to the story.
According to some sources, Fluke might just have been a well-placed fake. Not exactly the young-and-helpless female law student most took her for, Fluke's LinkedIn profile speaks for itself:
With a six year hiatus between her undergraduate time and GT Law, Fluke is probably closer to 30. And she's had plenty of involvement with the pro-contraception agenda. A Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies major at Cornell, Fluke is also a past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice. While she's presented herself in persona a woman suffering because of Georgetown's policies, it's more likely that Fluke has had her sights set on the school for quite a while.
In fact, it's almost certain.
One Washington Post blogger published the following on 16 February:
Fluke came to Georgetown University interested in contraceptive coverage: She researched the Jesuit college's health plans for students before enrolling, and found that birth control was not included. "I decided I was absolutely not willing to compromise the quality of my education in exchange for my health care," says Fluke, who has spent the past three years lobbying the administration to change its policy on the issue. The issue got the university president's office last spring, where Georgetown declined to change its policy.
Fluke says she would have used the hearing to talk about the students at Georgetown that don't have birth control covered, and what that's meant for them. "I wanted to be able to share their stories," she says. "My testimony would have been about women who have been affected by their policy, who have medical needs and have suffered dire consequences.. . .The committee did not get to hear real stories I had to share, about actual women who have been dramatically affected by this policy."
What did transpire, though, was a phone call from the Oval (read: Home) Office in support of Fluke's plight, and encouraging her for "speaking out about the concerns of American women." According to the White House, Obama's concerns followed directly upon Rush Limbaugh's disparaging remarks, naming Fluke as a "slut," a "prostitute," and as "having so much sex she can't pay for it."
Among others, one result of this curious turn of fact is the almost indefensible position opened up to by the president of Georgetown University, John D. DeGioia. The president, who has spoken out in defense of Fluke against her conservative rivals, now has to face the very loud music of welcoming and advocating a knowing instigator into his midst. If Fluke came to Georgetown precisely to cut her legal teeth on the school itself, DeGioia's stance seems at best dichotomous. On the one hand, he's responsible for defending the school's policies; on the other, he's (apparently) been party to an intentional and knowing act of subversion.
What's more, if President Obama has at all been privy to the Fluke situation—and it's hard to believe he wasn't, since he felt confident enough to pay her a personal phone call—what has become of the highest office in the land?
If it turns out that Sandra Fluke was just a fake, perhaps not much will change. But doubtless, the implications of what has and is happening in the contraceptive wars will be upped substantially. More than anything, Fluke continues the narrative of The Big Lie, that a segment in this country seeks to make contraception illegal for all women. It is a scorched earth policy that is as likely to leave its practitioners in infamy as it is to succeed in advancing the agenda.
I don't think the Republicans will let their desire to "win" the abortion issue stop... They are too controlled by the extreme religious right.
Polling has continually shown an increasing number of Americans being against abortion, with that group even comprising a majority now. This country has shifted towards the GOP's stance on it in recent years. James Taranto of the WSJ has been writing about why the left has themselves to blame for the shift and he posits that it revolves around militant feminism, among other things.
Sandra Fluke: "I encouarage everyone to go to Media Matters"
Daily Caller ^ | 3/5/2012 | Jeff Poor
Posted on March 5, 2012 10:03:16 PM EST by KansasGirl
In an appearance on ABC's "The View" on Monday, Georgetown Law student and women's contraception activist Sandra Fluke told viewers to check out Media Matters for examples of over-the-top conservative rhetoric.
When asked by co-host Joy Behar if she had anything to say to her critics, Fluke, who made headlines last because of the attacks and subsequent apology she received from conservative talker Rush Limbaugh, encouraged viewers to check out Media Matters' website.
"Well, I would encourage everyone to go to Media Matters because they have an excellent story on their website that gives a list of the various commentators who engaged in this type of language — Glenn Beck for one," Fluke said. "And I think it is really important for us all to understand that this was not one person who went crazy and made funny, outrageous statements. This is evidently a segment of our political commentators who think that it's acceptable in today's society to say these things about women."
Post by: MCWAY on March 05, 2012, 08:28:45 PM
Various commentators who engage in this type of language? You mean, Ms. Fluke, like the woman who was within ARM'S REACH of you, who called Sharron Angle a b----h, (TWICE) on national TV?
Quote from: MCWAY on March 05, 2012, 08:28:45 PM
Ummmm.....various commentators who engage in this type of language? You mean, Ms. Fluke, like the woman who was within ARM'S REACH of you, who called Sharron Angle a b----h, (TWICE) on national TV?
Fluke is a joke. She is a tailor made victim of the left.
who gave her the national platform
the only reason you even know her name is because Rush thought it would be a good idea to attack her
a bully thought she would be an easy target and he fucked up
other than that she has every right to speak anywhere she wants or is invited to speak.....just like you or me or anyone else
Thuglosi gave her the national platform.
I wouldn't know her name if it wasn't for Limbaugh
just like everyone else in the country
and despite that fact let's also not forget that she has just as much right to speak as you or me or anyone else
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewarts-round-up-of-the-rush-limbaugh-slut-mess-is-must-see-tv/
Yeah - another comedian. Can you tin pot commies do better than a comedian please for once?
________________________ ______
$9: Price for a Month's Supply of Birth Control Pills at Target 3 Miles from Georgetown Law
CNSnews ^ | March 5, 2012 | Gregory Gwyn-Williams, Jr.
Posted on Tuesday, March 06, 2012 8:23:30 AM by opentalk
Although Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke testified to the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee last month that contraception can cost a law student $3,000 over three years and that some of her fellow students could not afford it, a Target store only 3 miles from the law school currently sells a month's supply of birth control pills for only $9 to people who do not have insurance plans covering contraceptives.
That would make the total cost for birth control pills for a student who decided to use them for all three years of law school just $324.
Fluke was the sole witness who appeared on Feb. 23 before an all-Democratic panel chaired by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)."Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school," Fluke said. "For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that's practically an entire summer's salary. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy.
..."Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school," Fluke said. "For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that's practically an entire summer's salary. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy.
"One student told us of how embarrassed and powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter, learning for the first time that contraception wasn't covered, and had to walk away because she couldn't afford it," said Fluke. "Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Sandra Fluke, Gender Reassignment, and Health Insurance
Stephen Gutowski
Monday, March 5, 2012 - 7:35pm
Sandra Fluke is being sold by the left as something she's not. Namely a random co-ed from Georgetown law who found herself mixed up in the latest front of the culture war who was simply looking to make sure needy women had access to birth control. That, of course, is not the case.
As many have already uncovered Sandra Fluke she is, in reality, a 30 year old long time liberal activist who enrolled at Georgetown with the express purpose of fighting for the school to pay for students' birth control. She has been pushing for mandated coverage of contraceptives at Georgetown for at least three years according to the Washington Post.
However, as I discovered today, birth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if "gender reassignment" surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law.
The title of the article, which can be purchased in full here, is Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons and was published in the Journal's 2011 Annual Review. I have posted a transcript of the section I will be quoting from here. In a subsection of the article entitled "Employment Discrimination in Provision of Employment Benefits" starting on page 635 of the review Sandra Fluke and her co-editor describe two forms of discrimination in benefits they believe LGBTQ individuals face in the work place:
"Discrimination typically takes two forms: first, direct discrimination limiting access to benefits specifically needed by LGBTQ persons, and secondly, the unavailability of family-related benefits to LGBTQ families."
Their "prime example" of the first form of discrimination? Not covering sex change operations:
"A prime example of direct discrimination is denying insurance coverage for medical needs of transgender persons physically transitioning to the other gender."
This so called "prime example" of discrimination is expounded on in a subsection titled "Gender Reassignment Medical Services" starting on page 636:
"Transgender persons wishing to undergo the gender reassignment process frequently face heterosexist employer health insurance policies that label the surgery as cosmetic or medically unnecessary and therefore uncovered."
To be clear, the argument here is that employers are engaging in discrimination against their employees who want them to pay for their sex changes because their "heterosexist" health insurance policies don't believe sex changes are medically necessary.
Additionally Sandra Fluke and her co-editor have an answer for why exactly these "heterosexist" insurance policies, and the courts that side with them, deem sex changes as medically unnecessary:
"In Mario v. P & C Food Markets, Inc., an employee who was denied such coverage brought claims under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security (ERISA) and Title VII. The court rejected the ERISA claim, finding the plaintiff's mastectomy and hormone therapy were not medically necessary. The court's ruling was based upon controversy within the medical community regarding that treatment plan. Much of that controversy has been linked to ignorance and bias against transgender persons, and the American Medical Association has declared the lack of coverage to be discrimination."
You see, all opposition to the determination that sex changes are medically necessary, and therefor must be covered by private employer provided health insurance, is based on "ignorance and bias against transgender persons".
The section on discrimination against those seeking gender reassignment ends with Sandra Fluke and her co-editor wondering why more lawsuits aren't filed against private employers on these grounds. Especially in comparison to the frequency with which these types of cases are filed against Medicare, Medicaid, and even the prison system:
"The reason for this lack of cases is unclear. Private employee insurance plans do not more frequently cover this need, so it may be a sign that transgender employees do not see the courts as likely to provide any assistance against private employers."
The argument made in this article edited by Sandra Fluke and Karen Hu is quite clear. "Gender reassignment" is a medically necessary set of procedures that must be covered under employee provided health insurance policies. If it is not covered by those policies that is tantamount to discrimination and legal action should be taken against the employer.
So, as you can see, Sandra Fluke is not what she is being sold as. Instead she is a liberal activist pushing some rather radical ideas. Keep that in mind as the left holds her up in the spotlight.
http://mrctv.org/blog/sandra-fluke-gender-reassignment-and-health-insurance
Is Sandra Fluke Coordinating with the White House?
Breitbart ^ | 3/6/2012 | Unknown
Liberal activist Sandra Fluke made her case to the mostly female audience of the ABC show "The View," where she claimed —apparently without irony— that she is being silenced by Rush Limbaugh. She also gave a significant clue that her "stunned" sense of outrage seems to be a scripted part of a larger narrative trifecta: supporting Obamacare, destroying religious liberty and silencing the right.
Anyone who follows the Institutional Left was probably suspicious when President Obama called Ms. Fluke on the phone in his unofficial role as Community Organizer in Chief. I scoured the history books and can't find another case of a sitting president personally contacting a US citizen because a radio talk show host had said something about them that hurt their feelings. Certainly, President Obama made no such called to Laura Ingraham when MSNBC's Ed Schultz called her a slut. Ms. Fluke described the President as "kind."
However, Ms. Fluke pulled back the curtain midway through her interview on "The View" when she suggested that viewers head over to the website of Media Matters for America. As The Daily Caller recently exposed, there's been a high level of coordination between the White House and Media Matters for America, so of course it's no shock that Ms. Fluke chose MMFA as her leftist propaganda arm of choice.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I'll Stay Out of Your Bedroom, Ms. Fluke, if You Stay Out of My Wallet
Townhall ^ | 03/06/2012 | Daniel Mitchell
I've already explained that the Obamacare contraception-coverage controversy is about economics and religious liberty, not birth control.
But now that the debate has been transformed by the remarks of a Georgetown student, this cartoon seems rather appropriate.
The bubble quotes in the cartoon do a good job of capturing the statist mentality. They want me to leave them alone (which I'm happy to do), but they won't leave me alone.
So here's a deal for Ms. Fluke and her fellow travelers. I'll agree to you doing whatever you want behind closed doors (heck, you can even leave the doors open, as far as I'm concerned). But, in exchange, I want you to leave me alone, which means I don't want to pay higher taxes OR higher insurance premiums to subsidize your birth control.
In a nutshell, this is the non-aggression principle that motivates libertarianism.
I'm quite disappointed, by the way, that the cartoon portrays the student in an unflattering light. This is the mistake Rush made (not for the first time), and it enables the left to deflect attention from the real issue of whether the government should be mandating subsidies.
How to Reconcile Liberty, Morality, Conservatism, and Libertarianism with Carney's Fusionist Theorem
As a libertarian who became interested in public policy because of Ronald Reagan, it won't surprise you to know that I'm more of a "right libertarian" than "left libertarian."
whats the deal with right wingers continuing to believe that they would somehow be charged for the cost of health insurance at Georgetown
The student pay their own premiums. If the cost of adding contraception is so great then the only people that will be paying more would be the students at Georgetown. Since adding contraception would likely prevent ovarian cysts not to mention unwanted pregnancies it's actually more likely that the net costs to the insurance company providing the coverage would go DOWN.
The continuing stupidity on the right is just remarkable
clearly you have no valid arguments left so it's time to start lying
how is an article she wrote for the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law relevent to this discussion
answer - it's not
being an alleged former law student you know that they write all kinds of articles for law journals on many different topics
The answer is that she is a radical leftist activist, not some poor little bo beep out of the woods. She is a hardcore communist nut.
PAY FOR YOUR OWN SEX CHANGE!
Limbaugh and Our Phony Contraception Debate
A student demands that a Catholic school give up its religion to pay for her birth-control pills.
By CATHY CLEAVER RUSE
WWW.WSJ.COM
Last week Sandra Fluke, a student at Georgetown University Law Center, went to Congress looking for a handout. She wants free birth-control pills, and she wants the federal government to make her Catholic school give them to her.
I'm a graduate of Georgetown Law and former chief counsel of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution. Based on her testimony, I wonder how much Ms. Fluke really knows about the university or the Constitution.
As a law student 20 years ago, I wasn't confronted by crucifixes in the classroom or, in truth, by any religious imagery anywhere. In that respect the law school has a different "feel" than the university. The law school chapel was an unadorned, multipurpose room in the basement used for Mass when it wasn't used for Gilbert and Sullivan Society rehearsals and club meetings. Among the clubs while I was there, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance was particularly vigorous.
I was not Catholic when I attended Georgetown Law, but I certainly knew the university was. So did Ms. Fluke. She told the Washington Post that she chose Georgetown knowing specifically that the school did not cover drugs that run contrary to Catholic teaching in its student health plans. During her law school years she was a president of "Students for Reproductive Justice" and made it her mission to get the school to give up one of the last remnants of its Catholicism. Ms. Fluke is not the "everywoman" portrayed in the media.
Georgetown Law School has flung wide its doors to the secular world. It will tolerate and accommodate all manner of clubs and activities that run contrary to fundamental Catholic beliefs. But it is not inclined to pay for or provide them. And it has the right to do so—to say "this far and no further."
CloseGetty Images
Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student at Georgetown University, testifies during a hearing before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on February 23.
.When congressional committee counsels plan hearings, they look for two kinds of witnesses: "experts" and "victims." The experts are typically lawyers or law professors who can explain the constitutional authority for the new law and its legal impact, and the victims illustrate why the law is needed.
At the hearing of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee chaired by Nancy Pelosi, Sandra Fluke testified as a victim. Having to buy your own contraception is a burden, she said. She testified that all around her at Georgetown she could see the faces of students who were suffering because of Georgetown's refusal to abandon its Catholic principles.
Exactly what does the face of a law student who must buy her own birth-control pills look like? Did I see them all around me and just not know it? Do male law students who must buy their own condoms have the same look? Perhaps Ms. Fluke should have brought photos to Congress to illustrate her point.
In her testimony, Ms. Fluke claimed that, "Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school." That's $1,000 per year. But an employee at a Target pharmacy near the university told the Weekly Standard last week that one month's worth of generic oral contraceptives is $9 per month. "That's the price without insurance," the employee said. (It's also $9 per month at Wal-Mart.)
What about Rush Limbaugh? I won't defend his use of epithets (for which he's apologized), but I understand his larger point. At issue isn't inhalers for asthmatics or insulin for diabetics. Contraception isn't like other kinds of "health care." Yes, birth-control pills can be prescribed to address medical problems, though that's relatively rare and the Catholic Church has no quarrel with their use in this circumstance. And the university's insurance covers prescriptions in these cases.
Still, Ms. Fluke is not mollified. Why? Because at the end of the day this is not about coverage of a medical condition.
Ms. Fluke's crusade for reproductive justice is simply a demand that a Catholic institution pay for drugs that make it possible for her to have sex without getting pregnant. It's nothing grander or nobler than that. Georgetown's refusal to do so does not mean she has to have less sex, only that she has to take financial responsibility for it herself.
Should Ms. Fluke give up a cup or two of coffee at Starbucks each month to pay for her birth control, or should Georgetown give up its religion? Even a first-year law student should know where the Constitution comes down on that.
Ms. Ruse, senior fellow for legal studies at the Family Research Council, received her J.D. from Georgetown Law in 1989.
A version of this article appeared Mar. 6, 2012, on page A19 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Limbaugh and Our Phony Contraception Debate.
Again, semantics.
Its not about Georgetown in particular, its that fact that theyre trying to use this as a lightning rod to help with their mandate that ALL companies have to cover BC, which WILL raise costs on everyone.
You have to just be trolling 333 with this, im assuming, as no one can be that dumb....
again, the sex change thing has nothing to do with the topic of contraception on the student health care plan at Georgetown
Quote from: Shockwave on March 06, 2012, 08:30:00 AM
the mandate is aready there in several states and has been for years (you can thank Republicans) and more to your point, contraceptions REDUCES healthcare costs.
Less Ovarian Cysts, Less unwanted pregnancies, less STDs = LESS COST
Omission Watch: Feminist Fluke Insists Insurers Must Fund Transgender Surgeries
Newsbusters ^ | 3/6/2012 | By Tim Graham
Posted on Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:39:06 AM by tobyhill
The Drudge Report has linked to MRC TV's Stephen Gutowski, who dug up that the Radical Feminist Heroine of the Week Sandra Fluke thinks insurance policies shouldn't just pay for contraceptives, but for "transgender" amputations and implants.
If the national media thinks this scandal-ette deserves to go for weeks on end, where is this story? Steve reports Fluke makes her view of an amputation entitlement clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law:
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Interesting points, youre probably right about the insurance companies money on payouts, but completely missing the point that premiums for everyone will go up if/when the fed mandate is put through, making it so everyone is paying for their BC, period.
I dont think the amount of money insurance companies save on Ovarian cysts is going to offset all of our premiums going up.
And the biggest issue of all, the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT mandating what PRIVATE COMPANIES can offer to citizens. And dont give me this "regulation" crap, the government is not regulating Mcdonalds on what size their coffee's are or what kinds are served, regulations are their to insure fair business practices', not what the companies can offer.
And no, I wont thank the Republicans OR Democrats, its wrong no matter what party it is, stop trying to play it off like its cool since the other party does it to, that shit dont fly.
I listen to Rush, so I think this. I'm a Democrat, so I think that!
I dont think any employer should be forced to provide anything but a pay check for hours and time worked.
Why do you think that? Because you chose a side.
Whatever comes out of the faucet, you will now take.
Same with anyone else.
You're no longer a man, you're a conduit.
Do you realize that?
Fuck off you TBI riddles nut.
I am a libertarian and my beliefs usually run through that strain. Employers are not utilities to be dictated to by radical leftists and communists to advance its extreme agenda.
you actually can thank Republicans since the idea of "mandates" was their idea dating back to the Clinton Administration
they championed the idea, sponsored it, endordersed it, signed it into law and after the fact vowed to support it
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=417486.0
And its wrong! Straw - dont you get it? Even many of us people who usually vote GOP hate the republican party!
I turned in my RNC membership in 2005 as a result of Bush. I fucking hate most of these people in the republican party.
That goes for anyone really. Everyone chooses a side, and its a very rare breed that will change their mind or admit theyre wrong when confronted with different evidence.
I try and base my opinions on personal liberties and the consitution, I dont believe its the governments job to create "fairness for all" through mandates and regulations, life is not fair, people are not all equal, some work harder than others, some dont. Fact is, some people dont deserve the same things as others. Thats just life.
What the EFF!?
Are you really that fucking stupid?
Its WRONG, its wrong for the Repubs, its wrong for the Dems, itd be wrong if the liberatarians tried to do it!!
Youre making yourself look like a fucking moron by pointing to the other party and saying "Blame them they started it so its ok for the other side to do it."
This isnt a "one side is right the other isnt" deal, its fucking WRONG on both accounts. Jesus.
it's actually not wrong if you're trying to have a functioning insurance system
If the only purpose of insurance is to enrich the insurance companies then I guess it's wrong
btw - are we talkign about mandates for cathoic affiliated institutions to offer contracteption or are we talking about the insurance mandate as dreamed up by Repubs in the early 1990's?
If we're talking about the mandate to have insurance coveragage Romney explained it pretty well in the Wall Street Journal Op Ed back in 2006
"Remember, someone has to pay for the health care that must, by law, be provided: Either the individual pays or the taxpayers pay. A free ride on government is not libertarian."
Jesus stop trying to deflect with your bullshit semantics.
The government should not be mandating what private companies offer. Its a private company. If they dont like the insurance, they can go elsewhere. ESPECIALLY not when its not critical care, its CONTRACEPTION for Christs sake.
Theyre not trying to tell someone they wont cover their cancer treatment. Theyre not denieing "ovarian cysts" coverage. Its contraception.
And in this case ESPECIALLY, not only is it wrong for the government to mandate what a private company offers, its ESPECIALLY wrong for them to interfere with a religious organizations rights to practice their religion as they see fit.
You can keep obsfucating the issue however you want with your misdirections and justifications, the fact is, the government is stepping into peoples business' and trying to tell them what they have to offer clients. Theyre telling them how to run their companies. And theyre telling religious institutions what part of their beliefs they can and cant practice.
And the other argument, that someone women are being denied "reproductive rights", is bullshit as well. Nothing is stopping them from walking to wal-mart and buying contraception just like 99% of the population that isnt attempting to force everyone to pay for the demands of a small group.
most if not all of the insurance companies are public and we have the right as citizens to set some rules on what products and services companies can offer
We've been doing for 100+ years
Wow............. Fail.
So your argument boils down to "I have the right to tell these companies to offer what I want them to".
Glad to know companies no longer have the right to determine what they offer.
Hell, if we have the right to tell them what they need to offer, I want your health insurance to cover boob jobs for my wife, on the grounds that not allowing her to have them violates her "rights to emotional confidence".
Go ahead and pay for my wifes tits. It makes as much sense as telling your employer OR SCHOOL they have to pay for your condoms and BC pills.
i would like hair transplants - maybe we can force Straw to pay for it.
if you don't believe "we" should require insurance companies to cover contraception (inexpensive) then why should we require them to cover cancer (very expensive)
how about this. What if the insurance company (the one providing the product) wants to offer contraception and the students (the ones paying for the product) also want it.
Why do we allow a third party (neither offering the product or paying for it) to deny the company the right to offer that product.
What if the company says it's cheaper for us to pay $5 to prevent disease or pregnancy than 50k to treat ovarian cancer or provide pre and post natal care?
I'm sure you're also aware that the government requires all kinds of companies to provide certain prodcuts and mandate individuals to buy certain products as well.
If you want to sell a car in this country we require that you include seat belts and air bags
If you want to get a loan from a federally insured or regulated lender to buy a property locatedin a flood zone it is a law that you have to purchase flood insurance
the list could go on for days
btw - if your wife need breast implants due to a mastectomy I'd bet there are some insurance plans that cover that
Round and round and round, never answering a question, just bringing up a million other reasons why we should violate certain groups liberties to cater to another who simply wants their shit for free.
IF a company wants to offer something, but the School doesnt on religious grounds, multiple things can happen. The Insurance company can doesnt have to work with that school. The school can find a new insurance policy. The student doesnt have to go to that school if its that big of an issue to her.
Going to a school that is specifically AGAINST BC as part of their beliefs, and then trying to force them to submit to their wants, is fucking rediculous. I wouldnt go to a Amish school and try and force them to give me a cell phone, would you?
All your arguments do, is say "I think her wants trump the liberties of everyone else". Its not a NEED. Period.
BINGO! ! !
I had a few Jewish friends who attended my Catholic HS because their parents were too scared to send them to the failed public schools infested w ghetto savages, and did they complain or try to change the school? NO! ! ! !
They went along and we all got along just fine! ! !
Fuck, my best friend as of today is a jew who attended my Catholic HS in that scenario!
Had I gone to a Jew Day School in the same scenario, I would NEVER think to try to change their ways to accomodate my selfish interests.
you said we should not requrie private companies to provide products yet we do it all day long in many other industries and have done so for years (and oddly you also think while we shouldn't require them to provide one product - namely contraception we should require them to provide another provide ..cancer care)
make up your mind or is it just that you get to decide which product are offered
I would like your opinion on the contraception issue at Georgetown
If the students who pay for it want it and the insurance company wants to provide it should we allow the school (who neither pays or provides) it to say it's not allowed
Its not black or white, yes or no.
Cancer is life threatening. BC is IN NO WAY a medical necessity to a normal healthy life. BC is a way for people to engage in practices that may LEAD to bad health to lower their chances, but its not something you have to have to live a normal healthy life.
CANCER isnt something you can choose, you cant choose to catch cancer.
BC, like I said, is something you CHOOSE to buy in order to try and downplay the chances of having something negative happen as a consequence to YOUR CHOICE OF LIFESTYLE. You cant help catching a cold. You cant stop getting sick in most cases. IN ALL CASES, you can choose NOT to engage in unsafe sexual practices that may result in a negative consequence.
Sorry, but youre just going to keep going around because you feel that contraception is a NEED, when its not, and no amount of bullshit coming from your mouth is going to change the fact that you can choose not to have sex.
Your Georgetown question - No. Because the company offers it, the students want it, but the school forbids it, no it should not be allowed. The school chooses what insurance company it offers, and it chooses who it allows into the school.
Its a religious school. They knew when they signed up for it. They agreed when they enrolled to abide by the schools rules. You dont like it - tough shit, you dont have to go there. You go somewhere else. Its called life, making choices based on your priorities and whats important to you. You dont get everything you want just because you want it, and contraception sure as FUCK isnt a "must have".
If I was so fucking worried about catching something and being safe, but had no money for condoms, guess what? I wouldnt go out fucking everyone in sight. The answer isnt "I want to fuck but I have no money, pay for me."
Your Georgetown question - No. Because the company offers it, the students want it, but the school forbids it, no it should not be allowed.
Its a religious school. They knew when they signed up for it. They agreed when they enrolled to abide by the schools rules. You dont like it - tough shit, you dont have to go there.
so you believe that in this case the school has the right to limit/restrict the products offered by an insurance company but not the other way around
basically the school has the right to interfere with the free choice of commerce between company and consumer?
btw - you're also aware that Georgetown provides contraception coverage to it's employees and since it's an employer sponsored healthcare plan they likely pay some or all of the premium as well
So it's ok for the employees to get it and most likely even have it paid for by the school but the school also has the right to tell an insurance company they can't offer it to students even when the school doesn't pay a single penny toward the insurance plan and both the company and students would like to have that product?
How is that consisten or fair?
you're not aware that the pill (contraception) can cut the risk ovarian cysts, ovarian cancer, the loss of ovaries etc..?
Why not liposuction as well?
Thats all well and good, but if the insurance company already offers coverage for those things, then its a mute point, isnt it?
If thats the sole reason then for this whole deal, then fine, cover ONLY THOSE ITEMS that are preventative medicine. But its still up to the insurance company.
All insurance is not equal my friend.
i think rush is right on the issue, he was wrong to call her the name, and this is funny-
Bottom line -
BC is not a must have for a healthy life.
Insurance companies dont have to provide what they dont want to.
Schools dont have to provide whats against their religious beliefs.
People should not have to pay for others choices of lifestyle.
Thats the bottom fucking line. In every case, youre stepping on everyone elses liberties to make sure a small amount of people have a personal hygiene item for FREE.
I thought you said it was up to the school
I agree with you (what you appear to be saying in this post) that it should only be up the company providing the service and the consumer paying for it
Schools dont have to provide whats against their religious beliefs. People should not have to pay for others choices of lifestyle.
if the school is not paying for it that how are they "providing" it
Sigh... No, you interperting what Im saying in the way you like. The SCHOOL can tell the students what is allowable at their school. WHY? Cause its their right, as a school, as a religious institution, as a business, to decide what happens in/around that school, as long as it doesnt interfere with anyones basic rights.
If the school has no problem with Ovarian medicine, and the company wants to offer it, then there is no problem.
If the school does not believe in BC, and the insurance company doesnt care, no BC offered, as its the schools perogative based on their beliefs and the students agreed to the rules when they signed up.
Take the school out of the equation, is up to the insurance company.
The school chooses what insurance to offer the students. Students dont like it, go somewhere else. Or get different insurance. Or get a job and pay for their own BC. Either way, the government has no need to force anyone to do anything they dont want to, as no one is being denied anything.
Guess what? In that situation, no one is getting their liberties fucked, everyone has the option of choosing what they want. Signing up for the school and then trying to forcibly change one of their very basic beliefs is fucking stupid.
I wouldnt take a job and then force my employer to change our benefits, cause guess what, part of the reason I chose that job in the 1st place is because I agree or can deal with their terms.
Round and round and round, every single time making yourself look more like an ass.
BECAUSE THE SCHOOL CHOOSES WHAT INSURANCE TO OFFER ACCORDING TO THEIR BELIEFS.
Guess what -
School offers classes.
School has rules.
School chooses insurance.
School doesnt believe in BC.
School doesnt choose insurance policy that offers BC
Students do not have to attend school if they want BC.
Now, can I make it any simpler, or are you going to try a different way to try and confuse the issue since you cant actually make a point?
LOL - good luck arguing with the self described STRAW MAN!
Post by: garebear on March 06, 2012, 06:53:16 PM
Why do we have to pay for the Iraq war if we don't support it?
I think it might come out to cost a little more than condoms.
Quote from: garebear on March 06, 2012, 06:53:16 PM
Because military is one of the few things in the USC. Paying for rubbers for you to bang your BF is not.
Browse · Search Pings · Mail General/Chat
Join the "Condoms for Georgetown" Campaign
RedState.com ^ | Thursday, March 1st at 6:08PM EST | traversecityconservative
Posted on March 6, 2012 9:31:13 PM EST by satan69
Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student at Georgetown Law and past president of the school's Students for Reproductive Justice recently testified on the floor of Congress about how she (and other law students at Georgetown) are so financially strapped that they can't afford the contraceptives that they need.
Barred from speaking by evil Republican lawmaker Darrell Isaa, who wants to adhere to Constitutional principles like Freedom of Religion, Flue was originally not allowed to testify at the faith-based hearing on Capitol Hill because Isaa found her unqualified to speak on the subject, since she is not clergy. Little did he know, she IS the poster child for birth control.
Even though students at Georgetown pay at least $40K a year for school, $1 per condom is just too much to bear – and so is any out-of-pocket expenses for voluntary birth control. Remember, they ARE college students – they have to save their discretionary spending for beer, fast food, cell phones and internet access!
It is also apparent that Miss Fluke has never Googled "free birth control" and looked any of the 52,900,000 results from that search.
Fluke spoke on February 23d to a Democrat hearing organized by the House Minority Leader on the financial and medical burdens that are incurred by students by not getting free birth control.
Most sane people on the planet have found her testimony to be laughable. Below are some past, un-related quotes from liberals, which may offer an insight as to how they might feel about Fluke's testimony:
"We think there might be a better way to go about this" – Nancy Pelosi
"A majority of this country opposes this" – Michael Moore
"It's like being paid to eat" – Rachel Maddow
"Bill Clinton strikes me as the kind of guy who goes wherever." – Al Sharpton
"Embarrassing" – Chris Matthews
"Why can't I just eat my waffle?" – President Obama
What can we do about this poor girl's plight and the hardship of other Georgetown Law students? Republicans all across the country sympathize with her and want to help her with her horrible situation. Please send a new, wrapped condom to:
Georgetown University Law Center Students for Reproductive Justice 600 New Jersey Ave. NW Washington, DC 20001
and if you have any further questions, please email Fluke directly at skfluke@gmail.com
Georgetownn offers employee a healthcare plan that covers contraception and most likely pays some or all of the premium so apparently it's OK fo the employees but not the students
BTW - Why shouldn't the students challenge the system
Who says they have to just accept everything the way it is
The irony is that they pay that school to teach them how to advocate/defend or challenge a position yet you seem to believe that it's an outrage if they actually try to do it at the school they attend in spite of the fact the the position Fluke is advocating for is supported by 94% fo the students and it concerns a business transaction that is solely between the students and an insurane company (who would most likely prefer to offer that service as well)
I don't see any problem with it at all and neither does the president of Georgetown
Cant believe im responding again -
Im not outraged they challgened it. I just think theyre fucking morons for going to a school, accepting the rules and then trying to change it. How about you quit putting words in my mouth, you creepy fag.
I dont give a fuck who is for what - heres the bottom line.
The school makes the rules.
The students accepted the rules.
The school selects the insurance policy.
If the students want change so bad, no one is stopping them from going to a different school or starting their own.
Guess what - you dont get everything you want. I dont expect someone to change how they run their business because 95% of the employees want something for free.
Im sure 100% of students would like more time off, guess what, they dont get everything they want.
Business' get to run their business the way they see fit, thems the breaks.
Insurance can offer what it wants, if the school doesnt accept that policy on religious grounds, tough shit, its not their school.
Last time, not responding to you again, you use the same tired logic that because a certain group wants it, thats grounds for the government to mandate it, thats not how shit works. Sorry but people wanting shit for free doesnt trump a business' rights to run their company when their business practices arent hurting anyone.
nice anger
your statement is nothing more than own fucked up belief
you seem to believe if they choose to go there they must be agreeable to everything or don't go
is that putting words in your mouth or is that basically what you're saying?
if you don't like it - go somewhere else!
for example - I have been kicked out of two Lanet Fitnesses so far. One told me they didn't like me benching 315 for reps, the other hated that I wore combat boots and wore 2nd amendment and slayer shirts. they said my image and behavior in lifting like an animal did not fit the "judgment free zone" they wanted to create.
was I pissed? A little. But that is their business not mine so it is what it is. I go to NYSC Now and they have no problem w me and I love it there. do I try to dictate the policy of the gym? NO!!!
What are you and your gf doing this weekend? Or do you have to do your lawyer duties? Or will you just be lifting weights?
Georgetown student to Sandra Fluke: "Have some self-respect"
http://www.jillstanek.com/2012/03/georgetown-student-to-sandra-fluke-have-some-self-respect/ ^ | 3/7/2012 | Jill Stanek
Posted on Wednesday, March 07, 2012
Sandra, I hope you take to heart our school's motto of "Cura Personalis" – care of the whole person. You are so much more than your reproductive organs.
Please, have some self-respect and take responsibility for your choices instead of having to beg the government for help. The government should not be able to force a religious institution – like the one we attend – to pay for the things they don't believe in. That is pretty clear in the first amendment.
But since you missed the ten commandments I can't expect you to read the Bill of Rights either.
~ Georgetown student Angela Morabito (pictured above left), in response to fellow student Sandra Fluke's (pictured above right) recent statements in support of free contraceptives, as quoted by Blue State Failure, March 5
Is this why Sandra Fluke went public?
Look which groups behind Obama's contraception strategy
Published: 10 hours ago
by Aaron Klein
Aaron Klein is WND's senior staff reporter and Jerusalem bureau chief. He also hosts "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio" on New York's WABC Radio. His latest book is the N.Y. Times best-selling, "The Manchurian President: Barack Obama's Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists."More ↓Less ↑ Subscribe to author feed
inShare.6 Text smaller Text biggerAds by GoogleLAN Troubleshooting GuideGet 8 Key Steps Every Network Tech Should Know. Free 115 Page Guide. www.flukenetworks.com/LANGuidePrior to her statements to congressional Democrats, did Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke have any prior connection to Obama administration officials?
Did the congresswomen who pushed Fluke's testimony coordinate with a marketing and polling outfit that recently conducted a survey to determine whether contraception mandates can become a possible presidential election issue?
Ads by GoogleSupport Joe Arpaio
Help Joe Take Our Country Back! Stand with Sheriff Joe Today!
SheriffJoePetition.comEm ployment Law Rights
Advice from Employment Lawyers CT, NYC, Westchester. Call Today!
www.BegosHorgan.comAccor ding to some reports, it was Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who pushed for Fluke's testimony. Maloney also initiated the call for Fluke to sue Rush Limbaugh for his on-air derogatory remark about Fluke, according to the Daily Beast.
Maloney is tied to a progressive pollster, Celinda Lake, who recently ran extensive polling in an effort to gauge voters' reactions to including birth control or contraception in insurance coverage.
Lake heads Lake Research, which lists both Maloney and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi as recent clients.
During the hearing, Maloney thanked Pelosi "for bringing Sandra (Fluke) to this hearing and for your commitment to these issues that are so important to tens of millions of women and men across our country."
In a Politico article two weeks ago titled "2012: The year of 'birth control moms'?" Lake was quoted as saying Obama's stance on contraception is enough to "really irritate" independent suburban moms and "re-engage" young, single women who haven't tuned into the campaign so far.
Lake said that she and other Democrats see the strong Republican opposition to contraception as a way to win women back after they swung right in 2010, even though they backed Obama in big numbers in 2008.
Politico also quoted Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University, as warning of a major female backlash if the Republicans overreach on contraception.
Lake, quoted by Politico, is no bystander on the contraception debate.
WND has found that her Lake Research is one of the driving forces behind the progressive strategy to use contraception as an election.
According to Lake's website, her company conducted polling on the contraception issue in conjunction with an organization called the Communications Consortium Media Center, or CCMC, and the Herndon Alliance marketing firm.
WND previously reported how the Herndon Alliance helped to market Obamacare, even providing suggestions on which words supporters should use to promote the bill.
Lake's research on voters attitudes on contraception found Catholic voters tend to mirror voters overall when it comes to reproductive healthcare services that the Affordable Care Act will cover.
Related Lake's website: "Not only are Catholics favorable to including birth control or contraception in insurance coverage, these inclusions also make them more favorable toward the Affordable Care Act.
"Moreover, a majority of Catholics say that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops' criticism of the requirement to cover contraception and birth control with no co-pay or deductible makes no difference in how they view the Affordable Care Act."
Lake also found affirmative reaction on the following issues, according to the Women Donors Network.
•Can communicating these new preventive health services to women boost public support for the Obama administration's premiere domestic policy initiative?
•What are communication strategies to shift the discussion on health care to a winning one for progressives?
The Women Donor Network noted the polling was funded by Lake and conducted by CCMC and the Herndon Alliance.
CCMC says its work focuses on a cluster of issues, including "children and families, early education and child welfare reform, health care, women's equality, reproductive rights, global population, the environment, voting, civil rights and immigration."
CCMC is funded in part by the Fulfilling the Dream Fund, a project of the Public Interest Projects.
Prior to Georgetown, Fluke worked with Sanctuary for Families in New York City, where she launched the agency's pilot Program Evaluation Initiative.
Another Sanctuary employee was Berta Colon, who now serves as president the Public Interest Projects that funded the CCMC.
Fluke's Georgetown bio, meanwhile, says that through Georgetown's clinic programs, she "conducted proposed legislation based on fact-finding in Kenya regarding child trafficking for domestic work, and has represented victims of domestic violence in protection order cases."
Fluke is also co-president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, where she has been helping lead the push to have the Georgetown student health-insurance plan cover contraception.
More possible Obama ties?
This week, faculty members, staff and students of Georgetown University Law Center and other law schools signed a statement that "strongly condemn the recent personal attacks on our student."
One signatory was Georgetown Law Professor Rosa Brooks, who served from 2009 until June 2011 as the Obama administration's adviser to Michelle Fluornoy, the undersecretary of defense for policy, a position described as one of the most influential in the Pentagon.
Brooks serves as faculty director of Georgetown Law School's Human Rights Institute. Brooks may have worked with Fluke, who co-founded a campus committee addressing human trafficking, according to her Georgetown bio
Brooks previously served as special counsel to the president at billionaire George Soros' Open Society Institute. She has consulted for Human Rights Watch and served as a board member of Amnesty International USA.
Another close Obama associate, John Podesta, is currently the visiting professor of law Georgetown.
Podesta is chairman of the Center for American Progress, which is influential in helping to craft Obama administration policy. Podesta co-directed Obama's transition into the White House in 2008.
A Time magazine article profiled the influence of Podesta's Center for American Progress in the formation of the Obama administration, stating that "not since the Heritage Foundation helped guide Ronald Reagan's transition in 1981 has a single outside group held so much sway."
With research by Brenda J. Elliott
http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/is-this-why-sandra-fluke-testified
Don't you obama drones see the fraud that was set up here?
You sure are a vile person.
Are there any shooting sprees in your future?
aawwwwhhhhhh - are you upset that your little leftist plant slut/whore is being exposed for a fraud?
You vehemently hate 98 percent of the human beings around you.
You have no job.
You have no friends.
You have no girlfriend.
The sum total of your social life is posting vitriolic political statements on a bodybuilding message board.
Seems like you're a good candidate for a person about to embark on a shooting spree.
False 50% of this nation fucking hate the communist left that you represent and the likes of obama piglosi frank and the rest of that gang of thugs and leftist parasites.
Bitter pill for liberals . . .
By Michael Graham | Wednesday, March 7, 2012 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Op-Ed
So tell me again why the pope has to pay for Sandra Fluke's birth control?
Now that Rush Limbaugh has reminded the world he's a tired old crank, and now that MSNBC has elevated Fluke to sainthood for bravely appearing before a group of fawning congressional Democrats, can we get back to the actual issue?
I'd certainly like to, and so would the Catholic church. Democrats? Not so much.
Forget about Rush and Sandra for a second, and think about what it's like to be a practicing Catholic in America under Barack Obama. For years, Catholic institutions were free to practice their faith, protected by the First Amendment from government directives that violated their beliefs.
Which meant that for years Americans who wanted to attend Catholic schools did — knowing these schools were Catholic and that meant faith was relevant to their policies and mission.
For years, people who wanted to work for Catholic hospitals made the same choice, with the same knowledge.
And for years, people who didn't like the strictures of Catholicism could simply go elsewhere. It seems so reasonable. So accommodating. So . . . diverse.
Well so much for celebrating diversity. A few weeks ago Catholics woke up to discover that the White House — without warning or any apparent reason — declared the religious exemption dead under Obamacare.
Catholics, not surprisingly, complained about the direct assault on their faith . . . only to discover that they have been declared the bad guys.
The Catholic church didn't ask 31-year-old Fluke — a long-time activist for "reproductive rights" — to attend Georgetown University or any other Catholic university. They didn't ask her to abandon any of her own beliefs about contraception or abortion or sterilization or anything else.
All Georgetown University asks is to be able to practice Catholicism. Or as the Democratic National Committee puts it, "wage a war against women."
I know the pundits think this is a terrific issue for Democrats. They hope we keep talking about forcing Catholics to pay for birth control and "day-after" pills 'til November.
But do you know who doesn't?
Democrats who actually need Catholics to vote for them in November. People like Elizabeth Warren.
"If several of the recent polls are correct, [Sen. Scott] Brown may have benefited from his positions on social issues in the last few weeks," The Boston Globe-Democrat reported yesterday. Issues like "whether Catholic institutions should be forced to provide contraception in their health care plans for workers."
Even Democratic consultant Dan Payne agrees: "Recently, issues that have been raised — whether to provide contraception as part of the health care reform and whether women should serve in the front lines of combat — have been on Brown's turf," Payne told the Globe.
But isn't "refusing to force Catholic Charities to buy condoms" the same as "denying women access to health care?" That's what CNN and the DNC keep telling me (pardon the redundancy).
But according to the Warren brain trust, these issues are hurting her and keeping her out of her wheelhouse: economics.
Good luck there, Prof. "Occupy Wall Street."
In addition to being rude, Rush was also wrong about Fluke. The problem isn't her sex, it's her sense of entitlement. You're 31. You're a grown woman. Buy your own damn condoms and leave the church out of it.
The question Democrats like Warren don't want to answer is whether sincere Catholics are "entitled" to practice their faith. Or should they instead be forced instead to answer to a higher power: Barack Obama.
Michael Graham hosts an afternoon drive-time talk show on 96.9 WTKK.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1408774
dumb article, you do realize that catholic women use the pill just as much as any other women ,to say that it's a direct assault on their faith is laughable.the ones that are upset are the cardinals and bishops,they live back in the 17th century
Who cares? Its their choice to follow their religion, its a very basic part of our history, freedom to practice religion.
Its their school, they make the rules, its a religious organization. They have the right to run it as they see fit, theyre not stopping anyone from using BC, theyre just saying theyre not supporting it or funding it, why is that so hard for people to deal with?
People are acting like the Catholic Church is banning people from using Contraceptives because they wont support it or pay for it.
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER ECONOMIST: Rush Limbaugh Is Right, Sandra Fluke Is A 'Prostitute'
Grace Wyler | Mar. 8, 2012, 5:29 PM | 1,850 | 30
It has been one week since Rush Limbaugh first called Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute," but the controversy shows no sign of dying down.
Now University of Rochester economist and former Slate blogger Steven Landsburg has jumped to Limbaugh's defense.
In a blog post, Landsburg argued that while the talk radio host's language may have been off-color, Limbaugh's logic was analytically shrewd. Fluke, Landsburg writes, "deserves only to be ridiculed, mocked, and jeered" for saying that women should have access to contraception."
He adds that Limbaugh's demand that Fluke and other Georgetown students post online sex tapes in exchange for contraception was actually a "spot-on analogy":
"If I can reasonably be required to pay for someone else's sex life (absent any argument about externalities or other market failures), then I can reasonably demand to share in the benefits. His dense and humorless critics notwithstanding, I am 99% sure that Rush doesn't actually advocate mandatory on-line sex videos. What he advocates is logical consistency and an appreciation for ethical symmetry. So do I. Color me jealous for not having thought of this analogy myself."
Unsurprisingly, Landsburg's arguments sparked a mini-firestorm at the University of Rochester, prompting the school's president to issue a public dissent. Landsburg has resoundingly dismissed his critics as "contraceptive sponges," and devoted another blog posts to rebutting their arguments in favor of contraception access.
But Landsburg's focus on the economic benefits and drawbacks of contraception have little to do with Fluke and her congressional testimony. Fluke was not, as Limbaugh and Landsburg have suggested, "demanding" that taxpayers pay for her to have sex; her testimony was originally part of a debate about whether religious institutions should be required to provide access to contraception. Her argument focused primarily on the medical (and non-contraceptive) uses of birth control.
See AlsoMeet The Georgetown Law Student Rush Limbaugh Called A 'Slut'And Here's Mitt Romney's Mealy-Mouthed Response To Rush Limbaugh's 'Slut' AttacksBreitbart.com Reveals Its Big Obama Scoop And Everyone Thinks It Is Ridiculous The US Offered Israel Some Very Advanced Weaponry If They Promised to Delay Their Attack On Iran
Please follow Politics on Twitter and Facebook.
Follow Grace Wyler on Twitter.
Ask Grace A Question >
Tags: Horse Race | Get Alerts for these topics »
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/economist-steven-landsburg-defends-rush-limbaugh-calls-sandra-fluke-a-prostitute-2012-3#ixzz1oZTHFosG
Post by: kcballer on March 08, 2012, 03:40:00 PM
Wow the right really is melting down like crazy over this.
Gloria Allred Asks Authorities to Investigate Rush Limbaugh
hollywoodreporter.com ^ | March 8, 2012 | Paul Bond
Posted on March 8, 2012 7:42:05 PM EST by Free ThinkerNY
Feminist attorney-activist Gloria Allred is asking authorities in Florida to figure out whether Rush Limbaugh violated laws when he ridiculed Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke.
In a letter to County Attorney Denise Nieman in West Palm Beach, Florida, dated March 8, Allred says Limbaugh may have violated a misdemeanor statute against defamation.
"Mr. Limbaugh has publicly acknowledged that his reference to Ms. Fluke as a 'slut' and a 'prostitute' were baseless and false," Allred wrote.
Allred said Nieman's office should "open an investigation into whether or not Mr. Rush Limbaugh is in violation of Section 836.04 of Florida Statutes.
The statute, according to Allred, reads: "Whoever speaks of and concerning any woman, married or unmarried, falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree."
(Excerpt) Read more at hollywoodreporter.com ...
{unrelated to topic rant}
Feminism is just another thing fucking shit up for Americans. Just like everything else, they demand equality as long as its equal on THEIR terms - meaning they only want equality when it suits them. They want all the benefits of being equal but dont want to deal with actually being equal.
The thing that really pisses me off about them is that the radical feminists take on a "This is how women should act and anyone that says of thinks differently is horribly misguided." ::)
The best is when they want the same pay and same job as a man, when they physically are not able to do the job.
They want to make women equal to men but still retain their "womanhood" (I.E. Theyll scream, punch and kick their boyfriend if theyre mad at them, but if the man gets upset and does anything back suddenly theyre this tiny frightened creature that cant defend itself.)
Or that theyre so strong and dont need a man, but as soon as they get a divorce they have to take their husband to the cleaners because theyre so weak, they cant support themselves, they feel they DESERVE half that shit (even though they havent done a damn thing but sit on their ass) cause "they need to be taken care of".
Feminists piss me off, they dont want equality, they want to have it when it suits them, and dont have it when it doesnt.
They people to treat them like equals, but still act like the poor little fragile woman when it suits them.
{/unrelated rant}
Post by: OzmO on March 08, 2012, 07:02:35 PM
Quote from: kcballer on March 08, 2012, 03:40:00 PM
I really don't get it.
Quote from: OzmO on March 08, 2012, 07:02:35 PM
BOR proved tonight she s a far left plant supported by the WH. There is your answer.
She is a communist plant by Obama and Thuglosi and I am glad e had gotten destroyed and exposed fr what she s, a slut, a whore, a useful idiot of the left, and a liar.
So she doesnt have sex?
3386 is on a lifetime meltdown, fueled by Cheetos and Diet Pepsi, a propensity for not learning and paid for by the grace of the taxpayer.
Doesn't matter, she is a leftist plant and a fraud tailor made for the dummies to buy in to.
O'Reilly: Former Obama adviser Anita Dunn's PR firm representing Sandra Fluke
Daily Caller ^ | 3-8-2012 | Jeff Poor
Posted on March 9, 2012 12:18:10 AM EST by smoothsailing
Jeff Poor
Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke is being represented by a former Obama adviser's PR firm, Bill O'Reilly explained on his Thursday night program "The O'Reilly Factor," suggesting that the young woman was indirectly planted at the center of the contraception controversy by the Obama administration...
O'Reilly went on to reveal that SKDKnickerbocker, a PR agency whose managing director is former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, is now representing Fluke. Dunn is perhaps best known for her attack on Fox News and for naming Chinese revolutionary and Communist leader Mao Tse Tung as one of her favorite political philosophers back in 2009.
"Now, late today we found out that Ms. Fluke is now being [represented] by the progressive PR industry SKDKnickerbocker where Anita Dunn, the former Obama communications director is the managing [director]. Ah-ha. So this whole deal comes back to the White House, at least indirectly." ......
Post by: OzmO on March 09, 2012, 08:16:13 AM
So she's a leftist plant that was planted to speak for birth controll pills?
Quote from: OzmO on March 09, 2012, 08:16:13 AM
Yes, she was planted there by the WH and thuglosi to try to divert attention away from Obama's war w the church, which he was losing on this.
Dude, you are getting out there.
So what? He using his polical power to get something done. The churches aren't going to crumble because of ot so stop that bull shit. Lol
Oh fucking please - more bullshit from you.
Yeah, lets have a dictator president and let him run our lives right?
The glorious messiah, peace be upon him, should be able to run everything right? Tell employers what to do, people what to do, people were to go and how to drive etc.
You leftists are incredible - stalinists and leninists to the core.
Its birth control. The only lives he's running with this is forcing religious instruction to provide it in insurance. Everyone wins here. More care free fucking which is always good. Less unwanted babies. Less burden on the welfare system, 99% of women already use npbirth control, etc....
Geez you are so fucking dramatic. Your are losing touch.
this is exactly what happens when you run loser candidates,you have to compensate ;D
No its not birth control! Its TOTAL CONTROL! Obama is trying to run your life. Now, mayber you are so insecure in your own decision making capabilities that you need someone to run your life, but the rest of us want to be left alone.
If you are so eager to have obama, pelosi, reid, fluke et al run your life, have it, just dont be surprised when people push back against this sort of stalinism from the thug you voted for and support.
Listen to yourself......you off the deep end dude.
How is OB making all health care include BC in there PPOs and HMOs total control of my life?
Looks more like company controll. And we all know where the extra cost is going to come down to.
But you are so stupidly trying to spin it as "total control of my life"
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahaha. Stop being such a retard dude.
You think it ends w BC?
He is FORCING EMPLOYERS to provide mandatory minimum levels of benefits to employees AS DETERMINED BY THE FEDERAL GOVT, not your elected representives.
I'm sorry you are so obtuse to not see the dictatorial nature of this and believe that employers should have no rights and say in how they run their businesses, but then again, nothing suprises from people who were so stupid as to be folled in 2008 by Obama.
What if I as an employer cant afford it and prefer to buy a cheaper policy? Should i not have that choice what to buy? Should I not have the choice to offer nothing at all if I dont want to ? What about the choice of who to cover?
Speaking to the choir here about that,but not About BC and Mrs Fluke.
Anything else you wanna bring up outside the topic?
No, Fluke was put up there as a diversion and a scam to fool the idiots in the public to buy into a false narrative carried by the stalinist left and the msm.
No fluke was put up there as a from of political tactics. Remember we are a free in that regard. ;D
Don't whine about the player, whine about the game.
And we are free to attack her and expose her lies along with her associations w the WH, Thuglosi, and the radical leftists she associates w.
Good God - some much stupidity packed into one sentence. How do you do it man?
When you speak of false narrative from stalinists I assume you're referring to Darrell Issa's holy sausagefest where not a single woman was allowed to give testimony on the issue of requiring employers and insurers to provide contraception coverage
That's what you meant......right?
Post by: kcballer on March 09, 2012, 09:27:43 AM
Neither. They look for this mass conspiracy. Next we'll be told Pelosi had a microphone in her ear and was telling her what to see. This was taking place while the FBI, under orders from Obama, killed Breibart AND Obama was disposing of the last remaining evidence of his Kenyan past into a boiling cauldron while chanting "death to america!"
You're aware that Rush's attack was completely void of any facts and merely an unjustified slanderous personal attack....that went on for 3 days
what am I saying
of course you're not aware of that fact
that would require you to have a momently lapse of sanity
She was a plant by pelosi and is now being helped by Anita Dunn from the WH
then I guess those 5 guys who testified were "Issa's" plants then too
Fine - call them what you want - but the leftists tried to falsely claim this woman was some poor college kid who could not afford rubbers when the opposite is true.
I'm not calling them anything
you're the one with the CT's and thinking people are "plants"
what does that even mean anyway?
It means that piglosi and hard left tried to fool the public into buying in to a false narrative in order to advance their stalinist/communist agenda and were found out and exposed.
how do you remain so uninformed ?
Factor Investigation: Ex-Obama Official Running Sandra Fluke
As we reported last night, "The Factor" believes that the Sandra Fluke contraception controversy was manufactured to divert attention away from the Obama administration's disastrous decision to force Catholic non-profit organizations to provide insurance coverage for birth control and the morning after pill. That might very well be unconstitutional.
Anyway, we're having trouble tracking down just who is sending Sandra around to the media. It's very strange. So far, the 30-year-old activist has appeared on eight national news programs where she was not challenged at all. Last week, we called Sandra on her cell phone and invited her on "The Factor." She didn't call back, very unusual. There was no other public contact for the woman, just her cell phone.
A man named Mike has booked her on a few programs, but we can't even get his last name. And Mike doesn't provide call-back numbers to those with whom he speaks. So Mike, who are you? And why the subterfuge?
Now, late today we found out that Ms. Fluke is now being repped by the progressive PR agency SKDKnickerbocker where Anita Dunn, the former Obama communications director is the managing editor... a-ha.
So, this whole deal comes back to the White House, at least indirectly. So, let's run down what we know. Sandra Fluke is a former head of the group "Georgetown University Law Students for Reproductive Justice." On February 9th, a group called "The Feminist Majority Foundation" arranged for Sandra to appear at press conference criticizing the Catholic bishops for objecting to President Obama's contraception mandate.
After that, Congressman Elijah Cummings, the former Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, invited Sandra to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee. But she was turned down by the chair, Congressman Darrell Issa, because she had no expertise in the church/state subject matter.
Nevertheless, Ms. Fluke went to the hearing and afterward complained to ABC News that she had been denied. A week later, Nancy Pelosi staged a mock hearing starring Sandra. After which Rush Limbaugh made derogatory comments elevating her to left-wing martyrdom.
So it seems there is a powerful presence behind Sandra Fluke. And as the polls show the controversy has benefited the President of the United States, who is on the ropes with the church deal. This is all the more amazing because the controversy Sandra is embracing is completely bogus as I explained on "The View" today.
O'REILLY: Do you guys know what Title 10 is? Do you know what Title 10 is?
JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, "THE VIEW": Explain it.
O'REILLY: Do you what it... ok. So it's in motion now that if you need birth control and you go to a federal clinic you get it.
ELISABETH HASSELBECK, CO-HOST, "THE VIEW": Yes.
O'REILLY: That's under Title 10 of the Public Health Act.
BARBARA WALTERS, CO-HOST, "THE VIEW": Right.
O'REILLY: All right, so there really isn't any... nay problem. You can get it and then if you don't want to drive down to the clinic you can go to Wal-Mart or you can go to Target and get it for $9 a month. So to insert this into a giant Obama care bill seems to be unnecessary to me.
O'REILLY: And by the way the ladies were respectful and we had a very good and necessary discussion.
Now "Talking Points" believes that very quietly President Obama will pull back on his demand that the Catholic Church cover contraception. He has snatched victory from the jaws of defeat and would be foolish to continue flogging an unconstitutional mandate.
Mr. Obama knows the polls say many American women now believe he is protecting them. For that he can thank Sandra Fluke and whoever is running her.
And that's "The Memo."
http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-oreilly/2012/03/08/factor-investigation-ex-obama-official-running-sandra-fluke
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7dFyaq-pYc
So much melting down going on.
Eh, most of its justified IMHO, I mean its pretty clear they engineered this whole thing to garner Women's support for the Democrats.
yeah that's clearly what happened
It's not like no one would even know her name If Rush hadn't decided to lie and slander her for 3 days straight
Im talking about her getting to testify in front of Congress after being rejected, and the fact that she apparently was put there indirectly by the WH ties. Rush has nothing to do with that.
I know you cant wrap your head around that Rush isnt everyones "de facto head of the republican party", but I dont give a fuck about Rush and dont listen to the fat fuck.
She had as much right to present a point of view on contraception as any of the men who were "testifying"
If Rush hadn't decided to attack her no one would know her name and it would have been a "non-story"
Rush made it a story by lying about her for three days in a row
Quote from: tu_holmes on March 09, 2012, 03:46:12 PM
Don't politicians bring in their people all the time to talk to congress? Isn't that how it works?
I don't know politicians so I don't get asked to testify in front of congress... I'm sure if I did, I would get invited or something.
All the time and you almost never hear about it
Can anyone tell us the names of the men that spoke at Issa's hearing and justify their legitimacy?
I suspect that no one knows any of their names without looking them up and the same would be true of Fluke Rush hadn't decided she was going to be an easy target to bully.
won't get any argument here. Rush fucked the party out of the women's vote, and she became that much more of political tool for the democrats.
My point was that she was rejected for.testimony since apparently she wasn't qualified enough to be there. Someone pulled strings, and they did it for a reason. She was misrepresented to people and.used as a political tool being potrayed as something she wasn't. (Struggling college student when in reality she was a radical targeting that school specifically to try and her ideals on the majority.
She doesn't.represent a struggling student just trying to make ends.meet, shes.a.radical.activist who was given a nationwide forum to push her ideals, only because it just happened to line up with the current admins agenda, and that's what pissed.me.off.
I'd have no problem they randomly picked a female student who really was struggling, instead.of a.woman who specifically manufactured the whole situation to push her radical feminism on religious.institutions.
That was Issa's claim but I don't buy it
She was perfectly suited to present her point of view as she and people she knows have been negatively effected by the current situation (lack of access to contraception via a health care provider)
If he didn't want her there he could have had another woman instead
the image of having 5 men testify on the mandate for religious employers to provide access to contraception without having a single women offering testimony is just ridiculous
Again, contrary to her not being qualified - I think she was a perfectly legitimate speaker and had a legitimate right to address congress as the other 5 who were allowed to speak
Just in case it's not clear...... These are my opinions
http://thegraph.com/2012/03/sandra-flukes-boyfriend
WTF!!!!
I called it. This bitch and her BF are communists!
What does her BF have to do with her idea of contraceptives?
it's not about BC for these communists.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/03/poor-sandra-fluke-she-wants-you-to-pay-for-her-9month-birth-control-as-she-frolics-in-spain-pompeii
She specifically was not talking about herself at the current time... Her statements said so.
You know this.
Really? Than why testify at all?
"40% of my friends say they cant afford BC" ? ? ? Please.
This bitch is also on record as advocating the employers be forced to pay for employees' sex changes.
Hey, I'm not saying I agree with all of her points... I just simply look at it fiscally... I'd rather pay for BC than have to pay 18 years for a welfare baby... That's all I care about.
Of course I don't think employers should pay for sexual reassignment unless the employer specifically wants to.
How can the govt ensure that the women will use it? will Obama's Team of African Ball Washers be there to put the condom on the men before sex?
They won't but if it's available, then there's a good excuse for not having Welfare children right?
We have provided you with all you need to NOT have a baby if you can't afford it... If you go and have a baby now, you're on your own.
In my mind, this is laying the groundwork for getting rid of welfare babies and no one wants to take it.
contraception is nearly free now and those with halth insurance through work are not typically those who end up on welfare.
Typically is a relative statement... I have seen / heard of many people WITH jobs who end up getting assistance with children.
you're trying to have a rational conversation with a mentally disturbed person of sub-par intelligence
you know by now it doesn't matter what someone says
333 will "hear" whatever he wants and be stunned when you don't "see" or "hear" it too
LOL How is that CBO scoring doing for obamacare douche?
If this was the case, id be all for it, but its not, the people behind this believe whole-heartedly in a welfare state, their not laying any ground-work to try and get rid of it when all their actions seem to add to the number of people on it.
less that what the Bush tax cuts costs us.....douche
Obamacare is up over what, 1.8 trillion now?
Thats quite a bit.
Not to mention the 4 million going to lose their coverage, and the death of the Health insurance industry.
don't hold your breath for that one
Correct - the communist ghetto traitor messiah sign us all up to be perpetual slaves and ATM machines for these companies.
If everyone is one one health care plan, and they punish everyone else for buying separate health care, how can the private industry stay afloat when the government has a forced monopoly on Health Insurance?
Looking at it from a saving money point of view, one could argue that the government will save money by reducing the amount of unwanted pregnancies through contraception use. This is due to the fact that a person with a child is entitled to a tax break on certain things that one without isn't. Not to mention the burden of welfare if the parent is single and can not afford day care to be able to work.
Quote from: kcballer on March 15, 2012, 10:31:17 AM
Whats stopping welfare months having 10 kids now considering condoms are free?
the government currently enforces a monopoly for insurance companies
I've said MANY times, the first thing they should have done was get rid of that
does access to private health insurance still exist in Canada and England?
Nothing at all. It doesn't solve that issue which is fixed relatively easily when education is given proper funding. Better education and free contraception means less unplanned births and less welfare babies.
LOL - those fat greasy dirty nasty thugs plan on having more kids for more welfare!
Do you work out?
Sandra Fluke: Politicians should be required to pass pro-woman litmus test to get elected
Posted on Wednesday, March 21, 2012 10:18:59 AM by Sub-Driver
Sandra Fluke: Politicians should be required to pass pro-woman litmus test to get elected By Michelle Fields -- The Daily Caller 12:09 AM 03/21/2012 ADVERTISEMENT
Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke said on Tuesday that candidates running for office should have to pass a pro-woman litmus test in order to get elected.
Fluke, an advocate for the Obama administration's plan to force health insurers to cover birth control, was on Capitol Hill for a forum on "Opportunities and Challenges for a New Generation of Women," in celebration of Women's History Month.
"There should be a litmus test that they be pro-women so our votes have to include that requirement at least," Fluke said. "And it should be a litmus test that applies to male candidates as well."
She also spoke about the possibility of running for office in the future:
Goddammit... give a bitch like that anyones ear and she'll never shut up with fucking rediculous ideas...
I hate when bitches like Fluke get attention for even a second, because then they think that they have some kind of influence and that people will listen to them, next thing you know theyre all over the place spewing their stupid drivel and bitching and moaning when no one gives a fuck.
Only the dummies fell for her little side show act.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sandra-fluke/affordable-care-act_b_1373071.html
So now this bitch is a writer at the HP?
Told you, all it takes is this bitch getting 1 second of attention and next thing you know, she's everyone trying to ram her worthless radical feminism down the throats of anyone who will listen. Next thing you know she'll be bitching cause people dont give a fuck what she has to say.
Bitches like this are so obnoxious, you give them any sort of venue to spew their shit and theyll never shut the fuck up. And theyll find a way to play the victim in order to try and push their message on people.
Proof of this? I can link to studies showing education lowers birth control rates.
Post by: andreisdaman on March 22, 2012, 04:42:14 PM
I was disappointed 3333... >:(..when I saw the words "liar" "slut" and "whore" in your thread title I thought this was a thread about your girlfriend
Quote from: andreisdaman on March 22, 2012, 04:42:14 PM
It's hard to assign labels to imaginary people.
did they diagnose that TBI yet?
Post by: Soul Crusher on April 25, 2012, 06:17:22 PM
Rush Limbaugh: Sandra Fluke 'Coordinating' With White House on Student Loan Issue
via Mediaite ^ | April 24, 2012 | Meenal Vamburkar @ Fox Nation
Posted on April 25, 2012 6:11:51 PM EDT by SunkenCiv
On his show Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh brought up a name that recently enveloped him in controversy: Sandra Fluke. But it wasn't about contraception. This time, the topic at hand was student loans. Saying Fluke is "coordinating" with the White House, Limbaugh noted the their similar tweets about rising interest rates on loans.
"Lookie here," Limbaugh said. "Barack Obama just warned the students at the University of North Carolina that interest rates on federal student loans will double if Congress doesn't act by July 1."
He then went on, mentioning one of Fluke's tweets:
"Word for word, what Sandra Fluke just tweeted herself. Of course, she is represented by operatives inside the White House. [...] 'Don't double my rate. Many students will see the interest rate on federal student loans increase if Congress doesn't act by July 1.' That's an exact tweet from Sandra Fluke! Obama just said the exact same thing, word for word, to the students at North Carolina!"
"Contraception isn't enough," Limbaugh said. "Some people want their education paid for by other people too."
Limbaugh then elaborated on his view of Fluke's connection to the White House:
"Sandra Fluke is just a poor, uh, isolated alone little college student worried about her contraception at Georgetown. But now she's represented by the flacks in the White House -- Hilary Rosen, Anita Dunn -- and they're coordinating with Obama, scaring students about the interest rates on their student loans."
Over at Business Insider, Brett LoGiurato noted another almost word-for-word tweet -- from the other side of the aisle:
Student loan rates set to double because a Democratic-controlled Congress voted to double them -- Speaker John Boehner (@SpeakerBoehner) April 24, 2012
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Politics/Elections; US: Ohio; Click to Add Topic
Sandra Fluke wants you to pay for her Birth Control even though her boyfriend is rich
mofopolitics.com ^
Posted on April 26, 2012 10:50:30 PM EDT by grundle
Full title: Sandra Fluke wants you to pay for her Birth Control even though her dumb boyfriend Adam Mutterperl is rich
Even though his Dad is filthy rich, he wants you to pay for his slutty girlfriend's birth control.
Bill is a partner in Reed Smith's Financial Industry Group. He specializes in providing high level counseling to CEO's, General Counsel, Boards of Directors and members of senior management of major financial institutions.
As the former Vice Chairman of The PNC Financial Services Group, he held management responsibilities for certain PNC staff functions, including legal, compliance, legislative affairs and media relations, and he was responsible for implementing best practices for corporate governance. He served on several senior management committees, including Mergers and Acquisitions, Corporate Re-Engineering and Consumer affairs, and also served as management liaison to a special ad hoc committee of the Board of Directors dealing with regulatory affairs and corporate governance. He also served as a PNC representative on the Board of Directors of BlackRock Investment Management, one of the largest investment management firms in the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at mofopolitics.com ...
Post by: Soul Crusher on May 11, 2012, 07:32:16 AM
Post by: Soul Crusher on June 14, 2012, 12:46:16 PM
http://nation.foxnews.com/sandra-fluke/2012/06/14/sandra-fluke-obliterated-cnn
LOL!!!! What a dope.
Post by: Soul Crusher on August 07, 2012, 08:14:11 AM
Sandra Fluke to introduce Obama in Denver
By Sara Burnett
Sandra Fluke will introduce President Obama at his Wednesday campaign stop in Denver.
In case you needed further proof of the importance of the women's vote in Colorado this election – and that the Obama campaign is following the 2010 roadmap of U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet – word comes that Sandra Fluke will introduce President Obama at his Denver campaign stop.
Fluke is the Georgetown Law Student who testified before Congress earlier this year in favor of insurance coverage of contraception, and gained national attention when conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh called her a "slut" and a "prostitute." (Limbaugh later apologized).
Obama is scheduled to speak at the Auraria Campus in downtown Denver Wednesday morning. While his talk – and other stops in Grand Junction, Pueblo and Colorado Springs – will be focused on his plans for the economy, the Fluke appearance brings to the forefront another area in which the Obama campaign is trying to differentiate its candidate from Mitt Romney.
The campaign recently launched a new television ad that hits Romney on women's issues, namely his statements that he would eliminate Planned Parenthood, calling Romney "out of touch" on women's issues.
The strategy worked for Bennet amid a Republican wave in 2010, when he edged Republican Ken Buck, thanks largely to women voters.
Post by: Kazan on August 07, 2012, 10:30:03 AM
Another "famous" for no reason waste of oxygen
Quote from: Kazan on August 07, 2012, 10:30:03 AM
Maybe obama is going to ask for a quick fluke from Fluke in return for her free birth control the rest of us are paying for.
Sandra Fluke: Romney didn't defend me from Limbaugh
The Blaze ^ | August. 8, 2012 | Eddie Scarry
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2012
In a column for the Huffington Post, Sandra Fluke explains why she'll be campaigning with President Obama today. She also talks about her displeasure with Mitt Romney:
Sandra Fluke talks about campaigning with Barack Obama"[...] I've already seen what Mr. Romney's lack of leadership looks like.
"When I was verbally attacked earlier this year, I was heartened by the many Americans who reached out in support, regardless of their politics. President Obama was one of them. He condemned those hateful words and supported my right to speak without being attacked.
"Mr. Romney was not. When Rush Limbaugh called me a 'slut' and a 'prostitute' for speaking about medical needs for contraception,
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
Post by: Straw Man on August 08, 2012, 09:15:23 AM
When Fluke graduates from Georgetown I wonder if she'll be such a shitty lawyer that she be forced to live in a ghetto and spend all day posting her imaginary delusions on GB.com
Quote from: Straw Man on August 08, 2012, 09:15:23 AM
No she will probably spend all her time trying to get shit for free
She will go work for the govt somewhere trying to create more leeches and welfare parasites like herself.
BTW - if she can afford 50k tuition she cant afford 13 a month for the pill?
Post by: blacken700 on August 08, 2012, 11:43:53 AM
this post about palin :D
Quote from: blacken700 on August 08, 2012, 11:43:53 AM
Its about you minus the famous part
so you don't think she'll be stuck in the ghetto ?
Sarah looking hot in those pumps on Drudge no?
Nah - she will probably get tricked out by a few perv libs in DC to others like Bubba, etc .
Quote from: 333386 on August 08, 2012, 11:45:13 AM
post the picture
so now you're saying she is going to be a prostitute
how is that any different from being a lawyer ?
I assume the reason you live in the ghetto is that you're the equivalent of a crack whore
Post by: Soul Crusher on August 08, 2012, 12:02:29 PM
LOL - so nasty!
Why the personal vitriol all the time at me personal? Is it a gay thing or something?
Post by: Kazan on August 08, 2012, 12:03:25 PM
Seriously I care as much what happens to her as I do any fucking Kardashian
Quote from: Kazan on August 08, 2012, 12:03:25 PM
I give Kim K a lot more credit than Sandra the Fluke. at least Kim K is honest about what she is. The Fluke is a lying snake all around.
Bama probably going to try to get Fluke to give some up in return for the free rubbers when in CO.
Post by: Straw Man on August 08, 2012, 12:08:17 PM
Quote from: 333386 on August 08, 2012, 12:02:29 PM
personal vitriol.....are you joking dude?
You just calle Fluke a prostitute and have you taken a look at the title of this thread
btw - closet case much? Why don't you just come out already. is that the reason for all of your anger and self loathing?
wow - still pretending she was talking about condoms
are you really truly this stupid
I mean for real?
Quote from: Straw Man on August 08, 2012, 12:08:17 PM
Fluke called herself a prostitute by her actions.
BTW - why so nasty personally to me? Geez - getting like Lurker w the creepy obsession.
She said it costs 3k a year for BC - that a lot of pills, rubbers, and whatever else she uses with her parade of men/women or whoever.
no she didn't and stop with your gay projections already
when I dont reply to your ads to cry like a little girl and publicy ask why I haven't replied yet and when I reply and point out how incredibly stupid you claim "creepy obsession" etc...
I'm sure you remember of course that Fluke and the other students pay the entire health insurance premium themselves so they are not asking anyone to pay anything
All they are asking is that the group plan included that coverage
Do you remember those salient points ?
It would seem an attorney like you should have a keen eye for details like that
Hmmm... now I'm starting to understand why you can't move your sorry ass out of the ghetto
is this your way of admitting the Fluke hasn't asked anyone to pay a single penny of her health insurance premium ?
Oh please - other policy holders are subsidizing her promiscuity.
And that is exactly why health insurance keeps going up! If you can't afford contraception, keep your legs crossed.
I'm sure you're aware the health insurance companies would PREFER to include it in their coverage because it saves them money in the long run
Of course they would, but that brings about the whole health insurance industry being a monster created by the federal government. Fucking health insurance or health care isn't a right. It is a service you must pay someone to provide. Fluke is prime example of what happens when you fuck with natural selection
What man in their right mind would ever want anything to do w a grifter like the Fluke?
and I assume you understand that the reason is they would prefer to spend a hundred dollars on contracetion than thousands of dollars on the expense of giving birth or the tens of thousands of dollars on the expense of treating cervical cancer
So let's review
The consumer who is paying 100% of the premium wants it and in the insurance company also wants to provide it
I don't fucking care the whole health insurance industry is a cluster fuck created by the government. The simple fact that you have to buy the health insurance to not loose your ass should you get ill, is a prime example of what is wrong with the system. Government intervention, wow look what its done ::) But lets just keep piling more shit on top until it all collapses
kind of hard to decipher that mess
are you saying that the government should do something so that you don't "loose your ass" should you get ill or that you should "loose your ass" if you get ill and tough shit for you
My parents managed to have and raise 2 children without health insurance, and it didn't bankrupt them. We had a family doctor, the same doctor who delivered me was my doctor until the HMO came along. Medical care didn't cost an arm and a leg until the government came along and fucked the system up. What I am saying is we would all be much better off without government "help".
did either you or your sister require any major medical care?
Post by: pro nitrousADRL on August 08, 2012, 10:27:48 PM
If this sandra woman is so concerned with people taking her choices away, then why did she not bring up bloomberg and his latest stunt with baby formula and breast milk? seems this sandra woman is a bit hypocritical
Post by: Shockwave on August 09, 2012, 03:51:41 AM
Quote from: pro nitrousADRL on August 08, 2012, 10:27:48 PM
She's only concerned about contraception for her cervical pre-cancer caused by her catching HPV from fucking everyone that she met.
Or to make sure she doesn't get pregnant because she fucks everyone she meets.
Bottom line, she fucks everyone she meets.
Post by: andreisdaman on August 09, 2012, 04:12:08 AM
Quote from: Shockwave on August 09, 2012, 03:51:41 AM
Don't we all???
Post by: 240 is Back on August 09, 2012, 04:47:31 AM
Romney did go out of his way to kiss rush's ass.
anytime a woman is called a whore, a gentleman and statesman will say that's inappropriate.
Romney was too scared of Rush to say that, and everyone here knows it. Showed his lack of spine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aFIkK79Of8
Typical obama voters.
Quote from: 240 is Back on August 09, 2012, 04:47:31 AM
Whatever assclown, she decided to get up and "testify", fuck her if she can't take the heat. Put yourself in the public eye, accept the consequence.
Sandra Fluke to Speak at DNC Convention
Fox News ^ | 09/22/2012 | Though AP
Posted on Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:43:30
A Democratic official says Sandra Fluke will try to solidify President Barack Obama's support among women during a speech next month at the Democratic National Convention.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lJ6Uh_5bBY
AWESOME RANT!!!
FUBO!!!
Sandra Fluke, Pro-Abortion Democratic Chair Crash GOP Convention
Life News ^ | August 30, 2012 | Steven Ertelt
Posted on Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:08:07 PM by NYer
Pro-abortion activist Sandra Fluke and pro-abortion Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair and Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Shultz crashed the Republican convention on Thursday afternoon.
Leading up to the nomination acceptance speech from Mitt Romney, Fluke and Wasserman Schultz somehow made it through security and into the convention center to speak to members of the press. Reporters surrounded Schultz to get her take on the GOP convention. She made a brief statement to the press and walked to the Google-sponsored bloggers lounge where press members also are found.
Although Democrats have set up an office near the GOP convention center, this was the first time and top Democrats ventured into the GOP convention itself.
Fluke later tweeted, "At the #RNC2012 getting the word out on why #romneyryan are #WrongForWomen. First this convention has gotten to hear about women's concerns."
Matthew Boyle of the conservative Daily Caller had more on their appearances and snapped a picture (below).
As of 1:30 p.m. EST, Fluke and Wasserman Schultz have been strolling through the convention center doing media appearances. Both were spotted on Radio Row, an area where noted convention figures go to make multiple subsequent radio appearances. Wasserman Schultz then visited an area downstairs in the convention center where several reporters are working.
Fluke has endorsed President Barack Obama for re-election and has campaigned with him around the country. She is expected to be a featured speaker at next week's Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C.
An RNC spokesperson told The Daily Caller they had "no comment" on Wasserman Schultz and Fluke crashing the GOP convention
Post by: Soul Crusher on September 05, 2012, 05:57:51 PM
LOL!!!! they actually gave this whore a prime time speech. LMFAO.
TRAIN WRECK!!!!
Post by: Kazan on September 05, 2012, 06:00:01 PM
Great another "famous for no good reason" person to take up bandwith
She sounds terrible. What a joke.
This is the democrat party. Fluke and Clinton on the same night. LOL!!!!
I can't stop laughing at this train wreck. Fluke and Clintn. WTF!!!!
Post by: andreisdaman on September 05, 2012, 09:16:08 PM
Quote from: 333386 on September 05, 2012, 06:03:59 PM
funny.......you're the only one who thinks so...everyone gave their speeches rave reviews
Post by: dario73 on September 06, 2012, 08:53:12 AM
Quote from: andreisdaman on September 05, 2012, 09:16:08 PM
Do you mean everyone as in every liberal who can't explaing Obama's plan for the next 4 years? What solutions does he have?
The only thing everyone agreed on is that Democrats keep babbling about government giving even more entitlements. No solutions to the current problems has yet been heard at that convention. Let's see if anemic barry can come up with some ideas that even come close to making any sense.
Quote from: dario73 on September 06, 2012, 08:53:12 AM
again this is the problem with this board..dudes like you can't even bring yourselves to acknowledge whats been out in the media and on the news networks...many Republicans raved over Michelle Obama's speech..and many said Bill Clinton's speech was great as well....you lose a lot of credibility when you persist in not acknowledging the truth
Rep. Joe Walsh To "Entitled" Sandra Fluke: "Get A Job" (video)
RealClearPolitics ^ | September 9, 2012 | RealClearPolitics
Posted on September 9, 2012 10:28:43 PM EDT by i88schwartz
Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) spoke to a crowd in Addison, IL, today and leveled an attack on Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown Law student who has been an outspoken advocate for no-cost birth control for women. Walsh even said that it's "embarrassing" that women like Fluke feel "entitled" to no-cost birth control.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Post by: Soul Crusher on October 21, 2012, 02:05:13 AM
http://www.rgj.com/article/20121020/NEWS19/310200053/Fluke-takes-center-stage-Reno
10 guys showed up probably to bang her.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/10/20/Less-Than-Dozen-Show-For-Sandra-Fluke-Obama-Rally
Ha ha ha ha!!!!!! Total FAIL.
Post by: GigantorX on October 21, 2012, 05:57:20 AM
Quote from: 333386 on October 21, 2012, 03:28:53 AM
She is a whore, that's a fact.
She is also another sad soul, in a long line of sad souls, dragged out, shown around, used, abused and then tossed carelessly into the trash heap by the DNC.
Post by: Straw Man on October 21, 2012, 07:06:36 AM
Quote from: GigantorX on October 21, 2012, 05:57:20 AM
how exactly is that a fact?
Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) spoke to a crowd in Addison, IL, today and leveled an attack on Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown Law student who has been an outspoken advocate for no-cost birth control for women. Walsh even said that it's "embarrassing" that women like Fluke feel "entitled" to no-cost birth control.(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Joe Walsh (and the author of this blurb) is obviously as stupid as you are
Fluke never advocated for no cost birth control
All she advocated for was to have birth control included in the student health plan for which the students pay the full premium. How many more times do you need that explained to you. This is the same phony argument as the "you didn't build that" nonsense. Why does you side have to make up phony issues ?
Post by: andreisdaman on October 21, 2012, 07:20:06 PM
what evidence do you have thats she's a whore?...because she likes sex and wants to use contraceptives so she doesn't get pregnant???...sounds responsible to me????
Post by: whork on October 22, 2012, 01:57:02 AM
Are you gay?
Why do you hate woman who want to have sex?
Post by: garebear on October 22, 2012, 03:44:17 AM
Do you agree with Ann Coulter that women shouldn't be allowed to vote?
Post by: blacken700 on October 22, 2012, 03:54:46 AM
Quote from: Straw Man on October 21, 2012, 07:06:36 AM
I'M SURE HANNITY OR RUSH SAID SO :D :D :D :D
Quote from: garebear on October 22, 2012, 03:44:17 AM
Yes. Absoutely.
Ann Coulter is the scariest white woman on earth...she's far to the right of Hitler politically
Quote from: andreisdaman on October 22, 2012, 08:34:33 PM
No, just no.
Post by: andreisdaman on October 23, 2012, 06:16:45 AM
you're nuts.....yes she is...and she hates black people
Quote from: andreisdaman on October 23, 2012, 06:16:45 AM
Lol. Why you say that ?
Post by: Soul Crusher on October 25, 2012, 06:34:47 PM
Move over Sandra - here comes Lena!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6G3nwhPuR4
you and Ann are kindred spirits
Post by: Soul Crusher on November 26, 2012, 06:55:27 PM
Sandra Fluke Nominated for Time's Person of the Year
by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 11/26/12 7:15 PM
She became the face for the pro-abortion movement during the 2012 elections and the laughingstock of pro-lifers for her relentless push to force Americans to pay for her birth control. College student Sandra Fluke has been nominated as a potential Person of the Year by Time Magazine.
Fluke is apparently unable to figure out how to purchase low-cost birth control from places like Target, Wal-Mart or her local pharmacy. Still, Time magazine felt she was qualified enough to include her with legitimate newsmakers and leaders who are significantly more deserving of the award and recognition.
The magazine wrote this in her bio at the page where Americans can vote NO on Fluke.
The daughter of a conservative Christian pastor, Sandra Fluke, 31, became a women's-rights activist in college and continued her advocacy as a law student at Georgetown. After she complained about being denied a chance to testify at a Republican-run House hearing on insurance coverage for birth control, Rush Limbaugh called Fluke a "slut."
Democrats and many Republicans reacted with outrage, and the left made Limbaugh's slur Exhibit A in what they called a GOP "war on women." Fluke, meanwhile, weathered the attention with poise and maturity and emerged as a political celebrity. Democrats gave her a national-convention speaking slot as part of their push to make reproductive rights a central issue in the 2012 presidential campaign — one that helped Barack Obama trounce Mitt Romney among single women on Election Day.
Post by: Straw Man on November 26, 2012, 06:57:58 PM
Yep, that slut/whore crap really worked well for Repubs
LANDSLIDE !!!!
Quote from: Straw Man on November 26, 2012, 06:57:58 PM
LOL. Sad commentary on state of the USA that the Fluke is time person of the year.
Post by: Soul Crusher on January 30, 2014, 02:22:33 PM
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/sandra-fluke-strongly-considering-run-for-henry-waxman-s-seat-20140130
geez - the fruit cups out there would probably vote for her too
Post by: Dos Equis on January 30, 2014, 05:29:43 PM
What is her life experience? Doesn't seem like she has done a whole lot.
Post by: Dos Equis on February 04, 2014, 10:38:16 AM
Birth Control Activist Sandra Fluke to Run for Congress
Tuesday, 04 Feb 2014
By Melissa Clyne
Former Georgetown University law student and birth control activist Sandra Fluke is planning to run for retiring California Rep. Henry Waxman's congressional seat, The Washington Post reports.
Fluke has filed with the California state Democratic Party to seek its endorsement in the race. Waxman, a 74-year-old staunch liberal, has served in the House of Representatives for nearly four decades.
Fluke, 32, made national headlines in 2012 when conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh referred to Fluke as a "slut" after she testified before Congress that health insurers should be mandated to pay for contraception as part of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. Limbaugh later apologized for his remark.
As result of Georgetown's decision not to include birth control coverage in its student health plan – it's a Catholic university -- Fluke told Congress that she and other women there had suffered "financial, emotional and medical burdens."
The Limbaugh controversy catapulted Fluke into the national spotlight. President Obama personally called her to apologize and she later campaigned with and for him in 2012 and was a featured speaker at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
Fox News host Bill O'Reilly noted on his show in 2012 that Fluke's then-boyfriend Adam Mutterperl —they are now engaged – is the son of "Democratic stalwart William Mutterperl."
O'Reilly questioned whether Fluke's advocacy came with a price tag, noting the timing of her rise coincided with criticism of the White House for Obamacare's contraception requirement, even for religious groups opposed to it, The Daily Caller reported in March 2012.
"Of course, that's when Sandra Fluke suddenly appeared — popping up at congressional hearings, showing up in the media," O'Reilly said. "Polls show President Obama's poll numbers among women now on the rise, and he has Ms. Fluke to thank [for] that. If you don't pay close attention to this story, it looks like President Obama is simply helping out a young woman under siege, but again, that's not what's going on here."
Fluke is licensed to practice law in California and also has an undergraduate degree from Cornell University in Policy Analysis and Management and Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. She will likely face a crowded field in the bid for Waxman's seat, according to The New York Daily News.
Contenders so far include Wendy Greuel, who ran for Los Angeles mayor, State Sen. Ted Lieu, and spiritual teacher and author Marianne Williamson.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/sandra-fluke-run-congress/2014/02/04/id/550814#ixzz2sNbpmSIO
Post by: Necrosis on February 04, 2014, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Beach Bum on February 04, 2014, 10:38:16 AM
what the fuck is a spiritual teacher? does he just surmise different possibilities to you and say things like the universe will provide...
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 04, 2014, 07:54:54 PM
Quote from: Chadwick The Beta on February 04, 2014, 04:19:28 PM
a slut is a slut
putting women on artificial pedestals is gayer than...
Post by: bears on February 05, 2014, 07:14:02 AM
Quote from: Beach Bum on January 30, 2014, 05:29:43 PM
she's a woman and she's fucked a few guys. so she's qualified to talk about contraception.
Quote from: bears on February 05, 2014, 07:14:02 AM
And she's probably a pro abortion zealot, which makes her a possible VP candidate.
Post by: bears on February 05, 2014, 01:08:23 PM
that and a gay best friend will win you the presidency nowadays.......easily.
Post by: blacken700 on February 05, 2014, 01:13:18 PM
I remember a few years back some party ran this moron for vp :D :D :D :D :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrzXLYA_e6E
Post by: Dos Equis on February 05, 2014, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: bears on February 05, 2014, 01:08:23 PM
Gay is all the rage these days.
http://duhprogressive.com/index.php/444-sandra-fluke-i-d-rather-be-a-captive-nigerian-girl-than-touched-by-a-republican
satire - but funny
Quote from: tu_holmes on May 14, 2014, 07:10:09 AM
This did not blow over did it?
I mean, the republicans would have won in 2012 if it had right?
If anyone seriously voted for Obama/biden due solely to birth control/gay marriage/abortion - those people need to be beaten the living shit out of.
This is why the state of affairs is what it is - a dumbed down citizenry w 40-50% looking for free shit from everyone else.
Post by: RagingBull on May 14, 2014, 08:46:56 AM
...but liberal women don't care if Bill Maher calls another woman (Palin) the "c" word.
Quote from: 240 is Back on March 02, 2012, 04:04:44 PM
Post by: Straw Man on May 14, 2014, 09:54:20 AM
Quote from: Soul Crusher on May 14, 2014, 07:14:05 AM
Who assigned you a the person to decide why anyone should or should not vote for a candidate
I'm sure there are more than a few voters who voted for McCain or Romney due solely to birth control/gay marriage/abortion so I assume they also need the living shit beaten out of them too
Post by: Dos Equis on May 14, 2014, 09:59:46 AM
Quote from: RagingBull on May 14, 2014, 08:46:56 AM
Or if Ed Schultz calls Laura Ingraham a slut.
and conservative women don't care that Ted Nugent called Hillary Clinton a toxic c.u.n.t ......right ?
Quote from: Straw Man on May 14, 2014, 11:08:42 AM
Toxic girl? LMFAO!!!!!
try typing the word c.u.n.t (without the periods) and you'll see that it automatically gets changed to "girl" when you post it
dipshit
Post by: Soul Crusher on June 30, 2014, 06:34:41 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/30/supreme-court-pares-back-obamacares-contraception-mandate
Post by: Soul Crusher on July 01, 2014, 09:23:32 AM
http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/30/megyn-kelly-takes-on-sandra-fluke-video
BOOOOMMMM!!!!!
Post by: Dos Equis on July 01, 2014, 10:07:52 AM
Quote from: Soul Crusher on July 01, 2014, 09:23:32 AM
Good. Megyn Kelly is right. Fluke doesn't know what she's talking about.
Post by: RRKore on July 01, 2014, 10:24:36 PM
Quote from: Beach Bum on July 01, 2014, 10:07:52 AM
I agree that Fluke is wrong about the issue being about limiting women's access to birth control but understand why some will think this is a possible result (to some degree, anyway).
If the Obama administration really wants to make sure that access is not restricted, btw, there are measures it can take. One would be to make birth control pills an OTC medication like it is in most other countries. This would indirectly lower the cost and would surely increase ease of access to birth control.
I think this issue is mostly about trying to thwart ACA with a side of the first amendment and a dash of religious nuttery so women's needs aren't really even on the radar, I suspect.
Post by: Soul Crusher on November 05, 2014, 06:45:00 AM
She lost too! Lmfao.
Post by: 240 is Back on November 05, 2014, 06:55:25 AM
Both sides contain a hole sexists.
Both sides whine that the other side doesn't complain enough.
Posted on November 5, 2014 at 4:42:16 PM EST by SeekAndFind
The hollow and silly "War on Women" narrative may never truly disappear. Democrats will need to marshal grievance among young and single women like never before if Hillary Clinton becomes the party's standard-bearer in 2016. But the 2014 elections have dealt this vacuous yarn a blow from which it may never recover.
Ed Morrissey chronicled the collapse of the fabled "War" in a must-read column for The Fiscal Times:
This is not a case of just poor turnout but of actual shift in support — or at the very least an erosion of loyalty in a very short period of time. Other polls by the Associated Press and Pew Research also show dramatic erosion for Democrats among single women since 2012, even while seeing somewhat larger gaps.
What happened? For one thing, Republican candidates had better message discipline in 2014, depriving Democrats of opportunities for their demagoguery.
The incessant harping on contraception may have finally repelled women who have other concerns, such as the economy and national security, just like the millennials. But perhaps the desperation of Democrats to play this card with the same effectiveness as two years ago finally opened their eyes to the paternalistic attitude that Democrats took in positioning themselves as protectors, which implies that women can't act on their own behalf.
He observed that Ground Zero in the counteroffensive in the "War on Women" came this year in Colorado where Senator-elect Cory Gardner defeated incumbent Mark Udall after the Democrat spent virtually the entirety of his campaign insisting that Gardner was an extremist on women's issues without substantial evidence to back this charge up.
This intellectual cul-de-sac culminated in NARAL ill-advisedly fielding an ad in which the group envisioned a dystopian future where Gardner had somehow outlawed all forms of contraception including condoms. The voters deserved more credit, and they earned it on Tuesday night when they voted out their one-note Democratic senator.
What's more, Udall did not even win women by overwhelming margins. A traditionally Democratic-leaning Demographic, the incumbent only secured the votes of 52 percent of women voters. Gardner won 47 percent of Centennial State women.
But the greatest defeat in the "War on Women" on Tuesday night came in California. There, the prototypical victim of Republicans' supposed assaults on women's health, the very face of Republican antipathy toward reproductive rights, Sandra Fluke, lost her bid for office.
Fluke lost to fellow Democrat Ben Allen, a Santa Monica-Malibu school board member, by over 21 points. As The Huffington Post's Paul Blumenthal reported last month, real estate mogul Bill Bloomfield poured $1.3 million into independent expenditures backing Allen's campaign, an enormous amount for a state Senate race. Both Fluke and Allen raised over $1 million for their respective campaigns. [Emphasis added]
The "War on Women" is not going away in 2016, but Democrats will be far more cautious when they invoke its themes. 2014 showed that it simply is no longer that effective a political tactic.