l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Limbaugh Asks How Sandra Fluke Can Donate $100K-Plus to Her Campaign Yet Can
't Afford the Pill
By Jack Coleman | July 29, 2014 | 21:35
A A
Two years after he was widely vilified for suggesting that Sandra Fluke was
a "slut" and "prostitute" for insisting that other people -- taxpayers or
insurance companies, she wasn't picky -- pay for her birth control, Rush
Limbaugh asked a question about Fluke today on his radio show that we're
unlikely to hear from what he derides as the "drive-by media."
Fluke, who somehow survived her brutish treatment by Limbaugh to land a
prime-time speaking gig at the Democratic National Convention that year,
right before Bill Clinton aptly enough, is running for state senate in
California. That she might get elected is due largely to Limbaugh's role in
making Fluke a public figure. Poor thing, the fame she's had to endure as a
rock star on the left, where they robotically view people they admire as
rock stars, has been hellish.
Turns out Fluke has donated mucho deniro to her campaign, more than $100,000
, even though she was alleging poverty in 2012 while begging for public
assistance to pay for her contraception. Such a target proved irresistible
to Rush :
Do you remember Sandra ... I can never remember how to pronounce her
name. It's spelled 'Fluke' but I don't think anybody wants to be called a '
fluke', so I think she calls herself 'fluk'. It's a risk either way you
pronounce it, right? Anyway, we all know who she came upon the public
consciousness. She arrived on the scene as a Georgetown Law student
testifying in a mock congressional hearing, it was a TV ad, it was made to
look like an official hearing but it wasn't, it was just a campaign ad. And
she was testifying about the hardships that she and other similarly aged
and conditioned women faced with the high cost of birth control.
She figured that given her, whatever, that it would cost her something
like $3,000 a year and she wanted this to be part of Obamacare and that was
the phony faux ad, testifying before a supposed congressional committee.
Well, this caused us to (wonder) -- $3,000 a month for this? Found out it
cost $9 a month over the counter, we said whoa! How much of this is going on
? And we started raising questions. Why in the world should this be
something all the rest of us should pay for? Particularly when, if you don't
want to get pregnant, there's a certain thing that you just don't do, it
has consequences and that's what you want to avoid. And then I was chastened
because I sounded like I was somebody who was against sex and I'm not
against sex. But I also don't think that contraception and all of that
should be part of Obamacare.
Can somebody, can at least one group of people accept responsibility for
their lives in this country? Can not one group do it? Can just one person
say they're not going to feed off the public?! Can just one person stand up
and say, you know what? I'm going to live on what I provide myself.
Apparently not. Apparently everybody seems to want everybody else to pay for
what they want.
Well, this irritated me and it resulted in characterizations which
required an explanation and an apology. However, Miss Fluke is back. The
Washington Examiner -- "Liberal darling and free birth-control advocate is
her own biggest donor in her state senate race, according to official
California campaign finance reports. Sandra Fluke donated $12,000 to her own
campaign and an additional $4,800 in non-monetary contributions. While $16,
800 may not sound like a lot, she also loaned her campaign an additional $
100,000."
Now where does a 2012 law school grad working as a social justice
attorney begging all of us to pay for her birth control come up with $100,
000 to donate to her campaign? I take it back -- where does she come up with
$16,000 to donate to her campaign? And how does she go out and get a loan
of $100,000? The Washington Examiner called her campaign and sought answers
to these questions and they never responded, so nobody knows.
But what is wrong with this picture? She donates $12,000 to her campaign
and $4,826.27 in non-monetary donations, which means hotel rooms and stuff
like that, things which impute to cash value, and then loaned her campaign $
100,000. Now, birth control costs about $10 a month and this woman went on a
fake TV commercial begging all of us to pay for her monthly birth control
because it was so expensive and it was so tough and so challenging for
college students to afford. So I'm asking the same question the Washington
Examiner asks -- how does this happen? Just asking the question.
Good question at that. Interesting to see if Fluke responds to Limbaugh's
criticism. Last time she did in the guise of a victimized Little Bo Beep,
though she more closely resembles Sigourney Weaver's alleged damsel in
distress in "Working Girl." With any luck, Fluke will have belatedly learned
the old saw that politics ain't beanbag. |
|
