Thread: Sandra Fluke

Sandra Fluke Announces Run for California State Senate
By Andrew Rafferty - 02/05/2014

Women’s rights activist Sandra Fluke announced Wednesday that she has decided to run for a California State Senate seat, reversing a previous move toward making a run for U.S. Congress.

“My entire career has been devoted to the public interest, whether representing victims of human trafficking or advocating for working families,” Fluke said in a statement. “I am committed to continuing that fight in Sacramento.”

The Democratic lawyer heavily considered running for the Congressional seat that will be vacated after Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Cali., retires at the end of the year. Fluke was one of three Democratic candidates who filed paperwork seeking the state party’s endorsement in what was expected to be a hard fought primary.

Fluke was catapulted into the national spotlight in 2012 after conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh called a “slut” after she delivered a Congressional testimony in support of mandatory health care insurance coverage for contraception.

NBC's Michael O'Brien contributed to this report.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elec...-senate-n22736




Sandra Fluke not running for Congress after all. Wise move? (+video)
Sandra Fluke gained celebrity as a women's rights activist after becoming the object of a slur by conservative Rush Limbaugh. But that was unlikely to be enough to sustain a US House bid.
By Peter Grier, Staff writer / February 5, 2014

Sandra Fluke is not going to run for Congress after all. The women’s rights activist and former Georgetown Law student announced late Tuesday that she’s forgoing a try at federal office and instead will campaign for a seat in the California Senate.

“While I strongly considered offering my candidacy for Congress, I feel there is a better way for me to advance the causes that are important to our community,” Ms. Fluke said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times.

Fluke came to national attention in 2012 after House Republicans refused to let her speak in favor of mandatory coverage of contraception at a panel on the Affordable Care Act (aka “Obamacare”). Conservative talker Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut” and a “prostitute” for this stance, igniting a partisan uproar. Mr. Limbaugh eventually apologized, but Fluke became a hero to many on the left.

After graduation, she moved to California, passed the state bar exam, and became active in local women’s rights groups. Many state Democrats thought she was prepping for some sort of political career.

On Tuesday, The Washington Post reported that Fluke had filed papers with the California Democratic Party seeking its endorsement in the race to succeed retiring liberal legend Rep. Henry Waxman. This launched a spate of stories (including ours) about the implications of her entry into a crowded Democratic congressional primary field.

But she’s decided to lower her sights, apparently. For her, that’s probably a wise move.

Why? For one thing, the race to inherit Representative Waxman’s 33rd Congressional District seat is already a political roller derby. Its participants include a number of prominent state Democrats, such as former L.A. controller and mayoral candidate Wendy Greuel and current state Sen. Ted Lieu; a couple of independents, self-help author Marianne Williamson and television producer Brent Roske; and (possibly) ex-Republican and current independent Bill Bloomfield, a wealthy businessman who won 46 percent of the vote against Waxman in 2012.

The fact is, it is unlikely Fluke would have won the state Democratic Party endorsement. Without that, she’s nothing but a one-episode pilot series canceled before the general election.

And as Washington Post political reporter Sean Sullivan points out, Ms. Greuel already has close ties to many of the women’s rights organizations and liberal groups whose backing Fluke would covet. That might have made it hard for the novice (that’s Fluke) to make headway in the race.

By running for state office, Fluke works with the state Democratic leadership instead of against it. Did we mention that the Senate seat she’s trying for is being vacated by one of the declared congressional candidates, Ted Lieu? That means Fluke won’t face the difficult task of unseating an incumbent.

Plus, as Philip Bump of “The Wire” notes, the prospect of being one of 50 state senators in sunny California, as opposed to one of 435 federal representatives in swampy D.C., is not an unpleasant one.

Plus, Fluke is building a résumé that will help her later in life. “This is a better decision. A much better decision,” Mr. Bump writes.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Deco...ise-move-video

Sandra Fluke, the Martyr, Asks for Your Vote
June 3, 2014 By TPNN Staff Writer

Sandra Fluke demonized all those who were unwilling to pay for her birth control. She testified before Congress that birth control is a right for all women and therefore it should be free. Now that she’s running for State Senate in California, it seems that Fluke is now singing a different tune when it comes to ‘costs’.

Sandra Fluke @SandraFluke



I’m not focused on taking the easy path.
I'll always fight back for what I believe, regardless of the personal cost.

4:00 PM - 2 Jun 2014

So, the woman who could not seem to pay the personal cost of $4 a month for birth control is now making herself out to be a martyr ‘willing to pay the personal cost,’ whatever that means, in her political campaign.

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/03/sandr...for-your-vote/

comments

I want to let that sink in for a minute. "I’m not focused on taking the easy path. I'll always fight back for what I believe, regardless of the personal cost. " So, if she believes congress should work together to solve this nation's problems, like poverty, crime, and the infringing of personal rights, why would she not pay the "personal cost" of compromise when it came to birth control?

Regardless of where you stand on the contraception debate, would it have not been a personal cost for the greater good to allow parts of Obamacare to be altered so that both parties had some input to it's functionality? You can't build a house with just architects.

I wonder how personal the cost of her being destroyed in the elections will be. Personally, I can't wait to see this media tool be put through the wash and hung out to dry like the dirty laundry she is.

...

She'll be the next Cindy Sheehan. Exploited and used until the public gets weary of her then she'll be cast aside.

..

What ever happened to the freak Cindy Sheehan?

▽
•

A Democrat became President so war is ok now. The media stopped covering her the second Obama got elected. Believe it or not, she's out there calling Obama a war monger and everything just like Bush. The media makes sure that nobody films her doing it though. I swear they even turn off traffic cams when they see her coming.

...

good thoughts here...if you think about the "great government shutdown" from last fall the area that created it was that the House sent NO funding bill on Obamacare to the senate, so Harry and the Prez wouldn't vote on funding the other areas of the government that they had bills for...THEN, after he got what he wanted and made the repubs look bad, the Prez modified Obamacare on his own!!!!!.....THAT is the danger of this guy in our WH...HE doesn't play by any rules but what is in his mind a the time...could have "negotiated" parts of it and voted thru funding but he was allowed to get away with it by all of the "changers" in this country....personally if you go to Philly and study the beginnings of our nation the founders NEVER had an idea that the FED Government would take care of anybody...IT has set things to do for us but leaving us to live our own lives is the most important....

..

Fluke is a darling of the national media terrorist 5 networks and she is singing to the choir in California. Any state that gives us Pelosi, Feinstien, and Boxer deserves a Fluke

She had a husband and a million dollar house, yet she needed a catholic college to provide her with free birth control for other men. This was nothing but an assault on the Church... no more, no less.

Poor Sandra Fluke Can’t Afford to Buy Her Own Birth Control,
But She Can Spend $100K On This…
July 29, 2014 By Jennifer Burke

Sandra Fluke was catapulted to Democrat stardom after she testified before Congress on the woes of having to pay for her own birth control. She contended that she could not afford the $3,000 a year cost for birth control, so the taxpayers should provide it for her.

This was used to craft and push the false narrative of a Republican ‘war on women.’ The ‘right’ to have sex with no personal responsibility was at the heart of the argument and anyone who objected was deemed as being against women.

Fast-forward to today and Sandra Fluke is now a Democrat candidate for State Senate in California. She boasts of fundraising prowess, claiming to have raised more than her opponent, Ben Allen. But a breakdown of her campaign finances reveals two startling facts.

The first is that Sandra Fluke and her family are personally responsible one-third of her campaign donations. When you take those out, Allen has actually outraised Fluke $330,141 to $278,859.01.

But, the bigger story is that Sandra Fluke, who complained to be unable to pay for birth control, a expenditure that she claimed cost $3,000 a year even though birth control pills can be purchased at most pharmacies for $4 a month, has given her campaign a total of $116,826,27. Of that, $12,000 was donated outright, $4,826.27 was given in non-monetary contributions, and $100,000 was given by Fluke to her campaign in the form of a loan.

The Washington Examiner http://washingtonexaminer.com/sandra...rticle/2551379 continues their report by pointing out that Fluke only recently graduated from law school, in 2012, and works as a social justice attorney. But, somehow, she had $112,000 at her disposal to give in monetary funds to her campaign.

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/07/29/poor-...-100k-on-this/

This was Sandra Fluke’s take on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Hobby Lobby case that was announced earlier today:

Sandra Fluke @SandraFluke

Supreme Court rules that bosses can deny employees coverage of birth control. #HobbyLobby #NotMyBossBusiness

Bob Owens @bob_owens

@SandraFluke It simply isn't possible for you to be ethical or honest, is it?

9:31 AM - 30 Jun 2014

Really?

Dana Loesch led off schooling of the fact-challenged Fluke:

Dana Loesch ✔ @DLoesch

You also know too that Hobby Lobby already voluntarily pays for pill, right @SandraFluke ?

9:57 AM - 30 Jun 2014

Reminder: Hobby Lobby already provides insurance that covers 16 types of contraceptives. http://www.unionleader.com/article/2...0/newhampshire …


Fluke’s “ironic” use of the #NotMyBossBusiness hashtag was spotted:

RightGirlNYC @RightGirlNYC

The delicious irony in that statement and hashtag. You don't see it do you?.@SandraFluke

9:28 AM - 30 Jun 2014

Julia Porterfield @JK_Porterfield

@SandraFluke If it's not your bosses business, stop asking him to pay for it.

9:34 AM - 30 Jun 2014

Denise Russell @DRussell76

@SandraFluke @EWErickson And now it's NOT your bosses business. You should be happy.

9:31 AM - 30 Jun 2014

http://twitchy.com/2014/06/30/cluele...obby-decision/

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

Is Sandra Fluke a fake victim used by Democrats to push free birth control?
March 4, 2012 Joe Newby Spokane Conservative Examiner

Is Sandra Fluke, the 30-year-old Georgetown law student who testified before a Congressional panel in late February, a fake victim used by the Democrats to push free contraceptives? Several posts in the conservative blogosphere seem to suggest just that. A post at Jammie Wearing Fools notes: http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/sandra-...e-is-no-fluke/

The Washington Post spoke to Ms. Fluke after Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) refused to let her testify in a hearing regarding religious freedom.

Democrats invited her to speak at that hearing, hoping that she would tell Republicans how much birth control meant to her. As the Post notes, the topic was so important to Fluke, she actually researched the school's policy before enrolling : http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...57HR_blog.html

The Daily Caller reported that Fluke has a long history of activism: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/03/me...-sandra-fluke/

An article at The Blaze also found holes in her narrative: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sand...ontraceptives/ That profile also reveals a woman with a long history of feminist activism.

The idea that she is an unwitting victim of a religious school is patently absurd. Yet that is the narrative Democrats are presenting to the American public.

It would seem that Fluke intentionally attended Georgetown for the sole purpose of agitating for her cause - contraception.

Her testimony caused a firestorm of controversy, especially after talk radio host Rush Limbaugh called her a "slut." Limbaugh issued an apology on Saturday, and added: http://www.examiner.com/conservative...ing-her-a-slut

Democrats want us to believe that Ms. Fluke is a victim of mean, cruel religious organizations, but the reality is something quite different. Instead of being a poor, downtrodden waif suffering under male oppression, she is a long-time agitator for feminist causes who allowed herself to be used as a propaganda tool by the Democratic Party.

As the post at Jammie Wearing Fools notes, Americans "are being played. She has been an activist all along and the Dems were just waiting for the appropriate time to play her." At the very least, Democrats owe Americans an apology for this dog-and-pony show. Ultimately, they should be voted out of office for perpetrating this fraud on the public.

Continue reading on Examiner.com Is Sandra Fluke a fake victim used by Democrats to push free birth control? - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/conservative...#ixzz1oB7DI1rS

Sandra Fluke: Your Health Care Should Cover Gender Reassignment Surgery
Patterico @ 5:58 pm 3/5/2012

So we are now forced to endure the women of the View and Jake Tapper (Jake Tapper!) interviewing Sandra Fluke without asking her any questions about her activism, or the facts concerning how easily it is to actually get birth control ($9 per month for birth control pills in Georgetown http://www.npr.org/2012/03/02/147820...-for-9-a-month ).

Here is a new part of the story for Big Media to ignore.

The College Politico has discovered something very interesting about Ms. Fluke’s beliefs: http://thecollegepolitico.com/sandra...lth-insurance/

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 . . . is “Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons” and was published in the Journal’s 2011 Annual Review.

Via The Other McCain, who observes: http://theothermccain.com/2012/03/05...hange-surgery/

This law school journal article is the sort of thing that might have been discovered about Fluke’s background, had the Democrats who put Fluke forward as a witness done so with the usual 72-hour advance notice. Here’s one brief quote from the article:

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.

Now, imagine Fluke trying to defend this language about “heterosexist” policies in a public hearing, with Republican members of the committee questioning her about whether religious institutions (or private businesses, or taxpayers) should also be required to foot the bill for “gender reassignment.”

Congratulations, America: You’ve been scammed!

http://patterico.com/2012/03/05/sand...nment-surgery/


And while I agree that Rush was inappropriate to call Ms Fluker a "slut".... it seems that the media is pushing the usual double standard.....


Carbonite Drops Limbaugh — But A-OK with Ed “Laura Ingraham Is a Slut” Schultz
— Patterico @ 8:42 pm 3/4/2012[/i]

So a whole bunch of advertisers are dropping Rush Limbaugh. I always feel ambiguous about boycotts, pressure on advertisers, and such. For me, it generally comes down to the rightness of the cause. Here, I can’t get terribly excited on either side. Sure, Fluke is a fake; a 30-year-old who shouldn’t have sex if she can’t afford $9 a month for birth control pills — and someone who has grossly misled the country about the price of contraception. But calling her a “slut” and so forth? It seems personal and nasty to me, and if Rush really thought that was the appropriate way to handle it, he should have the courage of his convictions and tell off his advertisers.

Here’s what is outrageous, though: Carbonite advertises on Ed Schultz. And he called Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLeGQ..._embedded#t=0s

I don’t recall Carbonite pulling their advertising then. I guess the operative word in the phrase “right-wing slut” is the word “right-wing.” If it’s a conservative you are calling nasty names, it’s A-OK.

That’s what Carbonite seems to be saying . . . doesn’t it?

So I figure that a lot of Limbaugh listeners subscribed to Carbonite for their backup needs because of Rush Limbaugh. And a lot of them might choose to stop because of Carbonite’s hypocrisy. As I said, sometimes boycotts seem justified. Maybe this is one of those times.

http://patterico.com/2012/03/04/carb...comment-926643

Posted
03-05-2012 11:36 AM
by pepperpot

Fluke was on the View today. Wasn't it nice of Mr. Obama to personally call her and make sure she was okay? (aka campaigning) Never waste a good disaster.....I believe her appearances (all of them) were orchestrated.

Rush took the bait. I will say it was wrong for him to use those terms, but I think the thought behind them is valid. His apology was appropriate. He didn't apologize for his view but apologized for his language.

Fluke is no victim here, this was all in her intentions. I caught that her "contraception" costs $3,000 per year. Why is it so expensive? Even a condom at $1 a pop for a daily event (pop) would only cost $365

She also made it "clear" that this was not "tax dollars"...hmmmm.....if one is employed by any government branch, this is "tax dollars" and the general public who do have health care is paying for this in their higher premiums. Just because it's covered under "insurance" doesn't mean that we aren't ALL paying for this.

http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-inf...l#post96342988

...


All the name calling aside. Here are the facts:

1) Sandra Fluke is not a "school girl" or "3rd year law student." She is a 30 year old political activist who joined Georgetown with the specific intent of challenging their religious policy.

2) Mandating that Georgetown provide coverage for contraception against their religious beliefs is unconstitutional and a violation of Freedom of Religion.

Forget about all the name calling and look at the facts. You can either side with Sandra Fluke against the Constitution or side with the Constitution. It is really that simple.


...

The War on Conservative Women
Michelle Malkin – 6 hrs ago

I'm sorry Rush Limbaugh called 30-year-old Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a "slut." She's really just another professional femme-a-gogue helping to manufacture a false narrative about the GOP "war on women." I'm sorry the civility police now have an opening to demonize the entire right based on one radio comment — because it's the progressive left in this country that has viciously and systematically slimed female conservatives for their beliefs.

We have the well-worn battle scars to prove it. And no, we don't need coddling phone calls from the pandering president of the United States to convince us to stand up and fight.

At his first press conference of the year on Tuesday, the Nation's Concern Troll explained that he phoned Fluke to send a message to his daughters and all women that they shouldn't be "attacked or called horrible names because they are being good citizens." After inserting himself into the fray and dragging Sasha and Malia into the debate, Obama then told a reporter he "didn't want to get into the business of arbitrating" language and civility. Too late, pal.

The fact is, "sl ut" is one of the nicer things I've been called over 20 years of public life. In college during the late 1980s, it was "race traitor," "coconut" (brown on the outside white on the inside) and "white man's puppet." After my first book, "Invasion," came out in 2001, it was "immigrant-hater," the "Radical Right's Asian Pitbull," "Tokyo Rose" and "Aunt Tomasina." In my third book, 2005's "Unhinged," I published entire chapters of hate mail rife with degrading, unprintable sexual epithets and mockery of my Filipino heritage.

If I had a dollar for every time libs have called me a "Manila wh ore" and "Subic Bay bar girl," I'd be able to pay for a ticket to a Hollywood-for-Obama fundraiser.

Self-serving opponents argue that such attacks do not represent "respectable," "mainstream" liberal opinion about their conservative female counterparts. But it was feminist godmother Gloria Steinem who called Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison a "female impersonator." It was NOW leader Patricia Ireland who commanded her flock to only vote for "authentic" female political candidates. It was Al Gore consultant Naomi Wolf who accused the late Jeane Kirkpatrick of being "uninflected by the experiences of the female body."

It was Matt Taibbi, now of Rolling Stone magazine, who mocked my early championing of the tea party movement by jibing: "Now when I read her stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of (redacted) in her mouth. It vastly improves her prose."

It was Keith Olbermann, then at MSNBC and now at Al Gore's Current TV, who wrote on Twitter that columnist S.E. Cupp was "a perfect demonstration of the necessity of the work Planned Parenthood does" and who called me a "mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it." He stands by those remarks. Olbermann has been a special guest at the White House.

Some of us have not forgotten when liberal Wisconsin radio host John "Sly" Sylvester outrageously accused GOP Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch of performing "fellatio on all the talk-show hosts in Milwaukee" and sneered that she had "pulled a train" (a crude phrase for gang sex). (Earlier, he called former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice a "black trophy" and "Aunt Jemima.")

Or when MSNBC misogynist Ed Schultz called talk show host Laura Ingraham a "talk s lut" for criticizing Obama's petty beer summit. Or when Playboy published a list of the top 10 conservative women who deserved to be "hate-f**ked." The article, which was promoted by Anne Schroeder Mullins at Politico.com, included Ingraham, "The View's" Elisabeth Hasselbeck, former Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino, GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann and others. Yours truly topped the list with the following description: a "highly f**kable Filipina" and "a regular on Fox News, where her tight body and get-off-my-lawn stare just scream, 'Do me!'"

And then there's the left's war on Sarah Palin, which would require an entire national forest of trees to publish.

A reporter asked Obama to comment on examples of liberal hate speech at Tuesday's press conference. He whiffed, of course. This is, after all, the brave leader who sat on his hands while his street thugs attacked tea party mothers and grandmothers as "Koch who res" during the fight over union reform in Wisconsin. (As I reported last week, his re-election campaign is now targeting the Koch brothers' private foundation donors in a parallel effort to chill conservative speech and activism.) He's leading by example.

So no, we won't get any phone calls from Mr. Civility. Acknowledging the war on conservative women would obliterate The Narrative. Enjoy the silence.

http://news.yahoo.com/war-conservati...080000034.html

Yea, the silence from the left when lefties go after conservatives like Palin referring to her with the C word or making fun of her down syndrome baby is deafening. They will never hold their own accountable much less to the same standard as conservatives neither will they ever have to apologize. And they say they are the party of fairness and equality? Far from it.

...

Not just conservative women. I remember the democrats paying James Carville to get the democrat media to attack democrat women. It's the way they roll. And heaven help you if you are gay or minority and end up on the democrat enemy list. They are just nasty.

...

no story here, we all know the nasty left...they are acting with all this righteous indignation whilst the low lifes on their side use/used much worse language toward the right and they laugh and giggle, Wanda Sykes, Sergeant Ed Shultz, the Forehead, Olbermann, Letterman, etc...

Limbaugh Asks How Sandra Fluke Can Donate $100K-Plus to Her Campaign Yet Can't Afford the Pill
By Jack Coleman | July 29, 2014

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. (Audio after the jump)

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 -- again (audio http://newsbusters.org/sites/default...%2029%2014.mp3 ) --

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.


: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-co...#ixzz38z8bJNVF

Sandra Fluke Loses California State Senate Race

The Huffington Post | By Mollie Reilly
Posted: 11/05/2014 8:39 am EST Updated: 11/05/2014 8:59 am EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...n_6106634.html

Last Tuesday, Sandra Fluke lost her bid to be elected to the California State Senate. http://twitchy.com/2014/11/05/all-ab...g-on-the-cake/ In addition to being an advocate for “free” birth control http://twitchy.com/2014/09/02/surpri...t-hobby-lobby/ Fluke has lobbied to raise the minimum wage as well as taken a stand against wage theft. http://twitchy.com/2014/07/06/lol-ir...st-wage-theft/

Speaking of wages, one of her supporters had an inquiry (we’ve blocked out the phone number):



RaiseTheWage!

Fluke’s response was the political equivalent of “take it up with human resources”:



Read the rest here .... http://twitchy.com/2014/11/12/i-have...aise-her-wage/