Why would anyone think that?
Posted on 03/05/2012 8:21:37 AM PST by Skeez
Fluke has been called a slut. Not only for sleeping herself through law school, but for pimping herself off as some kind of “reproductive rights” expert. But today I received an email from someone who claims to be from Georgetown stating that Sandra Fluke really isn’t who she says she is. That is heterosexual, and that she is in fact gay.
I have no idea if the email is real or fake. I don’t care if she’s gay or not. Having family members who are gay I’m not homophobic. The email headers check out and it appears legit. The writer states she knows this because, “We have been intimate, I know she hasn’t been with a man since I’ve known her”.
She further states that Fluke was “recruited” to testify, or rather act, as though she was at risk of having unprotected sex with men. So the obvious question is “Why is Fluke testifying to something she would never need?” Is that not indeed lying to congress?
So then maybe she’s not a slut after all, but simply a liar and a fake?
Again, have no idea if this is true, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it were. Wouldn’t be the first time liberals manufactured a character.
UPDATE: In 2010 The Woman Lawyers Association of Los Angeles cited Fuke as a 2010 Public Interest Grant Recipient.
Fluke has been called a slut. Not only for sleeping herself through law school, but for pimping herself off as some kind of “reproductive rights” expert. But today I received an email from someone who claims to be from Georgetown stating that Sandra Fluke really isn’t who she says she is. That is heterosexual, and that she is in fact gay.
I have no idea if the email is real or fake. I don’t care if she’s gay or not. Having family members who are gay I’m not homophobic. The email headers check out and it appears legit. The writer states she knows this because, “We have been intimate, I know she hasn’t been with a man since I’ve known her”.
She further states that Fluke was “recruited” to testify, or rather act, as though she was at risk of having unprotected sex with men. So the obvious question is “Why is Fluke testifying to something she would never need?” Is that not indeed lying to congress?
So then maybe she’s not a slut after all, but simply a liar and a fake?
Again, have no idea if this is true, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it were. Wouldn’t be the first time liberals manufactured a character.
UPDATE: In 2010 The Woman Lawyers Association of Los Angeles cited Fuke as a 2010 Public Interest Grant Recipient.
Seems Fluke is at the very least a celebrated activist with close ties to feminist causes as well with the LGBTQ, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender and queer and questioning groups.
UPDATE: More on Fluke at Pat Dollard’s blog. Turns out she’s a 30 year old activist.
Thanks because I haven’t seen it...
“a display of progressive hypocrisy is Fluke’s claim that law students at a prestigious private school can’t afford birth control. If Fluke could produce one of her colleagues who doesn’t have an I-phone, an I-pad, an I-pod, a high-speed internet connection, or cable television; who doesn’t spend $20 a week at Starbucks, or has to eat ramen every night, or never takes a vacation, never eats out, never goes to bars or concerts; or who has parents on welfare who can’t contribute to her education, or works part-time at a burger joint, or has any other characteristics of someone so poor she can’t budget for birth control pills, then maybe she’d have a point. But even then, condoms are available for free at numerous clinics and even at some retail stores. And God forbid we should suggest that the young lady just say no”
Isn’t that the truth? Go Newt!!!!
geez..anybody got that bear on a crapper in the woods picture?!!
OF COURSE she’s gay....and the only thing worse than her doing what she’s done ..is how the right-including Limbaugh..re-acted on it.
It was all co-ordinated to keep Bammy’s numbers from tanking even harder than just 5.00/gal gas is gonna do to him...
This is another attempt to lead us down a blind alley.
She said that she is speaking for many women who are having trouble paying for birth control and then she gave several examples of women who allegedly told her about their difficult situations. Apparently lezzies also have problems, even though I don't know what that has to do with birth control.
She is combining all of this as a women's issues when some are clearly medical and some are clearly related to birth control.
This whole thing is a tar baby meant to distract from the first amendment freedom of religion clause.
Errrr... your numbers are way off. The federal government brings in about $2.4 trillion per year in revenue and pays out about $3.8 trillion per year.
“So then maybe she’s not a slut after all, but simply a liar and a fake? “
She lied about the cost of “contaception” being $3000/year and she certainly looks gay to me. I don’t see any of her guys coming out to support her—but then, would you?
Doesn’t matter if she is gay. She isn’t the slut.
She said that all her friends at Georgetown were sluts, broke sluts who might get pregnant if the government doesn’t pay for their contraception.
The 3000 dollar figure was for 3 years and was phrased "as much as 3000 during law school" (generally 3 years).
I thought that she looked gay, when I saw her picture, not that you can tell that much from a picture.
So funny, Tom Hanks was more conservative dressed like that.
“Another parrot who didnt read/listen to the testimony...”
You’re right. Still, if it costs you more than $30/mo for birth control, you’re getting scammed. I imagine most of the gorls spend more than that a month on booze. Oooops, I shouldn’t have said that. Next, you’ll want me to pay for that, too.
The thing thatreally stands out in this article for me is this sentence:”Having family members who are gay I’m not homophobic. “
That is the biggest problem today. Too many people have family that are homosexual.
Of course the family feels bad that their son/daughter is queer, and of course they love them in spite of it, so they are willing to look the other way.
We hear that there are only 1% homosexuals, which IMO is BS, but almost every family can name a fruit in it.
My own Nephew was molested by his father as a child and is now “married”. His sister who was also molested is in the Air Force and is a switch hitter.
It used to be that when you had a fruit in the family they just were not talked about, and they kept quiet about it themselves. In todays world they expect the family to accept them and their depraved lifestyle.
I believe this is the main reason for their gain in social acceptability.One of the main reasons politicians are voting to give them rights to which they are not entitled such as marriage.
When you are in college, you should need BOOKS, NOt Birth Control.
Since Birth Control pills are about $9 a month at both Wal Mart & Target, the cost for 36 month is much closer to $300 & nowhere near the $3000 this ‘woman’ claims.
IF the balance of that $3000 is being spent by her or other college age women on condoms, they certainly are not working hard enough to get good grades at their chosen degrees. They are spending faaaaarr too much time on their backs.
Sandra Fluke is a deceiver of the first defree.
She can go march with Cindy Sheehan, IMO.
They are both nuts.
She also did not talk about multiple partners.
It is possible to have lots of sex with one person.
College guys buy most of the booze college girls drink. Same in grad school. Same in adult life.
If anyone wants to discuss the issue, then hammer the absurdity of the situation. Point out that the economy is in the tank, gas prices are going up, millions of real people are unemployed, the military and seniors are facing cuts in insurance coverage along with increases in costs, and other issues facing ordinary Americans, and all the left can do is promote free birth control for rich people. I still think they overreached here, and I am using this to show how out of touch they are on the real issues. You won’t win over the true believers, but they are not the target audience. The normal Americans who hear you or read your comments on Facebook are the ones you are after.
I heard Rush call it sounding like Fluck.
Breitbart could have a subsection to its web site called BIG FLUCK.
Why would anyone think that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.