The Hidden Scandal of Sandra Fluke: Behind Rush Limbaugh's Massive Blunder

Cure Socialism ^ | March 5, 2012 | Jonathon Moseley

[Moseley]

Last week, Rush Limbaugh enthusiastically and eagerly did a swan dive from the high board into the liberal trap. If anyone should know better, it is Rush. But Rush was thinking mainly about getting publicity for himself, to garner interest in people listening to his show. So Rush Limbaugh threw restraint to the wind, and started to channel Howard Stern. Rush started on a line of tittilating sexual innuendo, and just failed to stop at the border.

Anyone with Rush Limbaugh's experience knows by now that if you use certain words, phrases, or arguments, people will totally lose track of or forget what you were trying to say. No one experienced in politics fails to understand that if you use words like slut, prostitute, pimp, or the like, or Nazi, etc., or mention Hitler in any context, nobody will listen to anything else you have to say. They will be all wrapped around a tree about the word you used, and completely distract from the point you were trying to make.

The tragedy of Rush Limbaugh's inexcusable 'rookie' blunder is that the Sandra Fluke affair is a fiasco-in-waiting for liberals, Democrat candidates, and the Obama Administration.

This is not about Sandra Fluke.

Sandra Fluke exposed (almost) AN ANTI-CATHOLIC ATTACK BY LIBERALS AND DEMOCRATS.

What is being missed in Fluke's testimony is that she is only the spokesperson for a project to attack Catholic Georgetown University -- for being Catholic. Notice what Fluke actually testified:

“We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are here today ..."

“One told us about how ..."

“In 65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated .."

“For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, ..."

“One woman told us doctors ..."

“One woman told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered ..."

This was unmistakably a PROJECT to attack Catholic Georgetown University -- for being Catholic -- by "Law Students for Reproductive Justice" http://lsrj.org/

Sandra Fluke and "Law Students for Reproductive Justice" deliberately set out to attack and smear Catholics and the Catholic Church. This was a deliberate assualt on the religious beliefs of the Catholic Church.

This was the latest battle in the liberals' war on religion. (However, Limbaugh managed to totally obscure the real issues.)

It was also a complete pack of lies.

Perhaps Sandra Fluke will make a very talented liar, er, sorry LAWYER, one day.

Sandra Fluke may prove skilled at convincing juries of things that just aren't true.

But here, she got caught red-handed.

Because her testimony was perjury -- lying under oath -- her fitness to be admitted to the Bar ought to be questioned. The Bar makes a big distinction between dishonesty NOT under oath (not good) and a lawyer committing an actual crime, such as perjury. A candidate for bar admission faces a much higher burden to get admitted the first time.

FAILED ARGUMENT:

The crucial lynchpin of the argument for attacking Georgetown's Catholic religious beliefs is the hypothesis that birth control is too expensive for a student to afford without health insurance paying for it. YET, THAT IS A FLAT-OUT, TOTAL LIE.

Sandra Fluke committed perjury (lying under oath) by claiming that "AS YOU KNOW" birth control costs a student "OVER $3,000" over the three years of law school.

Note: Some have tried to cover for Fluke by changing this to "UP TO." No. She said "OVER $3,000."

To expose this perjury, we need look no farther than Planned Parenthood's own website.

Of course Sandra Fluke did not identify which type of birth control she had in mind. But it doesn't matter:

COSTS: (1) Birth Control pills, every single day (with placebos often in the plan for 2 or 3 days): $15 per month, says Planned Parenthood. $540 over 3 years. (2) the PATCH: $15 per month says Planned Parenthood. $540 over 3 years. (3) IUD: Good for 12 years, $500 to $1000 up-front, says PP. (4) condoms: 40 cents each in economy packages.

Top name brand, Trojan, condoms cost $13.99 in a 36 count economy pack. That's 40 cents a condom. So the only way that a Georgetown student could be spending $3,000 over three years is to have sex 7,500 times over three years. That's 6.84 times a day, every single day, without any days off, for three years.

Could one spend MORE than $15 per month, which Planned Parenthood says is a likely price? Who cares? The discussion is about a student on a limited budget. So we are talking about how little she might spend, not how much she could go on the up side.

It is Sandra Fluke’s claim that a student *MUST* spend “OVER $3,000″ during 3 years. She is claiming that it is NECESSARY (unavoidable) for a woman at Georgetown Law School to spend “OVER $3,000″ a year for birth control.

So, sure -- you could pay more than $15 per month. But we are talking about students who are short on money. So obviously we are talking about students paying the minimum, because they are on a limited budget. The argument is that these students cannot afford birth control, so we have to look at the minimum price, not the premium price you could pay if you don't care about the cost.

But if Georgetown’s students — who are supposed to be studying some of the time — had sex 3 times a week, taking 2 weeks out being with their families for holidays and taking 2 weeks out for exam weeks, that would be 432 times over three years.

COST FOR CONDOMS: $172.80 plus tax over three years. (432 times 40 cents each.)

With contraceptives, there is NO PROBLEM. They are cheap. Easily available. Nothing to worry about. Anyone who wants contraceptives can get them, often FREE.

To buy condoms 5 days a week, every single week without a break, costs only $104 a year if you buy top-brand quality (Trojans) in 36 count economy packs.

But the liberals have a more fatal problem here:

If you are going to lie, never lie about things that the hearer can SEE to be a LIE.

For the next 8 months, women will be buying their birth control pills every single month, if that is their chosen approach. They can SEE that the liberals are lying.

For the next 8 months, voters will walk through the aisles of grocery stores and then can SEE how little condoms cost. They can see that birth control is all over the place. In every grocery store in America, you can see them right there.

So the lie by the Democrats is obvious for all to see. The looming fiasco for liberals is that anyone can see the facts for themselves that the liberals are lying about.

Democrats and free agent liberals are doubling down on THE LIBERAL WAR ON WOMEN:

LIBERALS ARE PUBLICLY ARGUING THAT (liberals instinctively believe) WOMEN VOTERS ARE DUMB. That is, liberals hope and imagine that women voters aren't smart enough to see through the liberal scams and hogwash.

Republicans are betting that women voters are smart. Liberals are desperately hoping they're not. Obama's re-election strategy is to bet everything on the hope that voters are easily-fooled, gullible, and naive. Republican election hopes rest on believing the best about the American people.

So the only way the liberal scam can work is if women voters are really, really dumb.

Republicans treat women as intelligent. Democrats don't.

[heartwood]

let me add “if there are no grounds for that.” Or “if it is irrelevant.”

Tell me, is Fluke a slut?

[saleman]

Hey noob. Welcome to freerepublic.

How exactly does government/insurance paying for contraception take the government out of your uterus?

It looks to me like your statement, or the “10-14 women” you supposedly work with, are about 180 degrees out of phase.

BTW, I pretty sure that’s the first time I’ve every typed or even spelled “uterus”. Thanks a lot.

[Moseley]

She did not say she was having a lot of sex.

There is no justification for Rush's gigantic blunder... BECAUSE RUSH HIMSELF KNOWS BETTER.. Rush could TEACH the principles for why he shouldn't have spoken the way that he did. He knows better. So this is not to defend Rush's mistake.

However, Rush was CORRECT on the theory behind his argument. It is not true that it costs "OVER $3,000" over 3 years for birth control UNLESS a person has having sex 2-3 times a day, paying for condoms at $1 per condom. (Rush assumed $1 each, when you can get them for 40 cents each.)

Sandra Fluke put forward financial numbers on the cost which can only be true if one is having sex 2 to 7 times a day.

So, yes, Sandra Fluke did claim to be having so much sex that she and others are going broke having sex.

While she did not explicitly mention herself, the meaning of her remarks clearly placed herself squarely in the center of the group she was speaking for. After all, her only relevance for being there was that SHE is a Georgetown University law school student, at a Catholic University. Her only reason to be there was to speak about her experiences, as part of the group of Georgetown women.

[machman]

I agree. I love Rush, been listening for 20 years but he really struck out on the Fluke. The only real issue was that some women who need the pill for medical reasons were having problems getting them, therefore we should make a Catholic institution provide them no questions asked and to hell with their religious convictions. Rush should have hit this one out of the park instead he wiffed totally. He didn’t do his homework...

[ohioman]

The real problem is that you work with a bunch of dumb ass women. The women in my life all agree with Rush.

[heartwood]

Let’s say I pay for a doctor’s visit, once annually, to prescribe contraception. $200. Pills on the expensive side, $50 a month, because the generics make me flatulent, or give me migraines, or take away my sex drive. And I use condoms because I’m scared about STDs. Or I really, really don’t want to have a baby in law school and I would never have an abortion, and I’m the kind of math nerd who says 1% x 2% pregnancy chance = 0.02% pregnancy chance.

Hey, I’m up to $1000 a year, and I’m only having sex every other day. Okay, I’m having sex every day, but my boyfriend and I split the cost of the condoms.

(Actually I think Fluke’s numbers and anecdotes were pretty bogus but you could get to “up to $1000 a year” without being insanely far-fetched about it.)

[saleman]

“Okay, I’m having sex every day, but my boyfriend and I split the cost of the condoms”

If anything ever happens to your boyfriend, please let me know. Your don’t happen to like to fish do you?

[heartwood]

No, I don’t fish. I’m a Georgetown lawyer and I eat Icelandic salmon and Chilean sea bass and South African lobster.

Fish. As if.

[jazzlite]

I have been a woman on this earth for many years and the government has never been in control of my uterus. I am not a wealthy person but I have always been able to find very cheap birth control. So, this is not about birth control. This is about a dictatorship which will never stop until it dictates who lives and who dies. The charade going on now is just another small step toward that kind of destruction. The left never tells the truth and the double standard is their workshop. I watched THE VIEW again today just to see how ridiculous Joy Behar would get in defense of her idols and allies and came away wondering about Elizabeth Hassleback. Only God knows where all of this is going. I think people are literally scared for their
livelihoods and, maybe, even their lives.

[Moseley]

Let’s say I pay for a doctor’s visit, once annually, to prescribe contraception. $200. Pills on the expensive side, $50 a month, because the generics make me flatulent, or give me migraines, or take away my sex drive.

But the argument is that students CANNOT AFFORD to pay for birth control, and are going broke having so much sex.

So the question is not how MUCH you can pay, but the MINIMUM amount it would cost you. The argument is that a student CANNOT pay for her own birth control. So the question has to start with the minimum it would cost you, not the maximum.

Planned Parenthood's own website pegs the cost of the pill as starting at $15 per month, and also the patch starting at $15 per month.

So if you don't like the pill, use the patch.

In Washington, DC, no matter what the product or service, there is always someone who will charge you as much as you are willing to pay. You can pay $500 for dinner for two. But you can also cook yourself for $5 for two.

So sure you could always spend more. But would it be necessary? No.

And if a future lawyer cannot figure out how to afford her own birth control, do you want her anywhere near a courtroom?

[saleman]

I can't help you with the Chilean sea bass or the Icelandic salmon but grouper and maybe some nice red snapper would make a good substitute. Florida spiny lobster is the same, I believe, as any old South African lobster. Just sayin...

Shoulda known you were a Georgtown lawyer as much sex as you are having. Bon Apatite

[netmilsmom]

>>Tell me, is Fluke a slut?<<

Understanding that the accepted denotative meaning of slut is “a sexually promiscuous woman” OR “a woman of a low or loose character; a bold or impudent girl; a hussy, jade.” and understanding that she is shilling for the left to misrepresent this entire argument, I’d say yes.

I do not let those who do not work in my best interest define the debate.

[netmilsmom]

No problem, my FRiend.

We only have so much information. Our lives are filled with just trying to make it day to day. When all of the media is telling us that things are “this way”, and we have no one to help us learn the truth, it is very difficult.

That’s why I love FR. I gave it up for Lent because IT’S HARD. When Andrew Breitbart died, I had to come back. Now I’m giving up a few days a week instead.

[roofgoat]

has there been any proof one way or the other regarding if certain BC will be covered by GTown for those women who medically need it and have their Dr’s OK?

[Pan_Yans Wife]

The entire controversy is not about birth control.

It is about abortion and mobilizing the women’s vote for Obama in November.

Birth control is legally and easily available throughout the land. It is not in danger of being made illegal. What is at risk is Obama’s re-election.

It’s just like Clarence Thomas’ appointment to the Supreme Court and the Anita Hill allegations of sexual harassment. That was drama that hid the issue of abortion. Thomas was subjected to a high-tech lynching because of his pro-life beliefs.

The Left will always use abortion to mobilize the masses, stir the talking points in the media and invite testimony on the Hill. But, they don’t always win. Justice Thomas’ seat on the court is proof of that. He’s still there, no matter how much they hate him.

[Sloth]

This was the latest battle in the liberals' war on religion.

That's still too short-sighted. This is not a war on religion, it's a war on freedom. Why should only religious organizations have an exemption? Why should a Catholic owner of a secular business be compelled to provide birth control? Heck, why should an atheist owner of a secular business be compelled to provide birth control?

[WaterWeWaitinFor]

“I wonder how we got the vote.” haa. THAT’s funny. I’ve thought about that many times over the years. I would be front and center fighting to GET the vote. When I was a little girl, my mother always taught us kids that you MUST vote in every primary and every election. Only reason to miss a vote is if you’re in a coma or dead.

So....... I always vote. It’s my right but don’t want to be nulified by some double dipping hack.