The Case Against Having Sex with Sandra Fluke
The case is simply this photo. This is not an attractive woman.
But here Sandra Fluke is telling Congress that she’s having so much sex that she’s going broke buying contraceptives.
So she thinks taxpayers should buy all her contraceptives so she can have as much sex as she wants without worrying about money.
Hey, let’s add this to our Bill of Rights: The right to have taxpayers buy all your contraceptives.
What an embarrassing display . . . that now lives in Google forever. Decades from now her children, grandchildren, friends and professional associates will be reading about this with raised eyebrows.
She might need to change her name if she wants to move forward professionally outside the sex industry after this performance.
BACKGROUND: At the invitation of Nancy Pelosi, Sandra Fluke explained to Congress the other day that she is having so much sex, she’s spending so much time on her back, that she’s going broke paying for all the contraceptives she needs.
So she wants taxpayers to pay for all her contraceptives. She calls herself a “reproductive rights activist.” Fluke’s parents must be so proud.
Can you believe President Obama actually wasted the people’s time to phone this bimbo personally to express his solidarity with her cause? — which, apparently, is to have as much sex as humanly possible at taxpayer expense.
Another reason no sane man would ever want to have sex with Sandra Fluke is that it would be a very dangerous activity. With all the sex she told Congress she’s having (with who knows how many different partners?), one can only imagine all the STDs that must be lurking in there: a real Little Shop of Horrors. Crocodile wrestling is probably safer.
Rush is now catching heat for calling this woman a prostitute.
She is demanding money for sex. Isn’t that pretty close to the definition of prostitute?
Rush is also right that if taxpayers must pay for her to spend her days having endless recreational sex, taxpayers should get something in return, like videos of all her sexual romps. Perhaps she could even treat us to a 24-7-365 reality Internet TV show of her life (sort of like The Truman Show), or something.
Here’s what Rush Limbaugh had to say about this . . .
Facebook comments:
2 Responses to “The Case Against Having Sex with Sandra Fluke”
If you want to be clever, maybe you should not just regurgitate the false spin that Limbaugh, longstanding embarassment to Conservatism, put on this nonsense. Try reading the transcript of the testimony and making fun of what was actually said. (She did not talk about her sex life, nor ask for taxpayer money, FYI.)
The real issue is why a Jesuit run institution gets any taxpayer money: the Roman Catholic Church has plenty of money without getting any from you or me.
And saying a woman is ugly isn’t especially clever. You wouldn’t want to have sex with her? Fine, no one’s making you. I’m sure there are plenty of people who haven’t wanted to have sex with you, even after you gave them the opportunity – does that make you a bad person? And is Limbaugh a paragon of handsomeness? (Word is still out on whether his Viagra was paid for by health insurance or not – he may have picked it up without a prescription while doing…uh, whatever he was doing in the Dominican Republic, doubtless unrelated to the huge sex industry there. He’s probably just a fan of Caribe cuisine and prefers the Dominican beaches to those closer to home.)
Amen, Gertz! Thank you for pointing out the obvious flaws of this article. I truly enjoyed the way you pretended to quote her without using any quotation marks, but hey I’m sure most of your readers fall for that kind of stuff everyday. In fact, I was led here by a woman who sited this article insisting the Miss Fluke went on record saying she has “so much sex”.
Karma is not very nice to liars, you know.