Thursday, March 22, 2012
Sandra Fluke admits she doesn’t know what birth control costs
A perfect ending to an iconic tale of political manipulation.
by John Hayward
CNS News caught up with leftist agitator and media darling Sandra Fluke, fresh off her appearance in a Capitol Hill forum, and asked her a very important question:
On Tuesday, Fluke spoke at an event at the U.S. Capitol in celebration of women’s history month. After the event, CNSNews.com asked Fluke: “Were you aware of the Target store that’s 3 miles from Georgetown Law that sells a month’s supply of birth control pills for $9 a month without insurance coverage? Were you aware of that?”
Fluke said: “So, I’m not familiar with specific department store policies. I know that some generic forms of contraception are less expensive than others and that that has been widely reported. But what has not been widely reported is that many women cannot use those forms of contraception.”
Let that sink in for a minute. This is a professional liberal activist masquerading as a college student, who signed up at Georgetown University for the sole purpose of using compulsive force to make Catholics purchase other people’s birth control, in defiance of their religious rights. The Democrat Party tried to slip her into a Congressional hearing as a last-minute, un-vetted substitution. When that didn’t work, they held a phony pseudo-hearing photo-op, at which Fluke testified that the co-eds of Georgetown were going broke because they had to pay a thousand dollars a year for contraceptives. This dire financial need was supposed to trump the religious and economic liberty of her targets.
And she just admitted, in public, on the record, that she has no idea what she’s talking about. She doesn’t know what contraceptives cost at Target. She presumes the power to change the lives of everyone in the country, but she couldn’t be bothered to pop into a drugstore and ask a simple question, or do ten minutes of online research.
So how she come up with the ridiculous figure that made her famous, a thousand percent higher than the true cost of contraceptives? She claims it’s because one person told her so, and she believed them without question:
“Women have different types of medical needs that require much more expensive forms,” she said. “One woman contacted me. She was very, very upset that that quote was being emphasized because she has a genetic condition that requires her to use contraception that costs $1,500.”
“So, this is medicine,” said Fluke. “It’s not one-size-fits-all, and while it’s great that some women can access more affordable contraception, contraception needs to be accessible and affordable for all of the women who need all of the different kinds.”
So there you have it. This woman is a total and complete fraud, and so is everyone trying to use her for their political advantage. It was never about Georgetown’s co-eds marching to the poor house en masse, hanging their heads and sobbing as they clutched thousand-dollar invoices for contraception they could never pay, as a result of impulses they could never hope to control. One person told Fluke she had to spend $1500 on some form of radically different treatment due to a genetic condition.
Fluke, by the way, was at that Capitol Hill forum to advocate her brand of feminist totalitarian politics, as reported by the Daily Caller:
Fluke, an advocate for the Obama administration’s plan to force health insurers to cover birth control, was on Capitol Hill for a forum on “Opportunities and Challenges for a New Generation of Women,” in celebration of Women’s History Month.
“There should be a litmus test that they be pro-women so our votes have to include that requirement at least,” Fluke said. “And it should be a litmus test that applies to male candidates as well.”
She also spoke about the possibility of running for office in the future:
“Numerous American women have actually written to me in the last few weeks saying that I should run for office, and maybe someday I will.”
A con artist who demands limitless power over others, and thinks that requiring people to pay for their own goods is equivalent to “denying access” to those goods? She’d be a perfect fit for the Democrat Party. The future belongs to the gullible, and those who know how to manipulate them.
To read another article by John Hayward, click here.
Posted by Brett at 12:49 PM