Sandra Who?

I wonder if Sandra Fluke is really happy. And yes, Rush Limbaugh was originally correct. She wants someone else – the tax payer, the Church, insurance companies, whoever – to pay for her to have consequence-less sex. That’s a whore by any sane definition, and like most whores in history, she ends up without notice, indeed, without even the notoriety that her sexual promiscuity should result it. Thus does history bury the immoral. I hope she repents. I hope her boy friends repent. I hope that we all repent. I am not guiltless of sexual sin in my past, and I doubt most people are.

She is the Cindy Sheehan of this election cycle: she’s been used by the Democrats,
and then discarded like a soiled kleenex.

It seems Ms. Fluke is no stranger to that chain of events.

It’s too bad that Limbaugh went overboard in his rhetoric about Fluke. His name-calling and subsequent apology overshadowed the fact about how clownish she and attention-seekers like her really are. It inflated her significance as a public person much like Monica Lewinsky. Both these women were suckered in to their bathetic roles. Only I have a feeling that, unlike Monica, Sandra will end up teaching at a university someday. Sort of like Anita Hill.

It inflated her significance as a public person much like Monica Lewinsky. Both these women were suckered in to their bathetic roles. Only I have a feeling that, unlike Monica, Sandra will end up teaching at a university someday. Sort of like Anita Hill.

1. Lewinsky was (and one hopes no longer is) notable for her superficiality, comprehensive absence of discipline and discretion (sworn to secrecy she only told 11 people), and loose morals (in part a product of her mother’s inane interests and silly rearing). She never sought public attention in the first instance. She is not all that obtrusive now.

2. Anita Hill has to know at some level that her academic career is a sham and an example of the collegiate apparatchiki’s racial patronage mill at work. She is 56. She cannot really fix her life at this point. (That a woman who has no background in quantitative social research was willing to seek out and accept a salary as a professor of ‘public policy’ is a piece of evidence that should retrospectively call into question her integrity).

3. Sandra Fluke was not suckered. She sought out confrontation and attention. Someone who ponied up for Cornell University’s pricy lessons and then squandered it earning a degree in ‘women’s studies’ is not the most sagacious of individuals. It has been in for a dime, in for a dollar for her ever since. We can all hope, however, that she shuts her mouth and finds a serious vocation.