When is a Fluke a Flake?

Posted on March 3, 2012


Doesn’t this picture of a Whale’s Fluke, look curiously reminiscent of a I.U.D.?  I’m just saying.

One of the definitions of the noun Fluke, in Webster’s dictionary is an accident or chance happening.  Certain people are the result of an accident, or chance happening. Such progeny are pejoratively referred to in conversations among liberals as ‘unwanted pregnancies’ or un-Planned Parenthood.   From that standpoint, Sandra Fluke is an accident or chance happening.  If her mommy had been as committed to ‘increased access to contraception’ as she is – Sandra would not exist at this moment.

One thing we should all remember about the ‘increased access’ drone is the nuance of Feminist sexual politics that lurks beneath it.  Feminists believe that contraceptives and abortions are a useful tactic in the battle for equality.  If men, by nature, are able to pursue a lifestyle of promiscuity without (seemingly) any consequences – then women are not equal with men until they are, with the aid of science – equipped to do the same.  This is the politics behind the feminist advancement of libertine moral behavior.

Rush Limbaugh, as is well known at this point – has got his tail (fluke) in a crack this week, because he summed up the political activist, Sandra Fluke, at Georgetown U. in precisely the way that she would have been viewed by the mainstream of society not too many decades ago.

Sandra is the campus President of ‘Students for Reproductive Justice’.  Whaaaa?  ‘Reproductive Justice’?  What Left wing Utopian think tank invented that descriptive phrase?  If you want to speak the same language as a partisan of the mentally disturbed progressive movement, mix in the term ‘justice’ frequently in context with virtually anything or any topic.

Part of me thinks that Rush derives enjoyment from baiting the Left and the Code Pink / Reproductive Rights Uber Alles groups.  What he should understand – and I’m certain he does, but just forgets in certain moments, is that statistically insignificant, but shrill and well organized special interest liberal advocacy groups can hound advertisers and scare the pants off of them.  In other words, the corporations that are not already engaged in a frontal assault on American values – are a bunch of weak kneed Nancys.  They are afraid of their own shadow and the leftist activists know it and exploit it.  I recently cited Pat Buchanan as an example of this as well.

One neglected aspect of this current debate about whether religious based organizations should be mandated to provide ‘access’ to birth control pills is the fact that there has been established a clear link between contraceptives and the increased risk of breast cancer.  Last summer, in a study of more than 50,000 African-American women, Boston University epidemiologist Lynn Rosenberg found a 65 percent increase in a particularly aggressive form of breast cancer among those who had ever taken the birth-control pill. The risk doubles for those who had used the contraceptive within the past five years and had taken it for longer than 10 years.

How ironic.  The Susan G. Komen foundation attempts to disassociate itself from Planned Parenthood, the largest single dispenser of contraceptives and abortions and the progressive Left erupts in fury and bullies them back into the relationship.  I thought that liberals were concerned about women’s health.  Looks like they are much less concerned about the increased risk of breast cancer, than they are about their feminist political agenda being undermined.

Another side of this that strikes me as obvious is that when the Left talks about ‘access’, they are really speaking in code.  Access, in their vernacular, quite simply means Government sponsorship or an authoritarian edict.

I would imagine that there are a lot of services that healthplan subscribers would like to see warranted.  How about the person that needs ‘access’ to plastic surgery to increase their confidence and self-esteem?  Bigger boobs anyone?  I’d suggest Viagra for prison inmates, but the New York State Medicare authorities have already been there and done that.  I’m all for making ‘Medical Marijuana’ available to those who wish to use it to alleviate pain, but why stop there?  Why not require insurers to pay for it for any patient that requests it?

Maybe I’m tired of living and I’d like to have someone else cover the costs of providing euthanasia services.  Hey, if ending life before it begins is worthy of entitlement – why not sponsor terminating lives that already exist?  I like to eat like a pig but I’m not too fond of the big gut I have.  Why can’t someone be forced to subsidize the laporascopic adjustable gastric band? Perhaps I’ve decided that I’d be happier as a man than as a woman or vice versa – oh, wait, the San FranFreeko Board of Stupidvisors has already passed a law forcing employers to cover that.  Never mind.

I’m sure you can think of many other examples of how healthcare insurers unfairly limit ‘access’ to any number of critically important personal desires.  Translated – if I have to pay out of my own pocket for it, I’m not being afforded ‘access’.

While I’m sorry that Rush had to wind up apologizing to these idiots that take everything he says and make a federal case out of it – I understand the reasons that he did so.  Despite the fact that I don’t completely agree with anyone all the time including El Rushbo – he is an indispensable daily dispenser of truth that we can ill afford to lose.  The Orwellian thought Nazis would like nothing more than to be rid of such a contrarian voice that impedes the furtherance of their utopian elite plans for society.  They are truly the Blasted Fools that I stand to oppose for the sake of  unrestricted ‘access’ to free speech.

Posted in: Useless Idiots