Skip to comments.Under Sandra Fluke's Logic, Secret Service Agents' Condoms Should Be Reimbursable
Posted on 04/22/2012 5:54:59 PM PDT by AmericanInTokyo
Ms. Sandra Fluke is attached to an organization with high moral values, that places an emphasis on ethics, honesty and integrity. There is in fact not only a student code at Georgetown University, there also an ETHOS CODE , and there is also the history, tradition and mission statement of the Catholic university guiding certain behaviors (both on and off campus as stated and each student is to be aware of this).
It is this very essence and aspect of core institutional values which "15-Minutes-of-Fame Sandra" very publicly whined about, mocked and assailed on national TV and also asserted that the US Government (and by extension, you and I out of our pockebooks and purses) should pick up the cost to facilitate her and others' pecadilloes and daliances...all at the cost of the taxpayer.
It is reported some of the agents made a stop to the store for "condoms" after they had selected their Colombiana partner for the night. Which begs the question and maybe Ms. Sandra Fluke of Georgetown Law School can weigh in.
If any of these men kept a receipt for the purchase of such "ahem!", items, should they not be able to then submit them in their expense report and demand reimbursement by the US government or the insurance agenc they are covered by as US employees?
After all, the items were needed for not only their peace of mind but protection, just the same as the federally funded insurance covered condoms insisted by Ms. Fluke when she spoke as a member of a traditional, moral academic organization.
Now if she says yes, would not that be something? But if she says no, then she is a hypocrite. Is she not a sexist (and also discriminating based on "sexual orientation", also against the Georgetown ethos, because the agents reportedly had a sexual orientation propensity, at least at that time, to have sexual relations as part of a business deal rather than anything romantic)? She is saying she can have such items funded because she is female (even if such items go against the moral foundation of the institution), but the others cannot have them funded because they are male? I don't get it. Which way is it, Miss FLUKE!!?? Shouldn't these men turn the receipts for contraceptives in to the US Government for reimbursement, if they wished to?
So, slut was the right word after all.
Truly I would like to hear them, the know-it-all- libs, address this proposition.
Secretary of State “Tools of the Trade”!
Why do we hold the security detail to higher standards than those displayed by a former client (William Jefferson Clinton)?
That is another excellent angle yes, R_A_R_H. As they say “s>>>” rolls down hill. These guys are expendible in the eyes of the Powers that Be. I also find Hillary Clinton’s clear public “fraternization” in Cartagena with female deputies (subordinates) as being highly questionable, and might be some violation of State Department policy somewhere.
I just blasted off a link to this to my email list as a “must read.”
Don’t look for Sandra Fluke to weigh in on the Secret Service controversy. She is too busy dumpster diving for trojans between classes right now.Poor thing.
I agree with your message, but you might want to clean it up before offering it up as some type of "viral" message!
Boy, you ain’t kidding. Too late now......oh well, that will give it a “signature” at least! ;-)
HaHA! Sandra Fluke. The Gift to Conservatives; The Gift that keeps on Giving.
Thank YOU! Sorry for the various typos. It was a rushed job. Speaking of Rush (or Glen or Mark for that matter) I would love for one of them to parody this angle on Monday.....
Yup, Sandra gives new meaning to the term Rubbermaid.
Looked ok to me
There MUST be a “Sandra Fluke Joke” website somewhere. If not, you are tempting me to start one. Of all the deserving libs to get one, Sandra.....
The FR Spell checker would have caught two out of three.
No need to haggle with Hooker’s. Its free under Obamacare. No co -pay either.
Nah. That would be “men’s rights.” Can’t be havin’ any of that around Sandra.
The Al Gore-m Doctrine?
"There is no controlling legal authority that says this was in violation of law."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.