Sandra Fluke nominated for “Person of the Year” by TIME. Anguish erupts from REAL America.

Picture of Sandra Fluke at a congressional hearing.TIME Magazine has announced Sandra Fluke, the advocate for contraception being covered as part of health insurance, as one of their finalists for person of the year.

Time has nominated the new face of birth control as their “Person of the Year 2012.”

Sandra Fluke — the recently graduated 31-year-old Georgetown law student who rose to prominence this year after she advocated for free-birth control before Congress and radio host Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut” — is now one of 40 nominations for Time Magazine’s annual honor.

Fluke and Limbaugh became part of the story line in the so-called Republican “war on women” and she went on to become a Barack Obama campaign surrogate.

The newly minted lawyer secured a Democratic National Convention speaking slot, and spent much of the campaign discussing issues that assisted in Obama’s significant margin of victory among single women voters.

Kudos to her.  I love seeing the daughter of a pastor even out the familial effect on the culture war.

The people over at Breitbart who, rather than try to defeat Fluke on the merit of her arguments, did their damndest to paint Fluke as an honorless slut, are not happy.

Fluke, of course, is the condom rights advocate turned Georgetown Law School martyr who testified before Congress about the hardships encountered by young female law school students who couldn’t afford to pay for their own birth control pills. Rush Limbaugh ripped her, prompting faux outcry from the left, all the way up to President Obama, who seized on the incident as proof that the right was waging some sort of war on women, as opposed to a battle against pathetic dependency on government. Obama called her personally, then used her as a campaign surrogate.

Leave it to Time to make her its Person of the Year. Of course, in the year of the dependent American voter, they might be right.

It must be hard to weave this “we’re the voice of REAL America” story when the majority of the country voted against you and admires your enemies.

Breitbart isn’t the only one.  Conservative voices all over are flabbergasted.  Yet, every year, their outrage begins to more and more resemble a feeble, distant whimper as a younger generation, uncontaminated by the social standards of old, begin to grasp the societal rubric firmly, with both hands, and claim it as their own.

The Breitbart folks have already begun skewing the public vote for Fluke on TIME’s website.  How about you guys go adjust it in her favor (and share it around so your friends can do likewise)?

  • Amyc

    I’m glad I can vote for more than one. There are a lot of worthy people on that list. Something the right seems to have forgotten is that “Person of the Year” is not necessarily a reward for being awesome. All it means is that person influenced the news that year (they even add “for better or worse”).

  • Makoto

    Yikes, the current ratio is going to be hard to overcome. 23% for as of this comment.

  • John Horstman

    Hrm, I wonder if it’s an intentional move on Brietbart.com’s part to hire writers who have only a tenuous grasp of the English language. To wit: “condom rights advocate” – um, condoms are legal and extraordinarily available, so we don’t really need advocates for the right to buy them, and condoms themselves don’t have rights, as they are not people, much like corporations; “Georgetown Law School martyr” – yeah, she’s not dead, and in no way has she been even metaphorically sacrificed; “prompting faux outcry from the left” – the outcry wasn’t false, moron, it definitely existed (for contrast, see any FOX ‘News’ segment in which they assert that “people are saying”, when “people” means “FOX ‘News’ pundits and no one else”); “all the way up to President Obama, who seized on the incident as proof that the right was waging some sort of war on women” – I realize the memory/historical awareness of the average conservative doesn’t extend more than 2 years, but “war on women” isn’t Obama’s phrase – it’s decades old; “as opposed to a battle against pathetic dependency on government” – those are not mutually exclusive, and this characterization is at best disingenuous, considering that you, dear author, would last about fourteen seconds without the protection a a massive state legal/security infrastructure given what an asshole you are; finally, “in the year of the dependent American voter” – if anything, lower unemployment means that the ‘American voter’ is less ‘dependent’ than other years, like 2010. I actually wouldn’t be surprised to find out that a lot of these screeds are written by computer programs cramming Conservaspeak memes together.

    • http://twitter.com/V2Blast V2Blast

      Thanks for taking that apart phrase by phrase.

  • John Horstman

    The weird bit is that Kim Jong Un is leading by a ton – second in total votes, and first in “definitely” percentage. Has he been making some serious plays on the world stage of which I’m not at all aware?

    • http://twitter.com/V2Blast V2Blast

      Yeah… I suspect that’s the work of the North Korean government. I mean, voting “definitely” doesn’t mean agreeing with him, but he hasn’t really been super-influential or done anything dramatically interesting in the past year.

      • Taneth

        It is actually the doing of 4chan, much like they promoted Moot the one year.

  • smrnda

    I get riled up against tirades against ‘government dependence’ since, even in the imagination of conservatives, 99% of human beings are just sucking off the superhuman powers of the top 1% who do all the real work. Nobody is self sufficient. When conservatives all produce every single item they consume they can lecture people about dependence.

    Women are taxpayers, they have a right to expect something for the money they pay. Women are workers without whom their employers could not function, so their employers shouldn’t be pretending that health care coverage is charity – no, it’s a little bit of what you really owe the people who work for you.

    Rush Limbaugh engaged in childish name-calling and treated contraceptive access as if it were a trivial concern (unlike real, serious manly concerns like blowing shit up and giving rich white men tax breaks) which just shows that the right does not care about women, except those who are proper stay home wives who only come into the public sphere to be paid massive salaries to talk about how women shouldn’t be in the public sphere to begin with.

    • RuQu

      In 2011, Walmart had a profit of $15.4 billion dollars.

      The state of CA in 2011 paid out $86 million in welfare subsidies to Walmart employees.

      These social safety net programs exist because workers are not paid enough to live on. The welfare paid to Walmart workers is an indirect subsidy of Walmart by the taxpayers. Clearly, with a profit of $15.4 billion, Walmart has the capacity to pay their employees more, or cover the cost of their welfare checks, and remain in business.

      It looks to me like it is the corporate shareholders who are dependent on government subsidies.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X