Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Fluke is in

Fluke is in

Files paperwork to run for Congress

http://youtu.be/xlRC0nsjtKQ

Sandra Fluke — yes, that Sandra Fluke — is running for Congress for the seat being vacated by Henry Waxman:

Women’s rights activist Sandra Fluke appears to be moving forward with a run for Congress.

Fluke has filed with the California state Democratic Party to seek its endorsement in the race for retiring Rep. Henry Waxman’s (D-Calif.) seat, according to the state party Web site.

A state party delegate confirmed to Post Politics that Fluke has filed and paid the fee to appear on the ballot this weekend.

The filing preserves her ability to run, but whether she mounts a vigorous campaign remains to be seen. If she can raise the money, and she should be able to, I see no reason she would not run.

Fluke is the perfect congressional candidate. An obsessive whiner and professional victim who expects government to subsidize everyday expenses, and who is willing to grossly exaggerate to make a political point.

Should be fun.

Bonus question: Could she be any worse than Waxman?

Update 2-5-2014: Fluke was in, now she’s out, but partially in again

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I’m conflicted on this. Loathe her. Yet, definitely “fun.” Worse than Waxman: Fluke will not have any seniority. She comes carpet bagging and that will annoy some of those who feel more entitled. Certainly has delusions of grandeur.

Make Congress even more Fluked up…???

In that district, lil’ Sandy is probably too moderate, and too much a rugged individualist.

    Musson in reply to Ragspierre. | February 4, 2014 at 4:08 pm

    If she wins would it be a fluke?

    My immediate reaction, too. Difficult to believe the legislative branch could get any worse, but then, it’s a reflection of the voters. And the fact that she considers herself someone with something to contribute is a reflection of our society and culture.

    Disgraceful

Oh good another moron, who has never done anything in the private sector and needs gov to be a daddy, is running for public office. She isn’t qualified to pick up after herself so a gov job is the last thing she should have.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | February 4, 2014 at 1:52 pm

Unfortunately, it’s partly our side’s fault. Rush’s criticism of her led to the firestorm that enabled the media to turn her into a national victim with considerable name recognition.

    Oh, please! Rush’s fault? You must be a troll.

      Googling “MaggotAtBroadAndWall site:legalinsurrection.com” yields about 2030 hits; googling “rocketmax site:legalinsurrection.com” yields about 39. Who’s trolling?

      I’ve posted it before and I’m repeating it: until major conservative bloggers cultivate comment sections that do not send undecided voters running away screaming, the conservative blogosphere will remain self-limiting.

      IMHO the quality of the comments contributed to WaPo’s decision to acquire the Volokh blog.

        Ragspierre in reply to gs. | February 4, 2014 at 4:51 pm

        I don’t know why, but that made me laugh out loud.

        caseym54 in reply to gs. | February 4, 2014 at 8:24 pm

        As opposed to what, the comments on the Daily Kos or DU, or for that matter the WaPo or NY Times?

          The utopian liberal message is superficially more appealing than the conservative message of sober realism. The Left controls most of the media, the educations system, and popular culture.

          The playing field is not level. The playing field is not level. The playing field is not level.

          Unless conservatives accept that as a baseline, they make their already difficult challenges even harder.

    Nothing with the Democrats happens without planning. Fluke was a complete no name who was invited to the Democratic National Convention to speak during the evening while being broadcast by one of the big three letter networks.
    Reminds me of a no name US Senator that was invited to give the keynote address at the Democratic Convention. His qualifications? He was black(clean and articulate according to Joe Biden), a lawyer, and it was a good initial test run to see if he could be nationally known
    Fluke’s qualifications? She’s a younger woman, somewhat attractive, and a lawyer. It was a good test case, that became a REALLY good test case when Rush made her as visible and remembered as Obama was.
    So, why is it surprising that she is running for the House? She’ll have time to vote present half a dozen times once she is elected before she railroads Hilary Clinton off the stage at the primaries and becomes our next Democratic presidential candidate.

      stevewhitemd in reply to Uh Huh. | February 4, 2014 at 5:49 pm

      I think that’s right. The Democrats work very hard on cultivating a deep, deep bench of activists. Some of them flame out, some of them lose interest, some of them are so goofy that the leadership abandons them, but some of them, cultivated for a long, long time, pay off. A few pay off big.

      Barack Obama: a nobody. But some folks took an interest in him (either in his early Chicago days or even before when he was at Columbia) and started grooming him. The Chicago machine helped as did the Ayers/Chicago radical machine. Obama got press time, information, tips, appointments to various boards, a shot at state senator, and so on. Did anyone think back in the early 90s that he was going to be president? No, not really, but they cultivated him.

      Elizabeth Warren: a nobody, graduate of a lower tier law school, a dense and pedantic lawyer and policy advocate. But she was groomed, aided, given jobs, given opportunities, and boom — now she’s Senator Pedantic.

      I could go on an on. You start looking for this pattern and you’ll see it at all levels of the Democratic party and machine. It’s one of the things the Open Society, foundation, NGO folks do best — find and groom people who can then be put into elected office or political appointed office. Who then do as they’re, er, asked, to do.

      Sandra Fluke is a nobody. Yet she got the scratch somehow to go to Georgetown Law. Follow her career to date and you’ll see the same guiding hands grooming her. She’s been a feminist, an ‘activist’ (gosh, a community organizer! they always seem to hang around and do well), and all-round busybody. Maybe she’ll pan out as a carpetbagging congress-critter, but if she doesn’t don’t worry, she’ll be back in some other role. She’ll be prepped and prepared until the day comes when she cashes in, or does something spectacularly stupid and thus is of no use anymore.

      Look for the pattern in these progressive apparatchiks. The nomenklatura has been grooming them.

        Bravo.

        Uncle Samuel in reply to stevewhitemd. | February 5, 2014 at 8:53 am

        These leftists groups work very hard to promote their Perpetual Victimhood:
        1. Womyn
        2. Blacks – since slavery, never mind it’s been over a hundred years
        3. Islamists – since the Crusades, colonization – never mind the human rights abuses (including slavery), misery, hate, racism, misogyny and all other evil (drug, sex, porn trafficking) inflicted by Islam from its inception to this very day.
        4. Native Americans – have had a hundred years and lots of help enabling them to pick up the pieces and move on.
        5. Alleged ‘Palestinians’ – these are really the invaders of Israel since 1922 gave 70% of the Jewish homeland and most of the rest of the Middle East to the Arabs:
        http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_wXDx9TVRBL8/SXIBq78o7gI/AAAAAAAAAuo/RgfAp6q4mXc/s400/IsraelMapReduction1922-mandate_for_palestine.jpg
        6. Illegals – 59% of illegals invading this country have criminal records (not related to immigration) here or in their own country.

    But name recognition for what? Whining that her neighbor should be forced to pay for her birth control so she can have an active sex life while attending school?

    I’m not sure who that’s going to resonate with….other than the other Flukes and I wonder if there’s enough of them in Waxman’s district to put her in office.

      A_Nonny_Mouse in reply to Sanddog. | February 4, 2014 at 7:24 pm

      That’s what turned me off this ditzy broad in the first place. I mean, GET REAL!

      Sandra, dear – If you’re mature enough to engage in activities that might get you pregnant, you should most CERTAINLY be mature enough to go buy a packet of condoms at the local grocery store or pharmacy to “be prepared”.

      If you can’t bother to do THAT LITTLE BIT in your own self-interest, why on earth would you expect anybody to vote you into *ANY* position of responsibility? You’ve proved you’re a (oops – “Rush-word” shall we say), AND lazy, AND too cheap to spend money on your own “recreational activities”, AND you feel “entitled” to everybody ELSE’s money for said “activities”. (But don’t let that stop you from running for office, toots. They’re all whores anymore, dont’cha know; you’ll fit right in.)

legalizehazing | February 4, 2014 at 2:06 pm

I am so sad this is real. 33rd district is LA I think… I’m pretty sure if you’re going to flip Hispanics this is how. lol

    There are nearly no Hispanics in this district. The 33rd runs from the People’s Republic of Santa Monica down the coast to Pelos Verdes, darting inland at the top to pick up Beverly Hills. Pretty much entirely million dollar homes.

    It is also not a slam dunk for Democrats. A weak Dem can lose to a solid (albeit socially liberal) Republican. Waxman won last time by only 10%.

Henry Hawkins | February 4, 2014 at 2:15 pm

If a House member represents a constituency anymore, she’d be a good match for many in her district. This suggests problems in CA. Heh.

OBAMA: I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.

FLUKE: I’ve got a vagina and I’ve got a pill.

The district, which is the next one over from mine, is a LOT closer to even than you might think after the 2010 redistricting. In 2012, Waxman won 55-45 against an independent, and had two challengers already this time. A moderate (read: not a SoCon) Republican could win this seat.

Note that California elections are now jungle primaries where the top top vote-getters regardless of party advance to the general election. So, I welcome as many weakish Dems as possible to divide the vote. Marianne Williamson is already in.

Fluke vs Flake.

*top two

Also declaring is Democrat Wendy Gruel, the losing candidate in the recent LA mayoral run-off.

No Republican yet, but there is a popular former mayor from Redondo Beach (Mike Gin) who could run. He’s gay so the SoCon thing is a non-starter.

NC Mountain Girl | February 4, 2014 at 2:50 pm

How many other names will be on the ballot? California’s open election system means that when a long time incumbent hangs up his cleats there will be a huge number of candidates. It also means the ultimate winner will in all likelihood face a fellow Democrat in the general election because the top two vote getters face off regardless of party affiliation.

    Not necessarily. If 10 Democrats and two Republicans run in a 60-40 Dem district, the result could easily be the 2 Republicans alone on the general election ballot.

    I was involved in a election in the old standard system (running as a Libertarian), for an open seat where there were 6 Democrats running for the Dem nomination (and presumptive election). The winning Dem had 19% of the vote. There are situations where 19% doesn’t get you on the final ballot.

    So far announced for the Waxman seat are 3 Democrats with distinct followers (NewAge author Marianne Williamson, Sandra Fluke and moderate Democrat Wendy Greuel, the former LA city controller and city councilwoman). Also running is Indie director/web producer Brent Roske as an indpendent.

    Roske and Williamson entered the race before Waxman dropped out.

    The first filing deadline is Feb 20 (petitions in lieu), but candidates may file as late as March 12 since Waxman isn’t fining.

A superficial Web search (which is all the time I have for La Fluke) indicates that her fiance, whose father is a big-time Democrat lawyer, has ambitions to direct/produce films. I take that to mean that Fluke would as willing a Hollywood sockpuppet as Waxman was. She might be the insiders’ choice; she seems to fit the political class’s mixture of incompetence wrt the general welfare, holier-than-thou hypocrisy, and special-interest cronyism.

    caseym54 in reply to gs. | February 4, 2014 at 8:16 pm

    There is already a Hollywood director/producer in the race as an independent. No stated positions other than SocLib.

This babe goes through $3K worth of birth control a year… she ain’t kissing babies!

FLUKING A! You run girl! Then you’ll get all the free condoms you can ever use.

She always looks to me like she just got a bucket of water dumped over her head, or maybe it is oil. Maybe we could subsidize her hair care expenses too.

Could she be any worse than Waxman?
I would have happily traded my Congresswoman for Waxman, so yes, some things could be worse. Through no fault of my own, I am “represented” by Maxine Waters.

I hear that FLuke was undecided until she found out how many MEN were in Congress.

At least she’s consistent. She wanted the people’s dime to pay for her contraceptives. Now she wants the people’s dime to pay her a wage.

Waxman and Miller are two of the worst ever. Both were worse than even Alan Grayson or Sheila Jackson Lee because they wielded more influence.

Fluke couldn’t be worse, but she is pretty clearly a flake. Her unscripted appearances after her phony “testimony” were unworthy of a mature high school senior. All she brings is an astounding level of vacuity.

I’ve heard there is a self-funded Republican in the district who ran against Waxman before. With four or five Democrats in the open primary, he could at least make the fall ballot if he is willing to spend the money.

TrooperJohnSmith | February 5, 2014 at 2:24 am

If her Congressional testimony was accurate, she’s likely to miss a lot of important votes and legislative days due to her active sex life.

Imagine that, a member of Congress fu*king themselves stupid(er).

Can’t wait for her campaign slogans…since her name rhymes with the activity so dear to leftist hearts.

The imagined/perceived civil right to F*** (any time any way they want to without consequence or cost) is the reason the leftists demand free contraception, free abortion, free sex change surgery, free STD treatment.

HIV treatment costs $600,000. over the lifetime of one individual. who knows how much sex change surgery and hormones cost.
Some STDs are incurable (HIV, Herpes, Hepatitis, HPV, new strains of gonorrhea).

LBGT are correlated with much highest incidence of STDs, pelvic/anal injuries, suicides, addictions, violence, personality and mood disorders.

These deviant lifestyles are expensive and dangerous.

Signed, Proudly Homophobic.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend