The day after First Lady Michelle Obama took the stage, women’s rights advocate Sandra Fluke previewed her own speech to the Democratic National Convention this evening saying she believes the gender gap will continue to favor the President.
“It's still in double digits,” says Fluke. “That support from women is not going anywhere. And I think that's because women realize that we have an agenda to get done in the next four years. You know, the Violence Against Women Act still has not been reauthorized. The Fair Pay Act has not been passed. So our work is not done. That women’s support's not going anywhere.”
The former Georgetown Law student became widely known earlier this year when, after being denied a speaking role in a Congressional hearing on religious liberty and the birth control, talk show host Rush Limbaugh criticized Fluke for her support of healthcare coverage for contraception. Fluke has since become somewhat of a field marshall in President Obama’s fight for women voters.
“What I want to make clear is the choice that we have facing us this November,” Fluke explains. "I think the best way to do that is to really talk about their records, especially their records on issues that matter to women -- on women's health, on equal pay, and on violence against women.
Watch the entire PRESS Pass conversation above to hear more from Sandra Fluke about this generation of young voters, bipartisanship in Washington and the importance of seeing women in office.
Leave a Comment:
Hey David -- you finally start asking tough questions probing someone's position, and it's with Sandra Fluke??? I can't believe how many times you said "that's not quite fair" in this interview. Probably equal to the total for ALL the interviews with elected Republicans this whole election season!
OK, I exaggerated on that last comment, but still. If you're going to hold people's feet to the fire (and I think it's great when journalists do it), would be great if it was consistent. Not to mention that it appeared you were tougher on Ms. Fluke than on people that actually sign up for the role (either through elected office or as paid spokespeople).
From her appearance, I can't imagine she'd ever need contraceptives, much less free contraception.
Wow! Between you and David..... creeps.
We either have heard, or are going to hear,
from Mr. and Mrs. Straight Democrat at the
convention. When are we going to hear from
Mr. and Mrs., or Mr. and Mr., or Mrs. and Mrs.
Gay Democrat at the convention, or whatever
they prefer to be called? Barney Frank is
supposed to be one of the leaders of the
Democratic Congress, yet, to my knowledge,
he and his significant other have never
addressed the Democratic delegates from the
podium, certainly not in Prime Time. Where
is Rosie O'Donell's 15 minutes, or Ellen's?
Are gays like children to the Democrats,
to be seen and not heard? Are gay votes to
be counted by the Democrats, but not their
voices? Are gays good enough for Democrats
to court, but not marry?
I hope you have the same interruptions and clarifications with your republican guests.
I think the owners of vaginas should be responsible for all expenses of their vaginas.
Only if I get some benefit should I have to pay for someone's vagina. In this sense isn't vagina welfare a form of prostitution?
Whitworth your comments are lame. I guess we better make sure insurance companies don't cover ciallis and viagra-right now they do. If women cant get their contraceptives for a copay as protection, then men shouldn't get their copay for ed drugs for erections! All said, David Gregory has had a weak democratic show. He seems afraid to ask tough questions equally of both sides and just insn't up to the job. We have started watching another channel.
Lets face it. David Gregory is basically applying for Chris Wallace's job at FOX. I can only stomach his questioning for 10 minutes on republicans. When they start making common knowledge false statements, does he challenge them, like Ryan on what are the details when he says his plan will save medicare using vouchers or whatever. I stopped wasting my time on his show a year ago. He lets both sides spew talking points. OH for just one journalist like Tim Russert again. That's why I will watch for a little as Romney tunes Gregory up to be his tool for the hour. He probably wont even ask him to clarify why they won't let facts dictate there campaign strategy.
Lets face it. David Gregory is to reporting what FOXNEWS is to news. He allows more republican guests to spew their talking points without challenging them for the truth or details. He is not a reporter and no Tim Russert. I stopped watching him over a year ago because I got tired of waiting for the follow up question to a talking point or outright lie. Gregory is afraid of challenging his republican politician guests for some reason. Maybe he wants to replace Chris Wallace on FOX. Anyway, I'll tune in n Sunday to watch Romney make Gregory his tool for a while. I would bet Gregory doesn't even ask Romney about why he isn't gong to let facts get in the way of his message.
David is obviously auditioning for a job with FOX NEWS. He schedules some pretty decent guests for the RNC and for the DNC, Sandra Fluke? Then he questions her and interupts her and did not ask his republican guests the same types of questions. Like Paul Ryan, tell us how you can reduce medicare to a voucher and not hurt the elderly financially? I too have grown sick of him and MSNBC should find someone else-anyone-for the sake of their show. Tomorrow he has Romney on the program and I bet he asks easy questions, doesn't challege him and allows Ann to say more than once "just trustMitt."
In 2008, the Democratic party committed the most
egregious crime of misogyny in the history of
American politics since women were ever barred from
voting. In 2008 the Democratic Party committed
perhaps the most egregious act of racism in the
history of politics since black people were barred
from voting, when the Democratic Party purposely and
with malice aforethought, struck half of the votes
of two entire states, Florida and Michigan, from the
rolls to be counted, to the specific, racist and
misogynist intent of allowing a black man to beat a
white woman for the Democratic Nomination for
President of the United States.
Four years ago almost to the day, John Lewis, an
elected representative of the Democratic Party, and
Barack Obama stood by, watched, and did absolutely
NOTHING while the entire Democratic Party
discriminated against Hillary Clinton precisely
because she is white and precisely because she is a
woman, to the purpose of aiding and abetting Barack
Obama, precisely because he is black and precisely
because he is a man, in one of the most despicable
and cowardly political acts of discrimination and
misogyny in the history of American politics.
For John Lewis, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and the
Democratic Party to have done THAT to Hillary
Clinton, and then stand there and have the temerity
to call Republicans racist simply for wanting to
ensure that American citizens and only American
citizens elect American representatives to
government; is, again, one of the most cowardly and
despicable acts I have seen in American politics.
That American women still support the Democratic
Party after what they did to Hillary Clinton baffles
me to no end. That any American white people, except
that bufoon Biden, support the Democratic Party
after what they did to Hillary Clinton, yet baffles
me even more. Why would anyone support a party as
openly racist as the Democrats?
Criticized? And you call yourself a legitimate press representative. I don't care that your biased. I don't care if you're just over-compensating.
We should all care when you use words that are untrue and imply something completely different then what is true.
Criticize is not an accurate word in any possible way. Vilify, revile, call her a slut and disparage her completely falsly and repeatedly at the top of his lungs day after day, encourage his listeners to see her and women who want contraception as immoral.
Then to top it all off he tells his listeners that if women want the taxpayer to pay for contraception (hearing had nothing to do with tax payers) then she should make videos so at least the tax payer would get something out of it.
Of course, you know all this. But you are NOT a reporter you are clearly so much less. According to you it was just criticized right. Implying that any tiny bit of what he said had any justification. No, you don't report; you are advertising.