Well, this law has my vote.
Can you believe this shit?
beyondtheveil posted on Oct 18, 2009
| views: 239
Comments
-
Hegemone said on Oct 18, 2009....
I'll have to come back later to check it out ... but just from what you say, I'm a little in shock already. -
husbandhater said on Oct 18, 2009....
Wow who knew that a former comic/actor had it right in the common sense department and the political idiots who we pay and have made a career of politics are so stupid that they lack it to have voted nay on this bill. This bill would had both of my hands up for it.Republicans suck and I hope to God that none of the 60 who voted nay on this bill ever has a child that opts to work for one of these companies and goes oversees to work and help others just to be raped and told that what occurred is not important enough to be heard or prosecuted. God how did we end up with such losers running the show? God people watch and protect your children b/c our government won't. -
gingersoul said on Oct 18, 2009....
BeyBey.......i worked for Halliburton many years ago...one of the first temp job i had after moving in US...
So....if i would have been hired full time i would have signed a form with which i would have agreed NOT to act against any of my Halliburton co-workers in case one or more would have raped me..
You know how i call it?
Cheney is dancing another happy dance...
That man is evil..
Stewart nailed it ...."This kind of speech? This kind of speech? Its GANG RAPE"..
Republican are always so great in showing their true colors anytime...Dems don't even have to work against ..they do all by themselves...one has only to seat and wait..they will always come up with pearls like this one...
And since money is everything... the government can be defended or accused only based on the twist of the monetary current...
Disgusting.
-
curmudgeon said on Oct 18, 2009....
With Al Franken in the BG you think this is an honest piece?Believe your own delusions. -
gingersoul said on Oct 18, 2009....
You too. -
beyondtheveil said on Oct 18, 2009....
This amendment is part of H.R 3326 Department of Defense Appropriations Act 2010....where is my delusion? -
gingersoul said on Oct 18, 2009....
BeyBey.......when one doesn't have valid arguments call the people delusion-al....
Clearly not your case...;-)
-
ALIENated said on Oct 19, 2009....
This is one of those deals that seems pretty clear cut on the surface. Face it. There are not that many stupid people going to Washington. You have to wonder what people are thinking, what implications they are seeing that we are not seeing. Although, I cannot imagine what anyone could be seeing on this one. No one should ever have to agree not to complain if they are raped. How does that language even make it into a contract?
-
beyondtheveil said on Oct 19, 2009....
alien- I think part of what they are seeing is that it 'clutters' the bill in their opinion because there are other alternatives on the books already. One is with the Department of Defense, but they will not move to protect the victims or provide an avenue for recourse.
If these alternatives refuse to move, the victim is stranded. As this girl is, and the others who were raped.
Hence, the need for the amendment.
The republican response is purely political, a very bad choice for 'making a statement', and supremely hypocritical.
-
Twylarants said on Oct 19, 2009....
Here are those who vote to protect a corporation over a victim of rape:
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
From this site.
Just lovely. I think I'll vote for only women from now on.
-
gingersoul said on Oct 19, 2009....
Just don't vote Republicans ....;-pFor me, women are usually my first choice......if there are any good around they have my vote... -
beyondtheveil said on Oct 19, 2009....
Thanks twyla
soulgirl- Mary Landrieu (D-LA) was a co-sponsor of amendment.
-
Twylarants said on Oct 19, 2009....
You're welcome, Beyond. This is disgusting...it's beyond disgusting. I'd love to hear the rationale behind these votes but I'd probably be more disgusted.
This is why I'm neither Republican nor Democrat. Labels for ideologies I don't completely agree with, that's all they are.
I think I'll have Twyla email some of these guys from the Twyla gmail and ask just exactly what the hell they were thinking. If I get any replies (yeah, right!) I''l let you know.
-
beyondtheveil said on Oct 19, 2009....
twyla- If you get any answers, I'd certainly like to hear them. -
ALIENated said on Oct 19, 2009....
You know. I have been thinking about this since this morning. There is something fishy about this. I mean, on the surface, it is a no brainer. How can someone sign a contract that denies them the right to law and order? Something does not compute here. This has to be one of those "do you still beat you wife deals". If some company had me sign a contract and it said I could not say anything if someone attempted to murder me, what judge would say that is legal because murder is not legal (except for abortion and euthenasia in some liberal states, of course)? This is like one of those deals that you get an email about and you look it up on Snopes and find out it is a pile of crap. What are we missing here? Maybe this is one of those "rock and a hard place" deals that Democrats / Socialists like to back Republicans into. Until I find out otherwise, I am going to figure this is just a political stunt by funny man Franken. Besides, there are already laws on the books about rape. Someone just needs to prosecute. This is exactly why people think no coverage for illegals has to be spelled out in the healthcare legislation since Democrats / Socialists evidently think one law can negate another law.
-
stopmediabias said on Oct 19, 2009....
Why spin this? This is a serious case and that moron Stewart spinning it takes away the seriousness of it. The real outrage should be KBR's handling of the case, along with the seemingly missing charges, convictions and subsequent ass-rape in prison to the cockroaches who did this to this poor girl. KBR and Halliburton should be ashamed and sued into the poor-house for their handling of this.
The spin is in the fact that the amendment to the appropriations bill only restricts contracts with companies who use mandatory arbitration in their employment contracts. It had nothing to do with rape and these senators above were voting against the fact it is too broad of an amendment. Arbitration is designed to speed things up and this amendment should specify that companies are not allowed to use it in such cases where a heinous crime was committed against an employee.
It is worth mentioning it was a Republican who got the state department to get this girl out of KBR custody.
-
gingersoul said on Oct 19, 2009....
BeyBey......that's why i said "IF" there is any good woman around....the IF is a big factor here... -
sheltercrow said on Oct 22, 2009....
The is a new blog site called Republicans for Rape -
sheltercrow said on Oct 22, 2009....
Your AfterDowningStreet link is pretty good. Now try this or this. -
beyondtheveil said on Oct 22, 2009....
shelter- You are a very good watchdog. I check your postings regularly.
I'm happy you are here.
-
stopmediabias said on Oct 22, 2009....
Of course showing what complete coward Shelter is, who doesn't really read anything or actually check anything, just post some ridiculous nonsense from some complete scumbag trying to make a buck off of propaganda.
Beyond-Your credibility just fell out the bottom like a cardboard box with a weak bottom full of crap.
-
javadewd said on Oct 22, 2009....
According to what I'm reading on the "Republicans for Rape" site shelter posted, am I to understand that a woman who is raped by a co-worker can sue her employer or the company that contracted them?
If so, does that mean if I hire some guy as a contractor and he rapes one of my contractors (let's assume a woman for the sake of this argument, but he could rape my dog for that matter) then I get sued for contracting a rapist?
So, speaking as a small business owner, does that mean I have to put a question in my employment app or a stipulation in my contracts that if you work for me that you can't rape? I agree with the initial premise of this argument : "We still have to make law[s] against rape!?" Wouldn't you think that if I hired somebody to do a job that they would do the job and not simply turn around and thank me by raping my contractors? And why the fuck would I be at fault if I hire some Catholic school boy out of college and he decides out of the blue to maliciously rape one of my contractors...? Last I looked, that wasn't in their job description, nor in their contract, so I certainly didn't tell them to do it and I didn't pay them to do it, either!!! -
beyondtheveil said on Oct 22, 2009....
SMB- My credibility has been falling for some time now with a number of people. But then, I don't know them and never will. Does this mean no one on the right posts ridiculous nonsense from some scumbag trying to make a buck off propaganda? Shelter is a devoted watchdog. I find some good reading. The day I read and watch one side is when my credibility falls to crap.
-
beyondtheveil said on Oct 22, 2009....
java- I do know that companies can be held liable if first, they don't do proper background checks before hiring an employee and second, can be held liable if they do not provide security for employees under certain conditions.
If you hire contractors, the contractors are responsible for those employees, aren't they? If you hire an employee, you need to do background checks.
-
javadewd said on Oct 22, 2009....
Well that makes sense. Is that the extent of the bill, because if all they want is to make sure we're all doing proper background checks on contractors, all they had to do was ask, you know. I don't need diaper boy in my face painting me as a "Republican for rape" just because I don't want to be liable for some sick fuck.
From my perspective, a contractor gets more scrutiny than an employee. Whether they are W-2 or 1099 if they screw things up with a customer, I'm stuck cleaning up the mess. Yes, a contractor has to have their own liability insurance before they can enter a home -- I don't umbrella them unless it's a commercial job and then they have to "buy in" to the coverage -- but this bill would basically make me liable if some recently divorced sex kitten wanted to jump the handsome devil and then cry "rape" the next day.
I certainly don't condone fishing off the company dock, and I persuade under certain circumstances any contractor that strikes up any more than a surface-level conversation with a client to refrain from doing anything like that on company time. I personally despise any contractor doing this on a regular basis. My business is not a dating service. In fact, I prefer if they decide to 'date' a client that they do it in a public and very third party location at first to disseminate any connection between my business and their relations. This is all covered in basic corporate sexual harassment awareness training, though. In other words, this isn't some new idea.
-
sheltercrow said on Oct 22, 2009....
The crackpot hard-right come to the rescue. This time to support the rape is ok issue. How quaint. Rape is ok as long as its part of the party line. Me thinks you need a new party.
Neither of these sycophants will ever convince anyone, other than their fellow traveler dingbats, that the government does not have the right to investigate it's contractors.
Were talking about government contractors not some 'small business owner.'
This from 'a small business owner' that lists the number of employees as one!
I was a contractor for some 25 years and can personally attest to the notion that contractors do not get 'more scrutiny than an employee.' -
sheltercrow said on Oct 22, 2009....
To the oxymoron stopmediabias:
From http://www.republicansforrape.org/I need to break character for a moment.
In an ideal society there would be no need to create pro-rape satire. We do not live in an ideal society. Thirty out of one hundred United States Senators voted to favor business interests over the rights and dignity of rape victims.
We encourage you to donate your time and money to organizations that serve to prevent rapes from ever happening and to aid the victims of rape. While we cannot direct you to any specific organization, we encourage you to seek out and donate to a local rape crisis shelter.
From http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/After Downing Street is a nonpartisan coalition of over 200 veterans groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that has worked since May 2005 to pressure both Congress and the media in order to hold Bush, Cheney, and their aides accountable for crimes and abuses of power. The coalition takes its name from the emergence in May and June of 2005 of several documents that quickly came to be known as the Downing Street Memos.
Read the rest. -
javadewd said on Oct 23, 2009....
I vote we have a very large ape rape sheltercrow with a PVC pipe. Second?
Sheltercrow doesn't own a business. Sheltercrow doesn't manage people. Sheltercrow doesn't take responsibility for anybody, not even themselves. So that makes Sheltercrow some sort of an expert on business and contractors. How quaint! Perhaps you should run as a presidential appointed czar. He certainly sounds more than qualified!
So you're saying that this bill does not affect any other sector except government? And the next one? Oh, wait, yeah I'm sure that will. Whatever gets regulated in the government sector quickly makes its way out to the private sector, but if you owned a business, you would know that, Czar Sheltercrow.
This from a small business owner. Yes, at least one employee. That's why it is called a "small business." Exactly how do you define the word is, pecker munch?
Perhaps in your neck of the woods contractors don't get as much scrutiny. I was talking about MY business you dolt. I have been a contractor for several businesses, but that pales in comparison to running a business. You should try it some time.
Speaking of oxymorons, the literal translation of that word could be broken into the prefix "oxy" meaning "self-oxidizing" or "self-feeding" and "moron" to which Sheltercrow certainly qualifies as an oxymoron. I wouldn't even have to come along for them to look like a moron. Why don't you play another little tune... How about "Me first and the gimmie gimmie's?"
I will agree that we don't live in an ideal society, but I think your definition and those of others in this thread vary wildly. I personally enjoy good satire, but the point is disturbing in so much as a business having to take responsibility for another business or a contractor that does something so unlawfully stupid. That's my point in a nutshell.
Also this is quite an oxymoron :After Downing Street is a nonpartisan coalition of over 200 veterans groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that has worked since May 2005 to pressure both Congress and the media in order to hold Bush, Cheney, and their aides accountable for crimes and abuses of power. The coalition takes its name from the emergence in May and June of 2005 of several documents that quickly came to be known as the Downing Street Memos.
Yeah, makes sense. Sounds like a smear campaign with financial backing to me. The only folks that I know who use the phrase "abuses of power" so close to the words "Bush" and "Cheney" are far-left loons. ADS... Nonpartisan... Sure... Whatever. That's like saying the New York Times is somehow "fair and balanced" instead of a run-by leftist smear rag.
-
sheltercrow said on Oct 23, 2009....
Question: How does one respond to a hard-right evangelical peckerwood? -
javadewd said on Oct 23, 2009....
With post-modernistic left-wing ignorance and horseshit. -
sheltercrow said on Oct 23, 2009....
Answer: -
javadewd said on Oct 23, 2009....
I rest my case... It's the liberal/progressive way! -
sheltercrow said on Oct 23, 2009....
How bad is KBR? A search for 'KBR crime' yields over 1,400,000 hits. Here are just a few of the stories:
KBR's Rape Problem
Former KBR worker pleads guilty to sex crime
Contractor accused of human trafficking in Iraq
‘Sleeping with the boss’ common at KBR in Iraq
Crime Without Punishment
Inside the world of war profiteers -
javadewd said on Oct 24, 2009....
Hey, look at sheltercrow : Cut & Paste Peckerwood Angst -
sheltercrow said on Oct 24, 2009....
Did anyone catch the Al Franken health-care hearing clip? It's with this health-care-lobby shill from the Hudson Institute who claimed that universal healthcare would increase medical bankruptcies.
-
ALIENated said on Oct 24, 2009....
The crackpot hard-right come to the rescue. This time to support the rape is ok issue. How quaint. Rape is ok as long as its part of the party line. Me thinks you need a new party.
See, this is the kind of statement that makes me think you must be no more than 15 years old. Anyone that cannot see through these kinds of deals is a moron. If a liberal is seen picking his nose in a public place in Boston, does that mean every liberal picks his or her nose while in public?
By these kinds of deals, I mean one incident that is pulled out of the air and then the whole party is villainized. Is every Democrat a sexual pervert because Bill Clinton is? Is every black person a racist because Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are? Maybe if I used kids blocks to spell it out, you would understand.
Plus the fact that Democrats / Socialists are notorious for creating some kind of obvious bill like this and adding several other stupid things in with it. If Democrat / Socialists were not so sneaky and underhanded, maybe Republicians would not be so leery of approving any bill that comes along. It is hard for people that actually have morals to deal with a whole party of politicians that do not.
-
sheltercrow said on Oct 25, 2009....
And then the right-wing ditto-head chorus lists it's programmed crackpot points. A better example of zombie think couldn't be found in Orwell's 1984. Clinton's blow-job and of course racism alleged to have been practiced by blacks.
This of course presupposes that blow-jobs are perversions and Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are racist. Whatever the merits of oral sex, it is not a perversion, and the real crimes of Al and Jessie, to this right-wing zombie, are that they are not right-wing zombies too.
All coming from the resident bigot and right-wing zombie.
-
javadewd said on Oct 25, 2009....
See, I don't understand why liberals get all pissed when they are accused of molesting children and puppies. It isn't that they do, it's just that if a conservative was accused of it, it would practically be the end of the world. The only redemption for an accused conservative at that point would be throwing themselves under a truck. To a liberal, though, it's just status quo. I had this epiphany when I first came here to SoulCast... Guess what? Still holds water today. -
ALIENated said on Oct 25, 2009....
Hmmm. Maybe 12 years old. What else would explain such infantile comments and misunderstanding of all that is going on in the world today? What else would cause someone to take funny man Al Franken seriously? I still see him as that homo character he played on SNL.
-
sheltercrow said on Oct 26, 2009....
Ya know. An interesting trend in the right-wing zombie cult comments theology is that everyone that is not a right-wing zombie cultist, like themselves, just doesn't know the real truth. And, as in this case, is just 'infantile' and 'misunderstanding of all that is going on in the world today.'
Absurdities abound of course. All cultists societies tend toward being a collection self referencing lunatics. Like calling the democrats 'Socialists.' The democrats get their money from the very same capitalist corporate sponsers as the republicans but somehow they're socialists. In the right-wing zombie cult mind capitalists are de facto socialists. -
stopmediabias said on Oct 27, 2009....
Beyond- See what we are talking about. There is right and there is left and then there is Sheltercrow over in bizzaro world. He isn't a part of any side. He knows the Republicans didn't vote against this bill to protect KBR or diminish or sanction rape. This is not about Republican or Democrat it is about KBR's trying to brush this under the carpet and the fact that it worked because justice hasn't been served to the scum who did this.
And if Shelter is a watchdog he is a watchdog for the looney cooky left who lie for living.
-
sheltercrow said on Oct 28, 2009....
stopmediabias, always a loyal right-wing zombie, writes:'This is not about Republican or Democrat it is about KBR's trying to brush this under the carpet.'
Absurdities again. KBR did try to brush this under the rug. In doing so it reached out to senators, both democrat and republican, to rejects this amendment. And, to their shame, the republicans eagerly responded en masse.
The republicans oppose any amendment presented by the opposition whatever the issues. That it might deny justice to a rape victim is of no consequence. Party always comes first
-
ALIENated said on Oct 28, 2009....
Goodbye to looney land, once again.
-
sheltercrow said on Oct 28, 2009....
What's the matter alien? Nothing from the latest Limbaugh show to be repeated? You poor shit. Try harder. Maybe something from Coulter?
-
javadewd said on Oct 28, 2009....
What? No post-modernist song and dance to go along with your crap! Absurd.