Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-21-2009, 01:38 AM
TheConcretekid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 30 republicans vote AGAINST anti-rape bill

I know we are a country divided.
We're experiencing some rough times.
The health care bill is causing tensions to run high on both sides of the aisle.

Luckily there was some legislation that was brought forward that anyone from any political background could get behind. It was inspired by the story of a teenager from Texas who was gang raped by military contractors while in Iraq. Here is her incredible story, please I beg you, watch this 5:30 minute video:
http://www.new.facebook.com/video/vi...3191487&ref=mf


For those of you who did not just watch that, or couldn't wrap their head around it, I'll sum it up:

19 year old Jamie Leigh Jones was an employee for Halliburton subsidiary KBR.
She was sent to Iraq and told she would share a trailer with another female employee.
Instead she was bunked in a barrack with several hundred male contractors.
Her reports and complaints to KBR about her living situation went unanswered.
On her fourth day in Iraq she was drugged and repeatedly vaginally and anally gang raped.
A doctor administered a rape kit, parts of which have disappeared. But they concluded she was in fact raped and experienced extensive injuries, including deformed breasts and torn pectoral muscles, and further unmentionable damages.
After she reported the incident she was locked in a shipping container with an armed guard and was refused any means to communicate with the outside world.
She was able to convince a guard to give her a cell phone, after which she called her father who contacted their congressman and they were able to get her home.

Upon seeking justice when she returned home, she found in the fine print of her contract with Halliburton that it listed 'assault and battery, infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, and negligent hiring and supervision' as claims that belong under arbitration, and therefor cannot be brought against Halliburton in court.



Claims of sexual assault and acts of egregious violence do not belong in arbitration.

Sadly hers is not by any means the only case of this matter. After she spoke out countless others have reported similar stories.
So Sen. Al Franken proposed legislation to pass this into law. Due to his name or the little capital "D" that comes after his name, several representatives voting against this legislation via sheer, unadulterated, blind, unforgivable and absolutely disgusting partisanism.


Those who voted AGAINST the anti-rape legislation:
(Those marked with an *, see quotes below)

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
John Barrasso (R-WY)
Kit Bond (R-MO)*
Sam Brownback (R-KS)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Bob Corker (R-TN)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
John Ensign (R-NV)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Lindsey Graham (R-SC)*
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)*
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
John McCain (R-AZ)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
James Risch (R-ID)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Richard Shelby (R-AL)*
John Thune (R-SD)
David Vitter (R-LA)
Roger Wicker (R-MS)



See if you guys can guess which organization these fine gents are so upset with:

Mike Johanns (R-NE) - "My amendment would prohibit one more penny of tax payer money from going to ____"
Richard Shelby (R-AL) - "We got to get corruption out of any organization that is taking tax payers money"
Kit Bond (R-MO) - "Repeated abuses of tax payers dollars allowed to accrue in their name" ... "____ is not above the law!"
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) - "It's unsustainable for a member of congress to justify the continued funding of this organization"

Did you figure out which organization it was?
Did you think they were angry at Halliburton?
That's a good guess, since they refuse to investigate the repeated gang rape of a teenager.
But wasn't Halliburton.
It was...
.
..
...
....
.....
......
.....
....
...
..
.

Acorn!
The company that gave a fake pimp fake advice for his fake prostitutes!


Now I doubt any of you will be pro Acorn, and thats besides the point, but don't you find it offensive, absurd and down right nauseating that these representatives are up in arms about the audacious Acorn but fail to make a peep when a teenage girl is repeatedly anally gang raped!?




Below is a link that lists all thirty legislators that are pro-rape as well as their contact information. I know that this forum is spread all over this country, so if you see your senator on that list, I beg of you, contact them and demand some answers. Ask them why our money is being given to a company like KBR that won't pursue rapist or protect women from sexual assault.
http://www.republicansforrape.org/legislators/



Below is Sen. Al Franken delivering this legislation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIKo-vy4010
And him questioning an arbitration lawyer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6kiZIlMFto


Give me a reason not to lose faith in all humanity.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-21-2009, 02:01 AM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,742
Default

I agree with them and shame on the Liberal politicians for taking advantage of this situation to advance their left-wing agenda. That portion about ACORN should never have been lumped in with this bill.

This is simply dirty politics on the part of our increasingly Left-Wing government.

Of course, the small-minded ones out there will claim that these Republicans are "pro-rape," but hopefully the average person isn't stupid enough to actually believe that nonsense.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-21-2009, 02:26 AM
TheConcretekid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR View Post
I agree with them and shame on the Liberal politicians for taking advantage of this situation to advance their left-wing agenda. That portion about ACORN should never have been lumped in with this bill.

This is simply dirty politics on the part of our increasingly Left-Wing government.

Of course, the small-minded ones out there will claim that these Republicans are "pro-rape," but hopefully the average person isn't stupid enough to actually believe that nonsense.
Who is them? I hope it's not the 30 republicans that voted against this amendment.

And you're missing the point. it wasnt a pro-acorn statement, it was to contrast the senators reactions to a fake pimp and a real gang rape.

So these legislators are doing nothing to protect against or prevent essentially legal sexual assaults nor to bring charges against Halliburton or the guilty parties involved. Moreover they are funneling our tax money to fund this company. And you're ok with that?

If you watched her speak about being gang raped and thought, "Ah-ha!! Liberal Media!! HUR!! Dirty Politics!! DUR!!" than you are just as blind and partisan as those who voted against this legislation.



Let me ask you NateR, what part about a company treating a teenager like this, and the group of men who repeatedly raped, assaulted and sodomized a 19 year old girl, is just and deserves no punishment, that no further actions should take place? She was fired for speaking out, justice served, right?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-21-2009, 02:34 AM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheConcretekid View Post
Who is them? I hope it's not the 30 republicans that voted against this amendment.

And you're missing the point. it wasnt a pro-acorn statement, it was to contrast the senators reactions to a fake pimp and a real gang rape.

So these legislators are doing nothing to protect against or prevent essentially legal sexual assaults nor to bring charges against Halliburton or the guilty parties involved. Moreover they are funneling our tax money to fund this company. And you're ok with that?

If you watched her speak about being gang raped and thought, "Ah-ha!! Liberal Media!! HUR!! Dirty Politics!! DUR!!" than you are just as blind and partisan as those who voted against this legislation.



Let me ask you NateR, what part about a company treating a teenager like this, and the group of men who repeatedly raped, assaulted and sodomized a 19 year old girl, is just and deserves no punishment, that no further actions should take place? She was fired for speaking out, justice served, right?
They had no business attaching anything about ACORN to that bill. If the Liberals really cared about this girl and her situation, then they would have let it slide through without bogging it down with their left-wing agenda.

Of course, they knew that if the Republicans voted against it, then they would be able to smear them and make them appear to be "pro-rape" (which only a brainwashed liberal would actually believe). So this was all carefully crafted to continue to make Republicans look bad in the public eye.

Why is this even a Federal government issue? Since when is Congress a law enforcement agency?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-21-2009, 02:58 AM
TheConcretekid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

1) Acorn is not in this legislation.
2) Are you saying it's not the government's business to decide with whom and how the government does business?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-21-2009, 03:09 AM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheConcretekid View Post
1) Acorn is not in this legislation.
Are you sure? Is there a copy of it online that we can both read?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-21-2009, 03:14 AM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Just what charges do you expect should be filed against Haliburton?

You make it sound like Haliburton put their subsidiary company and it's male employees up to gang-raping the girl.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-21-2009, 05:42 AM
Neezar's Avatar
Neezar Neezar is offline
SupaDupaMod
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South
Posts: 6,490
Send a message via Yahoo to Neezar
Default

I think the wording of the bill would have restricted the govt from contracting out to any company that required it's employees to sign agreement for arbitration instead of a court trail. That would basically knock out most companies. Those companies have those clauses for a reason.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-21-2009, 05:45 AM
Neezar's Avatar
Neezar Neezar is offline
SupaDupaMod
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South
Posts: 6,490
Send a message via Yahoo to Neezar
Default

Sec. 8104. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for any existing or new Federal contract if the contractor or a subcontractor at any tier requires that an employee or independent contractor, as a condition of employment, sign a contract that mandates that the employee or independent contractor performing work under the contract or subcontract resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.


(b) The prohibition in subsection (a) does not apply with respect to employment contracts that may not be enforced in a court of the United States.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-21-2009, 06:56 AM
flo's Avatar
flo flo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 7,756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neezar View Post
I think the wording of the bill would have restricted the govt from contracting out to any company that required it's employees to sign agreement for arbitration instead of a court trail. That would basically knock out most companies. Those companies have those clauses for a reason.
I'm glad you posted about the bill, that makes a lot of sense.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.