GOP senators in favor of rape?

[bullypulpit]

Of course not. The votes of 30 of them on an amendment to a DOD spending bill introduced by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) would lead us to think otherwise, however. The amendment will bar the federal government from issuing contracts to any company which forces its employees into arbitration, rather than the courts, in any case involving sexual assault or any “other egregious violations of civil rights.”.

Anyone who would willingly side against rape victims to shield a company, like KBR, from being held accountable for their actions might want to seriously rethink their priorities.

<table style='font:11px arial; color:#333; background-color:#f5f5f5' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='360' height='353'><tbody><tr style='background-color:#e5e5e5' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com'>The Daily Show With Jon Stewart</a></td><td style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; text-align:right; font-weight:bold;'>Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c</td></tr><tr style='height:14px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;' colspan='2'<a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts'>Rape-Nuts<a></td></tr><tr style='height:14px; background-color:#353535' valign='middle'><td colspan='2' style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; width:360px; overflow:hidden; text-align:right'><a target='_blank' style='color:#96deff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/'>www.thedailyshow.com</a></td></tr><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><embed style='display:block' src='http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:252468' width='360' height='301' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='window' allowFullscreen='true' flashvars='autoPlay=false' allowscriptaccess='always' allownetworking='all' bgcolor='#000000'></embed></td></tr><tr style='height:18px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><table style='margin:0px; text-align:center' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='100%' height='100%'><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes'>Daily Show<br/> Full Episodes</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com'>Political Humor</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/videos/tag/health'>Health Care Crisis</a></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

<center><a href=http://www.republicansforrape.org/>Republicans for Rape</a></center>

[stephanie]

Progressives and dirty politics go hand in hand...

when they are losing they go out to destroy..

remember Joe the Plumber? that could be YOU next..

[jimnyc]

How about instead of accusing GOP members of supporting rape, we actually find out WHY they voted against it. And Obama's White House AND the current DOD is apparently against it as well!

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/why-the-dod-and-the-white-house-opposed-the-franken-rape-amendment.php?ref=mp

[theHawk]

Bully you might want to try to get your news from sources other than The Daily Show and Keith Olberman.

You could just as easily say OBAMA supports rape.

[DragonStryk72]

Of course not. The votes of 30 of them on an amendment to a DOD spending bill introduced by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) would lead us to think otherwise, however. The amendment will bar the federal government from issuing contracts to any company which forces its employees into arbitration, rather than the courts, in any case involving sexual assault or any “other egregious violations of civil rights.”.

Anyone who would willingly side against rape victims to shield a company, like KBR, from being held accountable for their actions might want to seriously rethink their priorities.

<table style='font:11px arial; color:#333; background-color:#f5f5f5' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='360' height='353'><tbody><tr style='background-color:#e5e5e5' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com'>The Daily Show With Jon Stewart</a></td><td style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; text-align:right; font-weight:bold;'>Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c</td></tr><tr style='height:14px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;' colspan='2'<a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts'>Rape-Nuts<a></td></tr><tr style='height:14px; background-color:#353535' valign='middle'><td colspan='2' style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; width:360px; overflow:hidden; text-align:right'><a target='_blank' style='color:#96deff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/'>www.thedailyshow.com</a></td></tr><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><embed style='display:block' src='http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:252468' width='360' height='301' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='window' allowFullscreen='true' flashvars='autoPlay=false' allowscriptaccess='always' allownetworking='all' bgcolor='#000000'></embed></td></tr><tr style='height:18px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><table style='margin:0px; text-align:center' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='100%' height='100%'><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes'>Daily Show<br/> Full Episodes</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com'>Political Humor</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/videos/tag/health'>Health Care Crisis</a></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

<center><a href=http://www.republicansforrape.org/>Republicans for Rape</a></center>

What else was in the Bill, Bully?

[DragonStryk72]

How about instead of accusing GOP members of supporting rape, we actually find out WHY they voted against it. And Obama's White House AND the current DOD is apparently against it as well!

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/why-the-dod-and-the-white-house-opposed-the-franken-rape-amendment.php?ref=mp

I liked the setup of this statement:

October 21, 2009 12:50 PM

They should ban all mandatory arbitration.

Ban that from employment contracts and consumer contracts.

Voluntary arbitration is fine. But parties should always have the option of going to court.


This was a comment left under Jimmy's article, and I like this one, so I'm going to run with this. The idea here is to have it so you can use the voluntary arbitration, without losing the ability to take people to court, which I believe would be a vastly better solution that nitpicking through every contract and subcontract the government sees. In no case should blatantly illegal acts, such as rape, be kept from a courtroom, because it is not a company's right to determine guilt or innocence.

[avatar4321]

Seriously, how many times do Democrats have to lie about this.

This is about mandatory arbitration clauses in contracts. Democrats are against them. Republicans have stood for them or atleast for not interfering in the right of the employer/employee to negotiate their own terms. (Who would have thought Republicans would be voting for Freedom and The Democrats oppose it).

See Democrats seem to think that these alleged victims should be allowed to bring suit against their employers in US courts for activities that have allegedly occured in Iraq. And that somehow by eliminating these arbitration clauses they can do that. Of course, that completely ignores legal jurisprudence and the obvious fact that no US court has jurisdiction for torts and/or criminal actions that have occured in Iraq.

In other words, Democrats are in reality fighting to take away any options for the victims to file complaints. That's why arbitration clauses are placed in contracts for services preformed internationally in the first place. So that there is some place for disputes to be resolved since without them there is no remedy.

So if anyone is in favor of Rape here, and btw that claim is a stretch to any honest person, it would be the Democrats who are attempting to eliminate any forum in which complaints can be addressed.

Now, do you have the intellectual honesty to admit your claim is a bunch of nonsense? or do you want these victims to be raped again by your attempts to try to falsely accuse Republicans for what you are actually doing?

[Little-Acorn]

Seriously, how many times do Democrats have to lie about this.


In little bully's case, all he CAN do is lie about it.

If he had to tell the truth about his agenda, he'd be afraid to say anything at all.

The only way he can make it look good, is to tell lies about it. Give the guy a break, eh?

:coffee:

[bullypulpit]

The DOD's rationale for opposing the amendment go something like this...

<blockquote>"The Department of Defense, the prime contractor, and higher tier subcontractors may not be in a position to know about such things. Enforcement would be problematic, especially in cases where privity of contract does not exist between parties within the supply chain that supports a contract," reads the DoD note. "It may be more effective to seek a statutory prohibition of all such arrangements in any business transaction entered into within the jurisdiction of the United States, if these arrangements are deemed to pose an unacceptable method of recourse."</blockquote>

<blockquote>"...the Department of Defense could prosecute these crimes under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act and the Patriot Act's special maritime and territorial jurisdiction provisions, but has opted not to. In the face of DoD inaction, survivors, meanwhile, had signed away their right to sue civilly and were left only with arbitration - <a href=http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20091016/cm_thenation/15485424>The Nation</a>"</blockquote>

Gosh the DOD could have pursued criminal prosecution against the perpetrators, but CHOSE not to do so. Imagine that. Sorry Avi your rehash of Saxby Chambliss' (R-GA) doesn't hold any more water than his version does.

[avatar4321]

So what you're saying is that Obama refuses to prosecute, and that is somehow a Republican problem?

BTW I stand by my position. They wouldnt have any jurisdiction. Thats the whole point of arbitration clauses to begin with. To provide recourse when otherwise there is none.

Oh and the idea that somehow there is no recourse when the arbitration clause provides specific recourse is dishonest.