Defense Department Opposed Franken's Anti-Rape Amendment

That's like saying Pro-abortion.

You go brain user....good job.

There are some multi million dollar makers on the "homegrown" democrat side. Where do they get all their millions from? They grow it? Because apparently theirs doesn't come from big business.

WOT

The Republicans who voted to support rapists care only about the contributions from KBR not American citizens.

They are filth and scum. David Vitter, prostitute monger, is one of them.

They were voting on the single amendment that was attached to the Defense Spending Bill. It was a seperate vote, on just the amendment, not on the entire Spending Bill. It is not easy, but you CAN find the text of the actual amendment. If you like, I will give you the link so that you may read it yourself.

...says the guy who has no experience with/information on the military. Please, understand what you are saying before you type it.
Many of the filed complaints for women violating the "Don't Ask" (

the rape under discussion here was done by KBR employees, not uniformed servicemen...there is a HUGE difference.

They will probably be wife beaters.

Conclusions to jump to via the liberal mind.

This is the problem with the two parties. Both want the other to fail to the point where they are willing to have failure and gridlock as opposed to putting the country first.

How do you explain what is happening now? You have Dem controlled govt and the govt is still pursuing a corporatist agenda? That would indicate that there is not much difference between the parties when it comes to their actions.

115 people die a day because of car accidents.

It's also terrible that democrats cannot admit to their own wrongs....they just think they do everything perfectly.

Dear slarabee,

I specifically targeted the GOP's sub humans & blue dogs which leave quite a few in the shade ;)

As for the reality of the 2 party system... it is your absolute right to disagree but facts seems to be against your analysis that it is but a figment of a conspirationist delusion when it certainly seems to be the 101 of politic science ;)

"For in every city these two opposite parties [people vs aristocracy] are to be found, arising from the desire of the populace to avoid oppression of the great, and the desire of the great to command and oppress the people....For when the nobility see that they are unable to resist the people, they unite in exalting one of their number and creating him prince, so as to be able to carry out their own designs under the shadow of his authority." (Machiavelli, The Prince, ch. IX)

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." -- Noam Chomsky

A culture that cannot distinguish between reality and illusion dies. And we are dying now. We will either wake from our state of induced childishness, one where trivia and gossip pass for news and information, one where our goal is not justice but an elusive and unattainable happiness, to confront the stark limitations before us, or we will continue our headlong retreat into fantasy. - Chris Hedges * Empire of Illusion / The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle

hmmm... how does this list compare to the map of american vice I wonder?

http://current.com/items/91047425_american-vice-mapping-the-7-deadly-sins.htm

Good thinking bombastor!

Yeah, big surprise. Sadly both parties seem to handle big business with care.

They are against it because as Republicans they dont like to 'regulate' business. In other words the continued business of the defense contractors is more important than a few women getting raped.

That's a liberal answer.

I want a fact answer.

Well according to the article it says:

Sens. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) both provided statement to the Sun News in Macon.

"This would be a major, fundamental change in U.S. labor law and I believe it would be very detrimental to employees to eliminate arbitration as an option," Isakson said. The statement inaccurately portrays Franken's amendment: Employees would still be able to elect to use arbitration; they simply wouldn't be forced into it.

Chambliss added, also inaccurately: "If that happens, these employees' only recourse will be to litigate suits in court, which is a very lengthy, expensive and time-consuming process."

--------------------------------------------

Just a note for those of you out there who might not know, arbitration means settling things out of court directly with the contractor. The Republicans that voted against it argued that the amendment would take that option away, but this is not true.

Others said that it would mean that government would be dictating the terms of contracts. Others argued that it should have covered rape specifically and not sexual abuse in general.

Personally I don't like these reasons.

of course you want a fact answer Jammer

so does the 19-year-old girl who was raped,

gang raped,
vaginal and anal,
by KBR employees
and locked in a container when she tried to report it

and then told her attackers cannot be prosecuted
because part of the conditions of her employment
included signing away her rights via arbitration
...need more facts?

Women lie about rape.

What makes you so sure she's telling the truth?

You were there?

why don't you read something before you say things like that Jammer?

there was a rape test,
which mysteriously disappeared, and then reappeared.

there was physical evidence of aggravated physical assault and rape. women don't need to lie about things like that.

Women have lied about things like that.

Rape kits are done on anyone that says they've been raped. Doesn't mean she was raped.

Jammer, I have to say that is such a sick comment. You should really use some sort of filter on yourself before saying such awful things. And just for your information, this woman was most definitely raped, gang raped in fact, and she isn't the only one. The problem is not just that it this bill opens up the door for employees to have their CIVIL LIBERTIES protected when working for an American company overseas, but what it also does is say that we should stop using tax payer money to fund these companies when they use arbitration laws to violate their employees in such gross and sick ways. And why would 30 republicans not want that to happen, oh maybe because they are funded by the company using those arbitration laws.

You do not lock up RAPE victims in inhumane containers when they report their rape, even if you assume that it's a lie (which by the way, it most definitely wasn't)...

We should not have to use our money to hire mercenaries which have no responsibility for their actions...

I know you think the GOP is some sort of beacon of hope for the world, but the fact is that it is just as corrupt as the democratic party, stop making shit up to get people riled up, because it is so insulting that I'm surprised there isn't more outrage. If you had any shred of dignity you would apologize for saying such an awful thing about a woman that kept this quiet for over a year because of the shame she felt having been raped. It takes a lot of courage to stand up for yourself when the odds are against you. This woman was gang raped, had her career ruined, and has to live knowing that the men that raped her may never get ANY repurcussions for drugging and raping her.

honestly, use your head... the reasons are obvious, and that's why people are so pissed... you're deluding yourself into believing that your party is an actual representation of how you should behave or think.

I want to hear both sides.

So far the liberal side is just being angry and slurring their words together like a drunk Kennedy.

I can't side with the woman just because she said she was raped. Equality exists. So her being raped, to me, will be treated the same as a guy being raped. I have to be told exactly what happened from both points of view.

If someone cannot do that then I'll stick with what I have to go on and keep that view.

It really doesn't bother me. It's not like she's part of my family. Why should I care? This is just like the tied up dog being called art. People only care when they see it. Could care less that it happens daily to thousands of people.

If I have to read another liberal hate conservative view point I'm really not going to care what happens to her. I'm asking for a balanced view. None of this emotional whining.

The fact is this is an emotional issue, that's why we have civil liberties to protect them... Get a clue, fair and balanced? She doesn't even have the option of fighting her rape. You don't find a problem with that? Do you think it's okay for a company to take away your civil rights just because you may lie? If you do, you don't really believe in one of the greatest institutions we have in America, to protect ourselves with the arm of the law. If we don't have those rights, whose to say this woman shouldn't have the right to drug and rape those men?

Beyond this very specific example of how Haliburton and KBR use arbitration laws, what they are proposing would mean losing millions in "defense" income because if immoral practices. I personally don't believe in giving a portion of my paycheck to an institution that thinks it's above the law.
It's not just a "liberal" perspective... If I recall there were republicans that voted for this bill, meaning that it goes beyond party lines, and people were up in arms when ACORN allegedly (and later proved staged) gave advice to prostitutes, and they lost all their public funding. Why would the defense department have a problem with this? Because no one seems to be addressing that are they... Why would the defense department, and 30 republicans funded by Haliburton have a problem with arbitration laws that put regulations on a multi-billion dollar business? What you are looking for is the Republican scapegoat. This isn't a liberal perspective, because I believe the Democrats do the exact same thing when the issue benefits them, but does it make it okay that a business is allowed to violate people so intrusively just because they support your party?

I don't have a party.
It was not proved to be staged. Nice liberal lie.

And I find a problem with someone that would be wiling to work for a company that would have such a contract and then sign it.

Rape does cross party lines. No one wants to see rape happen unless they are a rapist.

I asked for another perspective. Giving the same emotional BS isn't going to make me alter my stance.

Well lets see, maybe if they wre made aware that when signing an arbitration contract that they were signing away their civil liberties than that could be a credible argument... But they didn't.

and yes putting in a fake prostitute is still a form of staging...

So give me some specifics of what you are looking for in a non-emotional way... Because I believe I addressed that. They would lose millions of dollars, there's the rub... Get it? You just want to fight for the sake of fighting, honestly I don't believe that you feel very strongly about this, and part of you probably agrees that this is a gross violation of our rights because you keep changing your argument to be more and more it's the victims fault.

Are yo stating if you don't read your contract then you don't have to abide by it?

And did this not happen off US soil?

Also why did no one catch this before? Why were the liberals allowing it to begin with? It's not like they didn't already know what was going on prior.....

the money angle is overused. There has to be something else.

that argument makes no sense. Arbitration is a form of security saying that if there is a dispute than the matter can be handled within a certain set of guidelines. It does not EVER include revoking a persons civil liberties. There is a vast difference between sexual harassment, which is what she thought she was signing, and being drugged and gang raped.

You know perfectly well that members of congress do not go over business contracts between companies and its employers on a case by case business, that would be a waste of their time... But if the case occurs, such as this, where a business is using a legal loophole to take away a persons rights, than yes, congress can get involved.

Also, I thought we both agreed that this was a non-partisan issue, so stop trying to throw that whole liberal agenda back into this... you cannot blame this on "liberals".

And just because the money issue is "overused" doesn't mean it isn't true. You are just trying to neglect the facts that are in front of everyone else. I know it's hard to admit, but most everything is decided on a fiscal basis rather than a moral one. Look at almost any national debate we have, money seems to the largest reason we have such huge problems. Try to get our nation healthy, you're a socialist stealing money. Want a free market, oh wait you can't because too many businesses are too big to fail, guess we have to throw money at it. Want to end the war, nope there's too much money invested...

Honestly, just stop. You have no argument other than some fantasized delusion that there has to be some mysterious reason 30 congressman (supported by Haliburton) would vote against plugging a loophole that a publicly funded company is using.

Answer this, why would the defense department get involved and voice an opinion on this issue? It's a civil matter, but they depend too much on mercenary companies to do dirty business overseas.