Does your Senator love (shielding government contractors from prosecution for abetting) rape?
- Thread starter Alex_P
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Figured republicans are pro government rapists (Political republicans that is, not republican voters... huge difference there 
)
)
oh. DAMMIT. still, i'm proud of our men from ohio voting this into law even if i'm not the biggest fan of brown or voinevich(sp).Berethond said:
In the US most people don't pay as much attention to our political government as many other countries do. To be fair though we also lack the power to dissolve the government and/or our representative unless they do something that is openly held reprehensible. Then we have to go through a long ridiculous hearing to decide how reprehensible it really is and if he/she really did mean it that way. Don't believe it's that dumb, look at the Clinton case. The fact is that politicians here don't have much to fear from its people because most people don't pay that much attention and if we did it takes a lot of crap to do anything about it (most of the time).Trivun said:
Kudo's OP for posting this. My state voted Yea.
Agreed. I'm of the sincere opinion that politicians are made the scapegoats in every situation simply because they're supposedly "in charge" even when the public knows very little aside from the vaguest of general ideas what in the Hell is going on.Kajin said:
Also, why all the Republican bashing? I'm a straight down the middle moderate who's totally disgusted by bipartisan politics and the divisions it causes. This is just one nauseating example.
Why, people? Are you really that biased, or are you simply jumping on the damn anti-Republican bandwagon just because they're a minority in congress? Or is it for some other reason? Someone please enlighten me!
Yea for Oregon! Both Senators voted Yea, which is a first since they usually do not agree on much.
I really don't want to read through all of the responses, so I don't know if this has been mentioned but KBR is also responsible for exposing US Army troops to a cancerous chemical while telling them that they would be okay. KBR didn't want the Army to pull it's support since the area where this occured was still hostile so they allowed the troops to breath in this crap for months before the truth finally came out.
A good friend of mine was exposed, still has breathing problems because of it and 5 out of the 100 men stationed with him in that area have already developed cancer. Several men from the two units stationed there have already died from conditions traced back to this chemical. Fortunately our state senators here are fighting to get them health care coverage and damages and a class action lawsuit is set to start soon against KBR.
KBR's only care is for the bottom line. They'll put their own employees and our troops into harms way to get money. They poisoned their own workers along with the Army at the site mentioned above just to get the treatment plant working so they could collect money. They give private military contractors a bad name and should be shunned by all countries until they clean up their act.
I really don't want to read through all of the responses, so I don't know if this has been mentioned but KBR is also responsible for exposing US Army troops to a cancerous chemical while telling them that they would be okay. KBR didn't want the Army to pull it's support since the area where this occured was still hostile so they allowed the troops to breath in this crap for months before the truth finally came out.
A good friend of mine was exposed, still has breathing problems because of it and 5 out of the 100 men stationed with him in that area have already developed cancer. Several men from the two units stationed there have already died from conditions traced back to this chemical. Fortunately our state senators here are fighting to get them health care coverage and damages and a class action lawsuit is set to start soon against KBR.
KBR's only care is for the bottom line. They'll put their own employees and our troops into harms way to get money. They poisoned their own workers along with the Army at the site mentioned above just to get the treatment plant working so they could collect money. They give private military contractors a bad name and should be shunned by all countries until they clean up their act.
there's got to be some legit political reason to oppose that amendment (Gov't overstepping bounds or something, though I don't see how it can overstep in a appropriations bill, they're just reallocating funds away from organizations with business policies they don't want to be associated with, it doesn't force those companies to do anything, it just makes it so they won't get gov't contracts while those policies are in place.)
But this law is coming into effect now (if the whole thing gets voted through, it says the sentate and the house are mucking it up about an amendment), to prevent gov't funding of companies that would allow this sort of thing to happen in the future. It won't help her case, she still signed the contract. Only the courts can have any effect on her case now.
P.S. however pissed you are, screaming that the opposition "loves rape" polarizes things and makes them way more hostile than is good for any political debate. I seriously doubt that any of the Nay-sayers support the idea of rape, and have legitimate reasons for voting against that amendment. That said, Go Ohio, and yay Voinovich, you crazy-son-of-a-gun.
But this law is coming into effect now (if the whole thing gets voted through, it says the sentate and the house are mucking it up about an amendment), to prevent gov't funding of companies that would allow this sort of thing to happen in the future. It won't help her case, she still signed the contract. Only the courts can have any effect on her case now.
P.S. however pissed you are, screaming that the opposition "loves rape" polarizes things and makes them way more hostile than is good for any political debate. I seriously doubt that any of the Nay-sayers support the idea of rape, and have legitimate reasons for voting against that amendment. That said, Go Ohio, and yay Voinovich, you crazy-son-of-a-gun.
With the sharp increase in contractors providing field support and private military services, we increasingly face situations where contract workers operate in situations of danger and lawlessness. Just as the government has always mandated strict standards for security and labor accounting for firms that engage in research and manufacturing back home, it now needs to manage the safety and conduct of contractors overseas. Previously, it could rely on the normal laws that all US corporations follow to do this stuff; it's hard to enforce those in a warzone, which is where more and more contractor operations are happening. Should the government suspend the Uniform Code of Military Justice to try to save some money, too?Seldon2639 said:
The position that setting limitations on contracts encourages "foolishness" is absurd. Where's the benefit in a system that allows a business deal to invalidate basic rights, exactly?Seldon2639 said:
People like to imagine that a world of contracts in place of laws will free us to make our own decisions. Quite the opposite: it'll chain us up and drug us down. Unrestricted contracts create a situation where each and every transaction can generate its own body of law, utterly stripping citizens of their ability to understand the law or engage with it.
-- Alex
I just love it that all 30 of the senators who voted against this were Republican. That could be Obama's next election platform: "Vote for Obama: We Don't Support Rape".
In actuality, that's pretty sad.
In actuality, that's pretty sad.