The gang rape and the Republicans
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 28, 2026 20:08
VIEWED: 2868
PAGE 1 of 3
This is an excerpt from a Mark Morford column that just came out. I knew about the story, but nonetheless got some satisfaction (as little as is possible, given the subject) from reading this. Will be interesting to see how it's dismantled by some here.Quote:
Behold, 30 U.S. senators who don't give a damn about battered women
Here is freshman Minnesota senator Al Franken's first-ever legislative action, a relatively simple, almost laughably surefire bill requiring the Pentagon no longer do business with any contractor -- hi, Halliburton! -- that requires its employees to agree that she cannot sue said contractor if she is, oh let's just say, gang raped by its employees.
You read that right. It's a can't-sue-us-if-you're-raped clause. In a U.S. government contract. Aimed squarely at Halliburton. Thanks, Dick Cheney!
First, you are required to get over your initial disgust that such legislation is even necessary, that such clauses even exist and that the Pentagon is already doing business with such contractors (hi, Halliburton/KBR!), and that there has already been a truly horrible case validating it, wherein a 20-year-old female employee was allegedly gang-raped by contractors, locked in a shipping container, abused every way from Sunday, and found out later she was unable to sue.
Let us pause to imagine if, say, Wal-Mart had such a clause. Or maybe Toys 'R' Us. Starbucks. Let us imagine the appalled outcry. But Halliburton? Dick Cheney's vile little spitwad of shameless war profiteering? No problem. Hey, it's Republican-endorsed military contracting. No one said it was ethical.
But that's not most the repellant part. Ready?
The most repellant part is the 30 U.S. senators -- Republicans each and every one -- who just stepped forth to vote against the Franken amendment, essentially saying no, women should have no right to sue if they are sexually abused or gang raped, Halliburton and its ilk must be protected at all costs, and by the way we hereby welcome Satan into our rancid souls forevermore. God bless America.
Let us repeat, for clarity. Franken's amendment passed with a vote of 68-30. Meaning 30 U.S. senators voted against the elimination of the rape/sue clause. Meghan McCain, call your dad. He's one of them.
Here is where you try and do it. Here is where you try to figure out where to slot such wretched information, how to make even the slightest sense of it.
And then you discover a horrible truth: you can't. Turns out, when faced with such vileness, all filters fail. All balance is thrown off. You thought you had some sort of way to process and attain perspective? You are proven wrong.
So perhaps all we can do is ponder how pathetic and sad these various senator's lives must be, how these bitter old men will now go home at night and announce around the dinner table that, yes, today they worked very hard to help improve the welfare of the nation by essentially enabling rape and sexual abuse, tried their darndest to prevent women who've been viciously attacked from having much legal recourse. And lo, Satan will chuckle happily.
Then maybe these senators will try and hug their wives, or their daughters. And maybe, if there's any justice in the universe, their wives and daughters will slap them as hard as humanly possible, lock them in a shipping container, and never let them touch them again.
P.S.; Would you like a complete list of these 30 senators' names? Right here.
Why look, there's grandpa McCain. There's disgraced man-child John Ensign. Hooker-lovin' David Vitter. Saxby Chambliss. Inhofe. It's a veritable welfare-state who's who of Dick Cheney's sanctum of oily fluffers, and many more who would love to be. Shall we write a nice letter to them? Or maybe their wives and daughters?
________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't like Republicans, but the chances that they actually READ what they were voting about was probably very low. Be glad that it passed and the number of no votes weren't HIGHER.
I'd also be more angry at Halliburton. What a BUNCH of SCUMBAGS.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I am not all surprised, even have a pet peeve along the same lines myself.
Quote:
Current bill is H.R. 911
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-911
http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr911
Bear in mind the cost of this to Americans would be $1 a YEAR, for four years.
While we're pouring billions down the drain for war and bailouts.
I mean, damn, I can spare a buck to put the brakes on the hellcamps, you know ?
As for Helliburnin...
They learned it from DynCorp, who learned it from Wackenhut, who learned it from Pinkertons...
And you can just keep goin with that, far back as history exists, it's why PMCs are and always will be creeps, really - Johann Tserclaes, Count of Tilly being a particularly offending example, and not without a great deal of company in his chosen line of work, most Condottieri really WERE creeps, and so were their men.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think those 30 Repubs should be charged with aiding and abetting a known rapist.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
the chances that they actually READ what they were voting about was probably very low.
And that is almost as disgusting as the issue itself. You should never vote on something you haven't read. Just as, clearly, no one should sign a contract they haven't read. Making laws shouldn't be some casual thing where you show up and have a drink, maybe read the cliff notes if you're feeling really diligent, and throw darts at your party's respective board.
I know Michael Moore is not the most popular of people, but maybe more people should adopt his strategy of reading legislation through a bullhorn. Clearly something needs to be done.
Whoever wrote the original clause should be drawn and fucking quartered. And they never should have gotten away with it. A criminal charge shouldn't be legally dismissed by a contract clause. Are they also allowed to let all their drivers go without insurance? Kill people? Anything they want to do as long as it's in their contracts??? No. That sort of thing must be stopped, and never should have been allowed in the first place.
This sort of thing makes me just
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I don't like Republicans, but the chances that they actually READ what they were voting about was probably very low.
Can they even read?
BTW all unconscionable contracts are void. It's a bluff. Like ticket stubs that allege you can't sue becuz you bought a ticket. BS. Jedi Mind Freak.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Byte: Maybe it's time for some legislation that REQUIRES the presence of congresspeople for the reading of any bills that come up for a vote, and if they aren't there for the reading, they don't get to vote.
And tie their pay and benefits to their attendance. "Sorry, Senator- you only attended readings of 30% of bills that came up in the latest session. Here's your paycheck for that 30% - and here's a bill for 70% of your healthcare coverage."
Just a thought...
Mike
Let the wild rumpus start!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
What does the no-sue contract actually say?
What did the bill actually say?
And what happened to this poor woman? Did she get justice? Did she sue the individuals involved? Did she bring them up on charges and send them to jail?
There's so much I'd like to know about this.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's the bill, (actually an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill HR.3326):
Quote:
SA 2588. Mr. FRANKEN (for himself and Ms. Landrieu) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 3326, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes; as follows:
On page 245, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:
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.
And the victim, Jamie Lee Jones, will get her day in court.
http://www.nsvrc.org/news/news-field/1754
If you really wanna get scared, google "mandatory arbitration"
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This kind of corporate behavior is widespread, and is not limited to sexual harrassment and rape. Most large corporations try to "Lawsuit-proof" themselves. In Indiana, you can't sue a certain large corp if you get injured on the job. It's in the contract, and even legislated in the law. As long as the employee attends a "job safety" lecture once a year (and a "harrassment" lecture too, come to think of it), the corporation is exempt from liability lawsuits.
It's true. A friend of mine had his fingers cut off on company machinery. His fingers were re-attached, and the company insurance paid for about half the cost. My friend still suffers stiffness and a great deal of pain, but he has been informed that the Company's liability ended with the surgery assistance.
So the "Gang Rape Clause" is just the tip of the iceberg.
"Might have been the losing side, still not convinced it was the wrong one." -Mal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME