Republicans think workplace RAPE is OKAY.

RStringfield said:
No, I am not making a big deal of it. Just pointing out that, my guess is she may have been using the words interchangeably.

I am not omnipotent nor am I witness to any of the facts. For all I know, she may have never been in Iraq, worked for Haliburton or ever had a Kiwi. That's what the courts are for.

Your point was that the Huffington Post lied. I don't see any reason to believe that.

I will say, they should have prefaced the statements in the first paragraph with "She claims."
Click to expand...

shipping container....

where did they get that idea?
 
blackascoal said:
WAIT .. are you suggesting that the thing that calls itself "USLOYAL whatever" is a woman?

wow
Click to expand...


Sorta. Back on the WOT and Rate G.W.Bush boards. I used to refer to her and her friends as the Harpies. A nastier-tempered flock of vultures you'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere.

BTW, fgor your edification and reading pleasure, here's Mark Morford's take on the 30 pro-rape senators, and for those on the right who are already hitting the quote button to protest my reference to those 30 dickheads as pro-rape, keep in mind that rape is an especially heinous crime, and there is no neutral position on it. Furthermore, this issue and the vote of yea or nay on Franken's amendment is a black mark on those 30 and their party, REGARDLESS of the veracity of the young woman making the accusation. Whether she was actually raped or not, there is no question that her employment contract required her to waive her right to legal redress if she was raped by fellow contract employees. The very existence of that clause in the contract practically guarantees women will be raped, because a company immune to the consequences of its policies, especially a company of slimeballs like Halliburton/KBR is going to take no action to protect their female personnel, which gives carte blanche to the many predators and slimeballs who would be attracted to a slimeball company. The fact that such a clause exists is an outrage, and there is no fucking excuse or context that can justify a nay vote. Call it what it is: pro-rape.


Now, as promised, Mark Morford on the same subject:



The Gang Rape and the Republicans

Behold, 30 U.S. senators who don't give a damn about battered women

by Mark Morford

The world's tallest domestic dog? Adorable. The world's biggest newborn baby? Sad and disturbing.

Waterless urinals in every new building in Los Angeles? A positive step. Canada's disgusting oilsands and Coal Country, a new documentary detailing the environmental atrocities in Appalachia? Heart wrenching and depressing.

Jimmy Page showing Jack White and the Edge how to play "When the Levee Breaks" in It Might Get Loud? All flavors of awesome. Garth Brooks coming out of retirement? Anesthetizing.

See, it's all a matter of perspective. It's all a matter of context and spin, into which bin we toss the delightful refuse of our culture to recycle and re-use it another day.

It is with this wonky filter in mind we turn our gaze to the gaping hellmouth that is the U.S. Senate, that drab cauldron of grumpy old men, defeminized women and tiny handful of rebellious dissenters, all of whom claim to have your best interests at heart but mostly only really give a damn about which lobbyist will help them best make their next boat payment.

Do I sound a little bitter? I cannot imagine why. Let us watch the senate and see if we can figure it out.

Look at them shuffle and sneer, hem and haw! Watch as they willingly eat their own souls with a ice pick and some turpentine, then step up to the media microphones and try to sound ennobled and magnanimous when in fact they only make everyone within earshot feel lost and fatalistic. So cute.

It's the same old spectacle, isn't it? There they go, tossing around the health care reform issue like it didn't affect millions of humans every single day, throwing in massive compromises and snags just so the GOP can fellate its pals in the insurance industry and a gaggle of aggrieved Democrats can get their egos fluffed and you still won't be able to get a decent dental plan for your family.

But now, just for fun, let's take it a step further. Or rather, darker. Let's go ahead and step right onto one of those large, rusty nails sticking up from the senate floor, so painful as to make your stomach turn, a bit of your lunch jump back into your throat.

It's a story from the dark political underbelly that makes you question the entire setup, rethink humanity, and lean out your window and scream: what the hell is wrong with these people? Who are they, really? Why do we give them power?

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 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 bring in the filter mentioned above, 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: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...fm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00308#position

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?
 
Last edited:
amazing how many lying libs we have on this board....i'm just glad not all the libs are as bad as the apples posting falsehoods in this thread

false:

KBR immune
arbitration clauses all but guarantee more women will be raped
arbitration is not legal redress
franken's amendment was solely about rape
republicans think workplace rape is okay


its disgusting that there are such slimeball libs as to use this girls horrible ordeal to spread political hatred and false accusations about their political opponents.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
I am only playing by the same rules used here on a daily basis.

Day after day, hour after hour I see thread after thread with misleading titles that allow conservatives to launch into another anti-liberal/Obama diatribe.

I learned it by watching them.
Click to expand...

That was so pathetic; that you need to facepalm yourself, over your failure.

:facepalm:
 
Yurt said:
the amentmdment's purpose does not mention rape or sexual assault at all....

AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
To prohibit the use of funds for any Federal contract with Halliburton Company, KBR, Inc., any of their subsidiaries or affiliates, or any other contracting party if such contractor or a subcontractor at any tier under such contract requires that employees or independent contractors sign mandatory arbitration clauses regarding certain claims.


by mentioning kbr by name....it comes close to a bill of attainder
Click to expand...


So basically; zippy lied out of his big ole ass, again.
WAY TO GO, ZIPPY :good4u:
 
ZappasGuitar said:
But everyone know WHY this amendment was introduced.

A woman was gang raped by her co-workers, and KBR, the humanitarian corporation that they are, refused to allow the courts decide whether the victim was owed any monetary recompense for her assault.
Click to expand...

But; that's not what it said, is it zippy.
You're just posting someone else's opinion piece of what their definition is.

WAY TO GO, ZIPPY :good4u:
 
ZappasGuitar said:
You expect an answer from me, yet you won't even treat me with the same courtesy you expect from me?

I asked you first, why would 30 REPUBLICANS vote against the Franken amendment?

But I understand, you can't answer. To do so would reveal you made a mistake. And you simply will not do that...ever.
Click to expand...

How abouit because it targeted ONE company and it's affiliates.
Why didn't he make it cover all contractors??

WAY TO GO, ZIPPY :good4u:
 
Yurt said:
not your lie zappo.....but this is a lie....her own testimony states she was locked in a regular trailer....

another lie for huffpo
Click to expand...

YEAH, BUT; a trailer is like a box,mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I mean it has 4 walls, a top, and a bottom.
So basically it was only an exageration.
 
zoombwaz said:
Sorta. Back on the WOT and Rate G.W.Bush boards. I used to refer to her and her friends as the Harpies. A nastier-tempered flock of vultures you'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere.

BTW, fgor your edification and reading pleasure, here's Mark Morford's take on the 30 pro-rape senators, and for those on the right who are already hitting the quote button to protest my reference to those 30 dickheads as pro-rape, keep in mind that rape is an especially heinous crime, and there is no neutral position on it. Furthermore, this issue and the vote of yea or nay on Franken's amendment is a black mark on those 30 and their party, REGARDLESS of the veracity of the young woman making the accusation. Whether she was actually raped or not, there is no question that her employment contract required her to waive her right to legal redress if she was raped by fellow contract employees. The very existence of that clause in the contract practically guarantees women will be raped, because a company immune to the consequences of its policies, especially a company of slimeballs like Halliburton/KBR is going to take no action to protect their female personnel, which gives carte blanche to the many predators and slimeballs who would be attracted to a slimeball company. The fact that such a clause exists is an outrage, and there is no fucking excuse or context that can justify a nay vote. Call it what it is: pro-rape.


Now, as promised, Mark Morford on the same subject:



The Gang Rape and the Republicans

Behold, 30 U.S. senators who don't give a damn about battered women

by Mark Morford

The world's tallest domestic dog? Adorable. The world's biggest newborn baby? Sad and disturbing.

Waterless urinals in every new building in Los Angeles? A positive step. Canada's disgusting oilsands and Coal Country, a new documentary detailing the environmental atrocities in Appalachia? Heart wrenching and depressing.

Jimmy Page showing Jack White and the Edge how to play "When the Levee Breaks" in It Might Get Loud? All flavors of awesome. Garth Brooks coming out of retirement? Anesthetizing.

See, it's all a matter of perspective. It's all a matter of context and spin, into which bin we toss the delightful refuse of our culture to recycle and re-use it another day.

It is with this wonky filter in mind we turn our gaze to the gaping hellmouth that is the U.S. Senate, that drab cauldron of grumpy old men, defeminized women and tiny handful of rebellious dissenters, all of whom claim to have your best interests at heart but mostly only really give a damn about which lobbyist will help them best make their next boat payment.

Do I sound a little bitter? I cannot imagine why. Let us watch the senate and see if we can figure it out.

Look at them shuffle and sneer, hem and haw! Watch as they willingly eat their own souls with a ice pick and some turpentine, then step up to the media microphones and try to sound ennobled and magnanimous when in fact they only make everyone within earshot feel lost and fatalistic. So cute.

It's the same old spectacle, isn't it? There they go, tossing around the health care reform issue like it didn't affect millions of humans every single day, throwing in massive compromises and snags just so the GOP can fellate its pals in the insurance industry and a gaggle of aggrieved Democrats can get their egos fluffed and you still won't be able to get a decent dental plan for your family.

But now, just for fun, let's take it a step further. Or rather, darker. Let's go ahead and step right onto one of those large, rusty nails sticking up from the senate floor, so painful as to make your stomach turn, a bit of your lunch jump back into your throat.

It's a story from the dark political underbelly that makes you question the entire setup, rethink humanity, and lean out your window and scream: what the hell is wrong with these people? Who are they, really? Why do we give them power?

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 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 bring in the filter mentioned above, 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: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...fm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00308#position

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?
Click to expand...

Show where her "her employment contract required her to waive her right to legal redress if she was raped by fellow contract employees", or be forever branded as a lying tub of shit.
 
Yurt said:
yes....zappygetard lied and has not been brave enough to show his face back in his own thread.....
Click to expand...

He used to be part of the Kennel Klub Kabal, the KKK; as we affectionetly refered to the lying liberals, on the old AOL boards.
It is nice to see that a change of venue hasn't stopped him from being a big ole lying tub of shit.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
He used to be part of the Kennel Klub Kabal, the KKK; as we affectionetly refered to the lying liberals, on the old AOL boards.
It is nice to see that a change of venue hasn't stopped him from being a big ole lying tub of shit.
Click to expand...

seriously, leave the AOL board shit where it belongs....in the PAST
 
To Freedumb

That is KBR's legal defense, you stupid motherfucker. She isn't claiming it, they are. Moron.

Don't bother. Just like on every other board you infect with your know-nothing-and-don't-plan-on-knowing-anything attitude, your pointless comments which you feel are so clever, but are in reality merely vapid and annoying, and your complete inability to comprehend that logically constructed arguments based on empirical evidence, must either be disproved or accepted, you are once again on my ignore list Christ, you're as boneheaded as my ex-girlfriend, who fancied herself a brilliant debater, but who thought she was allowed in the middle of getting a logical and factual ass-whuppin', to announce. ""We're going to have to agree to disagree." Like you, she could never grasp that agreement to disagree is not the norm, but the exception in a debate, where neither position has the benefit of a clear victory in logical validity, or has the truth clearly on its side; in other words, it applies to conflicts of opinion and opinions only. However, an argument you can't disprove is not a mere opinion, but the truth, and MUST be accepted as being the truth, whether you like it or not. Btw, throwing multiple logical fallacies at your adversary and hoping something sticks doesn't constitute disproof, either, like you once tried to do with me, and while i was pointing out the many and varied fallacies you committed in your pathetic attempt at a rebuttal, and trying to tell you that your argument was invalid, untrue, and a jucking foke, you were actually telling me i got my head handed to me! As if! You're clueless and a smug smartass, which is about as welcome as a turd in the punch bowl.

And don't worry that you'll get off a good line for which I won't have an answer. you won't, but in the unlikely event that happens, i'm sure somebody will alert me to the breaking news that you managed to get both of your functioning (and I use that term in the loosest interpretation possible) brain (ditto) cells to flicker in unison (more of less), and actually almost had a thought. Then we'll all laugh, because that just isn't gonna happen.

Not in this lifetime, or on this planet.

No way.

No how.


Buh-bye. Asshole.
 
zoombwaz said:
That is KBR's legal defense, you stupid motherfucker. She isn't claiming it, they are. Moron.

Don't bother. Just like on every other board you infect with your know-nothing-and-don't-plan-on-knowing-anything attitude, your pointless comments which you feel are so clever, but are in reality merely vapid and annoying, and your complete inability to comprehend that logically constructed arguments based on empirical evidence, must either be disproved or accepted, you are once again on my ignore list Christ, you're as boneheaded as my ex-girlfriend, who fancied herself a brilliant debater, but who thought she was allowed in the middle of getting a logical and factual ass-whuppin', to announce. ""We're going to have to agree to disagree." Like you, she could never grasp that agreement to disagree is not the norm, but the exception in a debate, where neither position has the benefit of a clear victory in logical validity, or has the truth clearly on its side; in other words, it applies to conflicts of opinion and opinions only. However, an argument you can't disprove is not a mere opinion, but the truth, and MUST be accepted as being the truth, whether you like it or not. Btw, throwing multiple logical fallacies at your adversary and hoping something sticks doesn't constitute disproof, either, like you once tried to do with me, and while i was pointing out the many and varied fallacies you committed in your pathetic attempt at a rebuttal, and trying to tell you that your argument was invalid, untrue, and a jucking foke, you were actually telling me i got my head handed to me! As if! You're clueless and a smug smartass, which is about as welcome as a turd in the punch bowl.

And don't worry that you'll get off a good line for which I won't have an answer. you won't, but in the unlikely event that happens, i'm sure somebody will alert me to the breaking news that you managed to get both of your functioning (and I use that term in the loosest interpretation possible) brain (ditto) cells to flicker in unison (more of less), and actually almost had a thought. Then we'll all laugh, because that just isn't gonna happen.

Not in this lifetime, or on this planet.

No way.

No how.


Buh-bye. Asshole.
Click to expand...


I don't care what those dambasses are fucking claiming, you stupid asswipe.
I see that you've returned to making lengthy posts, in an attempt to cover your lack of congnitive reasoning.

The title to this thread was a lie, the courts have already ruled that she does have the right to bring suit, and all of the rest of the liberal shit that's been posted about this wasn't worth the pixels it took to display it. Kind of like the pile of steaming crap, that you just created.

Speaking of brains.
Did you finally get the few you have left, stimulated??
But; you the man. :good4u:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I don't care what those dambasses are fucking claiming, you stupid asswipe.
I see that you've returned to making lengthy posts, in an attempt to cover your lack of congnitive reasoning.

The title to this thread was a lie, the courts have already ruled that she does have the right to bring suit, and all of the rest of the liberal shit that's been posted about this wasn't worth the pixels it took to display it. Kind of like the pile of steaming crap, that you just created.

Speaking of brains.
Did you finally get the few you have left, stimulated??
But; you the man. :good4u:
Click to expand...
The creep has always been a foul-mouthed, I know everything, you know nothing bastard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top