Does your Senator love (shielding government contractors from prosecution for abetting) rape?

[j0frenzy]

On the one hand, my opinion of Senators Chambliss and Isakson got lower. Well, Isakson at least. Chambliss hasn't moved from the bottom since I've heard the guy's name. However, the rationalist in me says that there has to be a somewhat reasonable argument that at least some of the 30 people made that I would like to hear because there are a couple of names on here that I tend to respect politically, even if we do not see eye to eye. Fortunate part of being a poli sci student in DC is that I will most likely here those arguments in 3 nanoseconds of mentioning the vote.

 

[The_Chief]

For all the political craziness in New Jersey at the moment, at least our senators voted Yea.

oh yea! *high five*

 

[Alex_P]

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.

My actual position is that most of those 30 senators have given up on even the pretense of good-faith political participation and just sit there saying "Nay" to everything in order to try to eek out a scorched-earth victory in the next election.

-- Alex

 

[Chilliman]

Good to see Maryland said "Yea".

Represent o.o

 

[ragestreet]

My state half-supports rape. I guess that means they support it as long as they're not on the receiving end.

 

[Jedisolo75]

As much as I love the idea of being able to smack talk politicians, I have to say that I don?t know about this logic. The bill wasn?t called the I Love Rape Bill, and half of the senators probably didn?t read it before they signed it. Granted, that?s a problem, but you can?t just come out and say ?Senator so and so loves rape.? Besides that, almost no bills are about just one thing, there could have been 20 different things involved in that vote. You can?t just make an assumption about people based on any one vote.

 

[AlexFromOmaha]

I'd actually like to see the proposed bill and give it a read through myself before I light the torch and brandish my pitch fork. Their may have been a reason somewhere in the fine print that they disagreed with.

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.

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!

Enlighten you? Sure. The link to the bill was in the original post long before you posted this. Reading comprehension is an awesome skill.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Let's hear it for Tennessee! Both senators voted nay!

Tennessee is my state. I could make a Southerner joke here...

 

[TheMadTypist]

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.

My actual position is that most of those 30 senators have given up on even the pretense of good-faith political participation and just sit there saying "Nay" to everything in order to try to eek out a scorched-earth victory in the next election.

-- Alex

See, we agree on that. It's just another data point in a string of poor sportsmanship on their part, imo, but I didn't know that was what you really meant from the opening post. The whole "Loves Rape" or "a vote for Rape" thing steals the spotlight and makes everybody angry. Yes, they made what I think is a bad decision, based on political motivations, but somebody else might think otherwise, and someone who respects and voted for those people will react in a hostile manner right back at you. And what we really want is everybody listening and thinking, right?

This damn factionalism we've got going on makes everyone "Politically motivated" instead of trying to represent their constituency and the best interests of the general populace. every decision's going to be a slogan, either yours or your opponent's, come election time.

 

[skitzo van]

WOO! California still knows its head from its ass!

 

[quack35]

After having read the amendment...

Screw you, op. I see what you were trying to do (implying Republicans endorse rape.) That being said, to anyone too lazy to read the amendment, there's more to it than *just* the rape clause. There's also stuff like battery, etc. Basically, under the amendment, someone who got into a fight with another contractor or military person could sue their company.

Oh, and it completely bans all contracts with Haliburton and KBR, if I'm reading this right. Even if they start dropping those particular clauses from their contracts.

Actually, what it says is that the government can't enter into contracts with people who refuse Americans their day in court if they are a victim of a crime. Frankly, anything else is immoral. American defense contractors do not get to set themselves up as authorities above American law. "Mandatory arbitration" is code for "no courts, our call."

EDIT: I wrote what I hope was a very nice e-mail to the Nebraskan senator who voted against it asking for his reasons. If I get them in a reasonable timeframe, I'll post it here for everyone to read.

Hey, you live in Omaha? Me too!

Cool.

 

[Eldarion]

Whew, my New York senators didn't let me down.

 

[Alex_P]

As much as I love the idea of being able to smack talk politicians, I have to say that I don?t know about this logic. The bill wasn?t called the I Love Rape Bill, and half of the senators probably didn?t read it before they signed it. Granted, that?s a problem, but you can?t just come out and say ?Senator so and so loves rape.? Besides that, almost no bills are about just one thing, there could have been 20 different things involved in that vote. You can?t just make an assumption about people based on any one vote.

It is an amendment to an appropriations bill. The entire thing up for vote was one paragraph plus a sentence. That paragraph covers more than sexual assault, true; I quoted the text from THOMAS earlier upthread if you want to see the details. The Senate site links to the bill text as well. I'd be surprised if anybody didn't read it. Franken could've read the whole thing out loud in less than a minute.

Anyone who thinks your Senator had a good reason to vote "Nay": I encourage you to write your Senator an e-mail and ask what about SA 2588 was so bad that it needed to be rejected. Maybe you'll get a nice little explanation from the staff or something.

-- Alex

 

[sethwood]

I guess my Senator didn't win because I would never vote for someone AGAINST rape.

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

I'm quite proud of Indiana right now =). I knew I always liked Bayh and I have a friend who works for Lugar.

 

[Jenkins]

go go california!

 

[quiet_samurai]

God I hope so, why else would I vote for him?

 

[Captain Schpack]

NY voted yea. cuz we awesome.

 

[ddon]

nice to see good old oregon voted against rape. i feel good that im not in a state with an idiot senator.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

Yay California! The Governator may not be the best, but we have thinking senators!