30 Republicans Senators Support Gang Rape

Thewelder

I know most of you guys swing to the right and a few swing to the left and some of us suck at swinging and are in the middle. But I saw this the other day and it caught my eye. You can also look it up at ABC and they have the story. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/15/defence-contractors-rape-claim-block . I do know that i will not be voting for Mike Johanns when he is up again because he was one of the thirty that voted against it. t give you the low down Jamie Leigh Jones was a twenty year old girl who decided to put her life in danger and be a civilian contractor over in Iraq. In her first few days there she was drugged, gang raped and locked in a storage container. She was locked in it so she couldn't tell anybody. She tried to sue the company and couldn't be cause of the fine print (can anybody else think of a company that had small print problems and people wanted legal action from the government recently. TC) She had her case taken up by Al Franken. it came up for voting in the Senate Luckily it got passed, but 30 republicans voted against it. I guess Republicans do support gang rape Here is a list of the Republicans who voted to protect a corporation over a victim of rape: Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Gregg (R-NH) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Kyl (R-AZ) McCain (R-AZ)-no not the guy who just tried to run for President of the USA McConnell (R-KY) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS)

cabinetmaker

I think the title of this post might be a bit biased. Just because they voted against this amendment does not mean they voted for gang rape.

phobicsquirrel

cabinetmaker:

I think the title of this post might be a bit biased. Just because they voted against this amendment does not mean they voted for gang rape.

I don't buy that. They protect their interest. These contractor's were hugely compensated and built up by the last administration. Instead of using our own military contractors were used at many times over the price. Saying that they support gang rape might be a bit far but it does show how they regard her well being thus being raped. Over the good of a company. So voting against this amendment is saying they want to save A COMPANY rather than a woman or women of having this tragedy. This company, and the people involved should be thrown in jail and rapped in the same way. It's Freak'n sick that people in power keep getting away with crimes and others take the fall. Now if she was pregnant and they gave her an abortion maybe they would be all over it. It's good to be a republican these days that's for sure...

clearlysuspect

phobicsquirrel

Thewelder

cabinetmaker:

I think the title of this post might be a bit biased. Just because they voted against this amendment does not mean they voted for gang rape.

I do agree with you that the title is very biased. It was done with that very idea in mind to be biased. While this a is a very horrible tragedy and I will not be supporting Mike Johanns from now on. I put this up here because of the Obama and his cronies post. The title of the article is or at least the subject is All Black People Must Be Democrats. While that entire article isn't about that it doesn't matter because people only read the headlines, make a decision on what they want to read, then actually read the article. Please read the actual articles in front of you and do a bit of research. Not just what you read from one site.

Vulchor

phobicsquirrel:

cabinetmaker:

I think the title of this post might be a bit biased. Just because they voted against this amendment does not mean they voted for gang rape.

I don't buy that. They protect their interest. These contractor's were hugely compensated and built up by the last administration. Instead of using our own military contractors were used at many times over the price. Saying that they support gang rape might be a bit far but it does show how they regard her well being thus being raped. Over the good of a company. So voting against this amendment is saying they want to save A COMPANY rather than a woman or women of having this tragedy. This company, and the people involved should be thrown in jail and rapped in the same way. It's Freak'n sick that people in power keep getting away with crimes and others take the fall. Now if she was pregnant and they gave her an abortion maybe they would be all over it. It's good to be a republican these days that's for sure...

Well said Squirrel, and again it makes another sad day for me to say I am still a registered Republican. Lord knows there are plenty of bad dems, and indeps too----but the list of these 30 reads like something from a fearmongering, anti-woman, homophobic, cluster F------Alexander, Brownback, Graham, Sessions......theres a list of heroes for ya, lol.

jacketsrule

These are some of the most conservative and faith based people in Washington. Some of them even ran for president. This title is defineately biased.

kuzi16

kuzi16

kuzi16

clearlysuspect

jpclotfelter

This story is such BS.

AQUADGIO1200

I vote for Michael Savage for President in 2012!

gmill880

I call BS

Vulchor

jacketsrule:

These are some of the most conservative and faith based people in Washington. Some of them even ran for president. This title is defineately biased.

LOL!!!Faith based....they may be the number 1 problem in govt. Oh wait, no Jesus rules all-----just as Sanford or the Teg Haggard (love those pics of him and Bush).

Vulchor

::::said with pretentious British accent::::I never make accusations or incorect statements, I am above such hogwash and rubbish...now get my tea and blindly follow my thinking.LOL!!!!!Michael Savage, the man who thinks autism is a plot to screw the prosperous and who is banned in the U.K. because he is "considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence". SPeaking of people who the Patriot Act should lock up without cause.

kuzi16

Vulchor:

jacketsrule:

These are some of the most conservative and faith based people in Washington. Some of them even ran for president. This title is defineately biased.

LOL!!!Faith based....they may be the number 1 problem in govt. Oh wait, no Jesus rules all-----just as Sanford or the Teg Haggard (love those pics of him and Bush).

i have some interesting thoughts on this concept.... anyone mind if i thread jack? (it is a bit off topic)

Vulchor

Go for it Kuz------we may agree on this one (my fingers are crossed we wont, lol ....j/k)

jacketsrule

Vulchor:

jacketsrule:

These are some of the most conservative and faith based people in Washington. Some of them even ran for president. This title is defineately biased.

LOL!!!Faith based....they may be the number 1 problem in govt. Oh wait, no Jesus rules all-----just as Sanford or the Teg Haggard (love those pics of him and Bush).

You left coasters are all alike! Florida, California, it's all the same.

jpclotfelter

I have been to that camp in Baghdad. I'm not saying that what happened to that girl was not an awful, unfortunate, and criminal situation. But you all must realize that NONE of you or I know all the facts. Period.

PuroFreak

The main reason I have a problem with this story and can tell it doesn't give all the facts is that it talks about sueing the company... When you sue a company that is a civil case and NOT a criminal case. This article does not address the criminal charge of rape. All this story says is that the company that she worked for can't be sued because she was raped by co-workers. It does not address the fact that criminal charges can still be filed against the suspected rapists and criminal charges can be filed against the company for tampering. All this says is she can't file a civil suit against the company she worked for.

clearlysuspect

PuroFreak:

The main reason I have a problem with this story and can tell it doesn't give all the facts is that it talks about sueing the company... When you sue a company that is a civil case and NOT a criminal case. This article does not address the criminal charge of rape. All this story says is that the company that she worked for can't be sued because she was raped by co-workers. It does not address the fact that criminal charges can still be filed against the suspected rapists and criminal charges can be filed against the company for tampering. All this says is she can't file a civil suit against the company she worked for.

I see that now and I apologize for my inaccurate statement earlier. However, I think she should be able to sue to company if they tampered with evidence. Just my opinion though.

Smokeee

Thewelder:

I put this up here because of the Obama and his cronies post. The title of the article is or at least the subject is All Black People Must Be Democrats.

Thank You!

mustluvcigars

kuzi16

jlzimmerman

Vulchor

I am not for killing kids....therefore I am better than Zimmer----lol.

PuroFreak

Vulchor:

I am not for killing kids....therefore I am better than Zimmer----lol.

In who's eyes? lol

Vulchor

Quite right Puro-----and I misspoke, I am not for killing ALL kids.

PuroFreak

Vulchor:

Quite right Puro-----and I misspoke, I am not for killing ALL kids.

Haha Thats more like it! Most maybe... but not ALL. lol