26 Responses to Senator Al Franken’s Bill: Justice for Rape Victims; 30 Repubs Vote Against

1. acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 12:42 pm «

   Please Mods, post the picture of our favorite Senator, Al Franken. Thank you.
• Phoenix Woman October 8th, 2009 at 12:43 pm «

  Seconded!
2. Phoenix Woman October 8th, 2009 at 12:42 pm «

   May I say again how proud I am that Al Franken is my Senator?

   And notice how many of the GOP’s “no” votes are from the Deep South? Hey, I thought the Confederacy was all about chivalry! I mean, that’s what they like to claim and all.
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 12:58 pm «

  Thanks, Phoenix Woman, and you are one lucky person to have Sen Al Franken for your very own. Cornyn is mine; said, “in a prior lifetime I was a rattlesnake judge”…may his next life form more appropriately be a pissant!
• TobyWollin October 8th, 2009 at 5:10 pm «

  The rule in the South goes thusly: We are chivalrous toward OUR women.(we can all guess the rest)
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 7:23 pm «

  Toby, Until the 60s kids came along, that chivalry toward ‘our’ women was a load of crap! If we weren’t Stepford wives the going got pretty rough. I guess you can tell, I never lost so much of myself so as to become one.

  Have you ever read how LBJ treated Lady Bird, even in front of other people? And as for womanizing, JFK had nothing on him!
3. john in sacramento October 8th, 2009 at 1:56 pm «

   Hi acquarius

   Sorry, to hijack this important thread but I thought you’d like this

   John F. Kennedy, The Secret Service and Rich, Fascist Texans

   On November 21st, 1963, 43 years ago today, the 1,035th day of John F. Kennedy’s tenure as President, he asked the Congress for $95.7 million in supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 1964. He also President asked his economic advisers to prepare “War on Poverty” program for 1964. Then, President Kennedy and Mrs. Kennedy departed for a two-day trip to Texas. It was to be his last full day on Earth.

   At the dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center, Brooks Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas he gave a talk in which he reminisced: “Frank O’Connor, the Irish writer, tells in one of his books how, as a boy, he and his friends would make their way across the countryside, and when they came to an orchard wall that seemed too high and too doubtful to permit their voyage to continue, they took off their hats and tossed them over the wall — and then they had no choice but to follow them… This Nation has tossed its cap over the wall of space, and we have no choice but to follow it.”

   And he predicted, “When some meet here in 1990 they will look back on what we did and say that we made the right and wise decisions. ‘Your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions,’ the Bible tells us, and ‘where there is no vision, the people perish.’” (Remarks at Dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center, San Antonio, Texas , November 21, 1963)

   Later, President Kennedy made brief remarks to the League of United Latin American Citizens at the Rice Hotel in Houston, Texas following which he attended a dinner honoring Representative Albert Thomas, Houston, Texas.

   Yesterday, we talked about Oil and Oilmen; today, we want to look at Texans, keeping always in mind that George W. Bush is a transplanted Texan, and he and his father have both been “Oilmen.” After that, we’ll look at the Secret Service, the men who were supposed to protect the President. From Farewell America: (keep in mind, while reading the descriptions of Texas and Texans that the following was written 38 years ago)

   […]

   http://www.sott.net/articles/s…..ist-Texans

   Here’s an alternate link in case SOTT gets hacked http://laura-knight-jadczyk.bl…..-rich.html

   She wrote a whole series of essays on JFK. Scroll down and about half way down on the right side under JFK’s picture there are 12 essays on his presidency http://www.sott.net/

   Alternate links here, click and scroll down
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 4:19 pm «

  Thanks for the refs, John. I’ll check out your links.

  Just finished Texas Rich by Harry Hurt III, story of Hunt Oil. Tells about the very close relationships among that bunch which included J. Edgar Hoover, Clint Murchison, Sid Richardson and his boy John Connaly….and a lot of others.

  Am now about 1/2 through Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover by Anthony Summers. The law meant nothing to that old so-and-so. He spent all his time and most of that of his subordinates in gathering dirt on everybody in DC and he used it against them. Even Ike didn’t like him and wanted to get rid of him. (of course, they wrote high sounding memos and buttered him up because they were all afraid of him.) I’m just now getting to the part about JFK’s assassination and Hoover & Johnson totally controlling the Warren Commission.

  I recommend these books for those who can face any kind of reality.
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 7:00 pm «

  Excellent article, John. As you say, it was written about 1970 before Haroldson Lafayette Hunt (H.L.) died in 1974. The old codger had 14 children, 8 were illegitimate (that are known about) and all or most were born before the death of his first legal wife. Those who were bequeathed inheritances were borne by 3 women, of whom he legally married 2.

  When the old man died, Ray Hunt, the son by belated marriage number 2, took over Hunt Oil; the Big Money went to the #1 wife’s legitimate children, and the quarreling began in earnest.

  In the article it is mentioned that this Ray Hunt and George W Bush were close friends…yeah, and all profited. Sometime in the last 6 months of W’s presidency I remember reading that Hunt Oil had landed the first big oil contract with the Kurds, though it was not according to the laws set up by the Iraqi oil ministry…(promises kept). hmmm, isn’t W’s new Dallas home “next door” to Ray Hunt?

  My daughter reads these books, too. She said, “There’s no way people who haven’t grown up in Texas will believe all this. It sounds just too far over the top.” Believe it.
4. Grumpy October 8th, 2009 at 2:08 pm «

   I would agree with you, had the amendment been better written. The problem is that regardless of how much you want to pretend it’s all about rape, it also strikes down arbitration for complaints about “emotional distress” from a dirty joke, or accusations of biased retentions during layoffs, etc. You know, the stuff arbitration is supposed to deal with?

   If it had said only, “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 and false imprisonment…” I would be 100% on your side, but of course it didn’t stop there.

   The purpose of prior agreement to arbitration is to avoid long and costly court cases designed to fatten lawyers pockets over vague and minor employee conflicts. Before you pretend that anyone opposed to the amendment is “officially pro-rape” you need to explain why an anti-rape amendment included these items in the first place: “…intentional infliction of emotional distress… negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.”

   There used to be numerous frivolous lawsuits over these issues. Now, perhaps, we can look forward to their return.
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 3:49 pm «

  I’m not a lawyer. The “Grievance” system in effect when I was employed was a cruel joke. Woe be unto any who dared go that route: forget promotion, hello dirtiest jobs and heaviest workload, plus being considered a fool and avoided by others for fear of becoming tainted in the eyes of the upper level management. That system was rigged. So, for me it’s, “Thank you, Senator Franken!!!”
• Grumpy October 8th, 2009 at 5:00 pm «

  Did your grievance system mandate arbitration or was it internal?

  Do you think “forget promotion, hello dirtiest jobs and heaviest workload” would also happen in cases where the issue went to court?

  I do appreciate your honesty in recognizing that this amendment is about getting rid of arbitration for grievances along with serious crimes, and if you feel that’s appropriate there’s certainly plenty to be said for that position. My feeling is that they’re trying to slip in a windfall for lawyers disguised as protection for victims of violence.

  Frankly, I’m surprised that it’s even possible for an employment contract to require arbitration for a violent criminal offense. Has anyone actually seen the text of Ms. Jone’s contract with KBR?
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 7:14 pm «

  I never bucked the system but I know some who did. I never knew one who gained by it. (BTW, I worked for the Feds). There were several steps and you had to dot every i and cross every t or it would be thrown out on a technicality. It was internal until the employee went crazy, committed suicide, or made it to the level of a Civil Court. What peon administrative worker can afford lawyers and court costs?

  Answer to your second question is “I don’t know”; but the claimant/defendant would not want to work in that environment even if they won.

  You may be right about the windfall for lawyers, however I don’t believe that was a consideration of Sen. Franken.

  I haven’t read of anything that is a quote from the IMO illegal stipulation in the employment contract. I doubt that in an honest court, with a real judge, that it would stand in the criminal case of rape. Just my thinking/hoping.
5. ProgressiveObserver October 8th, 2009 at 3:26 pm «

   Republican Priority List
   Defend Corporate Profits
   yadda yadda yadda
   blah blah blah
   so on and so forth
   discourage rape

   Yes! Tort reform now! Because all judges are stupid morons who can’t discern or throw out a phony…
   wait a minute…that’s not right…
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 4:26 pm «

  Defend Corporate Profits

  ;

  and kick-backs, and bribes, and campaign contributions, and perks from lobbyists, and rigged voting machines, and throwing out ballots, and granting fat contracts to former colleagues, and…and…and…
6. Jason Rosenbaum October 8th, 2009 at 5:05 pm «

   Sick sick sick. Go Franken!
7. tejanarusa October 8th, 2009 at 7:07 pm «

   A quick note – arbitration between a corporation and an employee is always rigged for the corporation. I’ve never seen one where the employer doesn’t get to choose the arbitrator … enough said.

   Maybe not enough – an arbitrator quickly finds himself out of work if he finds against the company employing him. Odd, then, how most arbitration goes for the corporate side.

   Sorry, arbitration sounds good, usually works out very badly for the party with the less power.
   Mediation, otoh, is another thing altogether.
   Yes, I have some familiarity with arbitration and yes, I’m generally against it for the reasons given.
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 7:27 pm «

  Thank you for the insight into corporate arbitration. Your name tells me that you know whereof you speak.
8. Jim White October 8th, 2009 at 7:47 pm «

   Hi Scout,

   Sorry I missed this earlier. Great diary!

   Franken is certainly starting to distinguish himself very quickly, isn’t he?
• acquarius74 October 8th, 2009 at 8:07 pm «

  Hi Jim. You know, I think a person with a sense of humor just sees things more clearly than those who fear their face will break if they smile (or see things clearly). I just hope Sen. Franken’s sense of humor holds strong, he’s fallen in with a pretty disgusting crowd. (Cornyn, Sessions, Shelby, Kyle…ugh).
  scout (heard anything from Boo lately? And what about Adie?)
9. aznoteasy October 8th, 2009 at 11:23 pm «

   Moved from New Jersey to Tucson two years ago. Kyl is one of those people who thinks he is smarter than anyone, when he actually isn’t. No amount of criticism will affect him. I miss Corzine. He couldn’t use a seatbelt, but he is rich, smart, and a liberal. The polls in NJ never tell the truth. Find a resident of NJ who will tell a pollster the truth, and I’ll show you an Arizona senator who gives a crap about anything other than the defense industry.
• acquarius74 October 9th, 2009 at 7:20 am «

  I haven’t noticed your name before, aznoteasy. If you’re new to the Lake, welcome. Though I’m not an AZ resident I share your frustration – txainteasy either; we’ve got Cornyn. They both strike me as clones of P.T. Barnum, bamboozling the suckers with their torrent of wordology while fleecing us of our constitutional rights.
10. MommaSpeaks October 9th, 2009 at 7:36 am «

    Thanks for listing the names. All men, I’m pretty sure. And to think McCain might have been our president, and that Coburn is an ob/gyn (!!), and Gregg almost became Commerce Sec. (Barack, what were you thinking), and horndog Vitter has gotten away with soliciting prostitutes (a crime)!

    How any woman could ever vote for any of these 30 men is beyond me.

    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) McConnell (R-KY) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS)
• acquarius74 October 9th, 2009 at 9:38 am «

  How any woman could ever vote for any of these 30 men is beyond me

  .
  Volumes could be, and probably have been, written about this subject. In looking over the states of these senators it appears to me to be a cultural conditioning of the regions as to “a woman’s place”, passed down from mother to daughter and father to son.

  As the bud and blossom must precede the ripened fruit, woman’s full realization of their our personhood may take a couple more generations. I hope no more than that.

  To me there is nothing so pitiable as a Barbie doll woman grown old.
11. Grumpy October 9th, 2009 at 12:04 pm «

    “You may be right about the windfall for lawyers, however I don’t believe that was a consideration of Sen. Franken.”

    And I don’t believe the 30 were “against justice for rape victims.” Had the amendment been limited to the issues your article pretends it was I think it would have passed with 100% support. Instead it was written in such overly broad terms that one could not vote FOR justice for rape victims without also voting AGAINST arbitration for grievances, which is a totally separate issue.

    Not an uncommon tactic in Washington: Issue “A” can’t pass on its own so you include it in legislation about issue “B” which everyone supports. Or which few dare to dis-support knowing they’ll be painted as “pro-rape.”
12. billycthulhu October 14th, 2009 at 8:37 pm «

    As a constituent of both Shelby and Sessions I am deeply disturbed and ashamed. I can tell you I will vote against whomever is running against them in future elections and I will write in a candidate if none is provided.

    I have no words for my disgust with this. I know they’re not pro-rape (god, I hope they aren’t). But it sickens me to think that they found their scheming political concerns more important than preventing future horrific injustices like the Halliburton case