OrionTheWolf
Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rulemylife
I've been on the topic through the start.
And? I have been reading since the start.
quote:
The bullshit is that no one here is supposedly opposing the bill, they just have had their delicate feelings offended by the wording.
You say supposedly, so it would be easy to link to the post number, state the post number, or copy exactly what you are speaking of. There is one ludicrous statement made by someone, that you called them on, but besides that not one. So the bullshit is yours, unless you wish to show otherwise.
quote:
Because we can't have a rape victim getting justice if it offends a Republican pet company like Halliburton.
You see this is bullshit here. Who on these boards are defending Halliburton? Prove it, show it, put up or shut up.
quote:
But wait, I forgot, we have no Republicans here, only Independents who espouse every Republican cause of the day.
Ludicrous statement. Again I say you do not have integrity enough to prove your words, they just ring hollow with slander. Come on prove me wrong, I dare you.
quote:
quote:
Probably, and those that are opposing it will be noted. Both sides tend to do it though, that is why myself and Ron said there was political theater attached to this, which there is.
Only the theater being created by those who want to oppose a worthy bill based on political gamesmanship.
Who has said the bill should be opposed, with the exception of one ludicrous statement made by someone that does not usually comment in this section. Come on RML, show me you are not lying. You can't, because I have reread the posts several times.
quote:
quote:
In your simplified handling of things. This woman and all like her deserve a right to justice. See that is in issue out of the way.
I'm sorry, did I just misread this?
Were you just trying to say that the woman being raped was an issue aside from the bill about the woman getting raped?
Yeah you misread it with your partisan twisted mind. The issue of her getting justice is agreed upon by all except one poster on this topic. Now that has been settle the other issues that some of us have are listed later in my post.
quote:
quote:
The next issue that others have a problem with, which I know you would like to silence us, is why did Franken deny this did not target Haliburton, when it does, and mentions Haliburton in the statement? The other question and issue I have, is if this legislation is that important, why put a landmine in it? Instead of playing politics with such an important piece of legislation, fast track them damn thing. That is if you believe this woman has a right to justice as the priority, instead of using it to just torpedo the other side with political bullshit.
Well..............hmmmmmmmmmmmm...............let's see.
You had an employee of Halliburton who had a criminal act committed against her but who was denied justice because of an unconscionable and unenforceable contract Halliburton required her to sign.
I see what you mean, it was obviously a political vendetta aimed at Halliburton.
No reason they should have been mentioned in the legislation at all.
Yeah they should not have been mentioned until the legislation had passed, and then they should have been burned in the media. It is called putting the importance of the legislation first and foremost, instead of politics. Do you need it in larger font?
quote:
quote:
So which posters have defended those that opposed it? Which ones seem to be against justice for this woman and others like her? Still waiting, and as I said your actions will reflect your integrity.
I believe you just did unless my reading comprehension has suddenly deserted me.
Your reading comprehension suddenly desered you, but that is to be expected. So where is the list, if you are stating me now, then you are a liar. Point out where exactly? Here let me help you a bit, since your reading comprehension has left you:
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
I see it as political theater as well. From s strategic view, leave Halliburton in, and then run negative campaigns against anyone that opposed it by saying "they oppose a law that protects rape victims", and any explanation afterwards will be drowned out.
The people at the top are not idiots, it is just we do not always know why they do the things they do, until it is revealed.
Political theater is about wagging the dog, and sleight of hand. We should be so proud of the officials we elected into office. I would like to show them some of the mountains where my Mom's people grew up. There are some holes up there that no one has seen the bottom of alive.
Why else would they have included the specific name of a company in the actual bill?
So where is the opposition in the above RML? Huh?
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
That would be just too effective for our elected officials. They might even start to improve their image and approval rating if they started doing things like that.
Where is it here? In fact I was speaking about streamlining it and improving the bill. Huh?
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
The difference would be a fine, upstanding and truthful Senator said it was not about singling out Haliburton. So what do you think about Franken saying it does not single them out?
Why even include their name in the bill? Seems you would want to make a bill as "landmine" free as possible if the number one priority is to get it passed.
Here again I question the political motives of including the name. Still no opposition to the bill though.
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
Seems pretty obvious to me as well, so why did Franken deny it?
Here I am wondering why Franken denied that the bill targeted Halliburton. Still no opposition to the bill though.
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
Good spin. Not sure why those human wastes did not vote for the bill. What I am saying is that if you want a bill passed without problems, do not put political landmines in them. Both sides have some responsibility here, the ones that did not vote for it, and the ones that purposefully included some worded in the purpose, that they knew would trigger some problems.
I am a little slow, could you make those notes here and post them? I just find it funny that when I want to insult someone, I do it directly, but the mods get onto me for it. Others do it in a deceptively, passive-aggressive way, and they get away with it. Let's see honesty or deception is rewarded? Mars, we know where much of your bias and hatred is, and that stuff is going to eventually eat you up inside.
So who exactly here is against this bill again? Could you show me where?
Put up or shut up, time to show how much integrity you have.
No opposition here, in fact I call the ones that did not vote for it human waste. So show me RML, or admit you are a liar in your statement.
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
No one has spoken against the bill or defended those that opposed it on the Senate floor, so your comment is false. Also, you assume that you know each of us that has had a problem with the wording of the Statement of purpose, and your assumptions would be false.
This bill is apparently needed, because of BS that can be put into contracts and enforced by Federal Contractors, and most that have a problem with the wording have stated as much. Let me say that again so you do not miss it this time; This bill is apparently needed, because of BS that can be put into contracts and enforced by Federal Contractors, and most that have a problem with the wording have stated as much.
No the issue I have is why did they ever put Haliburton's name anywhere near the bill, if their true intended purpose was to protect? The only reason I can see is to create poltical bait, which I find reprehensible that they did so. Such an important bill should have been made landmine free, so that it could be fast tracked through.
Here is another one you can point out opposition to the bill in. Just put it in bold.
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
That may well be. I wrote to someone privately that they should have left the name out in the beginning, gotten the bill fast tracked, and then once signed nailed the bastards to the wall in the media.
Also, I am still a little confused by Franken's comments, which as Thadius said, seem to be half truths. Leave that crap out, get important legislation passed, and then rip up anyone that it points at.
This one speaks for itself.
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
Damn Spinner, I cannot believe he turned that around on you. Just so you know, I did not see anything in any of your responses that indicated you did not support this bill, that you felt that gang rape and false imprisonment should be left to private arbitration, or that you support private companies having any kind of police powers.
This is typical of Mars, and a few others here, as well as it is a reflection of some of the things that is repulsive, and needs to be corrected in our political system.
Here is where I am supporting Spinner because Mars tried pulling your lie.
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
No one has argued it, but it will not keep Mars and a few others from saying it is true. Hell I find that more offensive and insulting than many of the things that occur on this forum that are reportable offenses.
Gee I guess I am a fortune teller her because you have done exactly what I said. I would rather you call me a stupid, motherfucker because it is less insultive. Feeling proud of your integrity yet RML?
So RML, there are all my posts, it should be easy for you now to show where your reading comprehension either failed you, and admit you misread what I wrote, admit you lied, or keep showing what a big person of great integrity you are by slandering me. Your choice of course, but I suspect you will ignore this post that has all of the facts in it.
_____________________________
When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."
|
RE: New bill needed for rape - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread