Ode To Pro-Rape Republicans

Thirty Senate Republicans voted to keep rape victims who work for defense contractors from having their day in court. How? By voting against an Al Franken-proposed amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies (like Dick Cheney’s KBR) “if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.”

Franken was inspired to sponsor this amendment by the ordeal of Jamie Leigh Jones, who was gang-raped by her co-workers while working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad. A clause in Jones’ KBR employment contract made employer-friendly private arbitration her only recourse, precluding Jones from seeking justice in court.

I hope all those pro-rape Republicans (listed below my limerick) are proud of themselves:

Ode To Pro-Rape Republicans (Limerick)
By Madeleine Begun Kane

Though Republicans yearn for support
From females, they’re bound to fall short:
Their position on rape
Is in criminal shape
Cuz they treat it like less than a tort.

Here’s the list of the thirty pro-rape Republican Senators:
Lamar Alexander (R-TN) John Barrasso (R-WY) Christopher Bond (R-MO) Sam Brownback (R-KS) Jim Bunning (R-KY) Richard Burr (R-NC) Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) Tom Coburn (R-OK) Thad Cochran (R-MS) Bob Corker (R-TN) John Cornyn (R-TX) Mike Crapo (R-ID) Jim DeMint (R-SC) John Ensign (R-NV) Michael Enzi (R-WY) Lindsey Graham (R-SC) Judd Gregg (R-NH) James Inhofe (R-OK) Johnny Isakson (R-GA) Mike Johanns (R-NE) Jon Kyl (R-AZ) John McCain (R-AZ) Mitch McConnell (R-KY) James Risch (R-ID) Pat Roberts (R-KS) Jeff Sessions (R-AL) Richard Shelby (R-AL) John Thune (R-SD) David Vitter (R-LA) Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

10 Responses to “Ode To Pro-Rape Republicans”

  1. Rape is a Republicans second name.


  2. Joyce T. says:

    That is unbelievable. And sad.

  3. We’re currently working on a site to start coordinating against these men. It would be fitting to see the end of their political careers over this.

  4. I may be naive, but I have, for so long believed, that if all women believed, and acted, as if we are of equal value as men: husbands, boyfriends, brothers, fathers, —
    there would be such a change in our universal consciousness. That means that women would have to believe that they can take care of themselves without a partner…that they are capable of taking care of themselves without a man or a woman(if Gay). That they are valuable with or without a partner. That is not to say that women should not have a partner…but that if that partner turns out to be an ASS-HOLE they can pack up and get the Hell out of there, wherever there is…
    And that also means that women have the burden of transferring that Self-Esteem, Self-Worth onto their Daughters and Sons. And the men that believe this also. But how often is the fact that a Son is going to be born more valued than a Daughter on the way? I don’t know. I have no children. I just have a Mom who didn’t understand what I am saying back when I was young….And now at the ripe age of 86…She Does.
    I don’t know if I have made any sense here but this kicks around in my head when this topic arises.

  5. Tim says:

    To be fair (and I don’t know why I should be, given the tactics of most of the GOP). if Al had proposed two separate amendments, one dealing with workplace sexual assault and battery and the second with discrimination, the votes might have gone differently. Personally, I would support both amendments, but voting against the first is orders of magnitude worse than voting against the second.

  6. Bill says:

    Looks like I can file Mad Kane under “women who won’t have to worry about rape.”

  7. Ali says:

    Actually she was not permitted from bringing legal cahrges against the rapists, she was prohibitied from suing the comapny in court since she signed an arbitration agreement. Arbitration is faster an chaper and overwhelmingly benefits the employee since they usually received compensation. It is also beneficial to the company as it keeps their costs down. I would rather see the money go to the victim not the lawyers involved. The Franken amendment also prevented contractors who have already done work for the US Gov to not get paid. Not good news in tis economy. A lot of men and women wont get paid now because the USGov wont do business with them anymore. I like Franken but this was grandstanding and disingenuous.

  8. cisco rusell says:

    Looks like Ali is just as sick as the Republicans. Find ANY excuse to justify whatever wrong is done by corporations. Republicans are the “FAMILY VALUES” party, as long as the family is the corporate family!! I feel very sorry for all the Christians whose hopes and lives have been entrusted to this party of zero values when it comes to the simple man/woman.

  9. Infophile says:

    Ali: It is important to raise the distinction between criminal charges and civil charges here, but I’d argue that arbitration is in fact significantly worse than being able to bring civil charges. Even if the employee typically gets compensated (which I’d doubt, as the company wouldn’t want to make it look like they’re admitting to any wrongdoing, but feel free to cite and prove me wrong), it’ll be simply an amount of “hush money,” a token attempt to satisfy them.

    As for the company keeping their costs down… if they’re defending rapists in court (or they are the ones being sued and they lose), keeping their costs down ranks on my priority list right between “providing hot meals to convicted rapists in prison” and “keeping the 30 senators who voted against this bill employed.” In other words, we have punitive damages for a reason.

    That’s not to say the bill couldn’t be better… Would be nice if it simply banned companies from having these contracts at all. On the other hand, when you cross-reference the people who voted against this bill with those who voted to defund ACORN for being accused of crimes…

  10. Tumblewords says:

    Amazing. Good limerick, tells it like it is.