If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Senate passes Violence Against Women act by landslide. Meanwhile, there are 22 Senators apparently still in favor of violence against women   (usatoday.com) divider line 320
    More: News, Violence Against Women Act, violence against women, Sen. Patrick Leahy, House Republicans, domestic violence, federal courts, House Majority Leader  
•       •       •

3500 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Feb 2013 at 7:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



320 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-12 11:34:06 PM

Jackson Herring: have you read a single farking post I have ever made about this topic, including the literally dozens I have made today and in this thread speficifally


I'm thinking that this one is some sort of bizarre reverse-troll. Either that, or we've found living proof that some Democrats really are just as reactionary and stupid as Republicans are.
 
2013-02-12 11:35:07 PM

Jackson Herring: ramblinwreck: Unless you're the subby...who either through ignorance or deliberate (and effective) means, misidentified a vote against the bill was only a vote against protecting female victims of domestic abuse.

have you read a single farking post I have ever made about this topic, including the literally dozens I have made today and in this thread speficifally

I mean I know you haven't, it is a rhetorical question


You like to write that a lot in your posts, as if what you say is ignored. (And that everyone should read what you have to say because it's REALLY important)

Bottom line: my point on semantics wasn't even addressing you.
 
2013-02-12 11:38:45 PM

Jackson Herring: ramblinwreck: You used a "textbook" shaming tactic used by feminists

but what about MEN's rights a bloo blah bloo


Oh wait, so we do have the truth now. You couldn't give a crap about the bill protecting ALL victims?
 
2013-02-12 11:41:45 PM

Karac: serial_crusher: One thing I'm failing to get here... Supporters of this act like tribal women weren't getting any justice, like there was just nobody who could prosecute a guy in cases like this.
But, couldn't the actual State that the reservation was in do the prosecuting? Or was there anything actually preventing that? Surely you couldn't just wander around and rape people with impunity on reservations... Could you?

Reservations currently cannot prosecute non-native americans for crimes on indian reservations, unless congress delegates such powers to them - which this bill tries to do.  Those crimes fall under federal jurisdiction.  Which means that when those crimes go to court, they have to go to a federal court, which out west where a lot of reservations are, might be a few hours drive away.

What this means is that when a federal prosecutor takes a look at cases he can prosecute, he can pick from a couple murders, maybe some drugs dealing, maybe a nice organize crime case - or he can spend the time and money to ship in witnesses for a case of some asshole beating his girlfriend.  Understandably this particular category of crime usually falls through the cracks due to simple triage.

As to the 'concerns' that allowing tribes to prosecute non-Indians being unconstitutional - that case has already been settled in Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe , where the Supreme Court said that it's legal as long as congress has told them it's OK to do so.


Ah, that makes sense. Well, as much sense as anything in our legal system makes.
I guess the big problem is escalating straight to the federal level, skipping counties and states (since usually they'd be the ones prosecuting this sort of thing, not the Feds).

So ensuring proper justice either means spending federal money building federal court near the reservation, or letting the tribes do their own thing. I guess in that sense the small government republicans should really have been for it...

Ideally the tribes should just get over themselves and disband and let us treat them like everybody else (well, keep the casinos legal...)
 
2013-02-12 11:49:33 PM

ramblinwreck: Oh wait, so we do have the truth now. You couldn't give a crap about the bill protecting ALL victims?


are you serious at this point or are you just ignoring reality to show how concerned you are
 
2013-02-12 11:50:28 PM

ramblinwreck: You like to write that a lot in your posts


ok yeah you are just making stuff up at this point
 
2013-02-12 11:52:45 PM

serial_crusher: So ensuring proper justice either means spending federal money building federal court near the reservation, or letting the tribes do their own thing. I guess in that sense the small government republicans should really have been for it...



Even if there is a Federal Court House you would need the prosecutor would have to prosecute According to government data US attorneys decline about 67% of sexual assault  cases from Indian Country, just having the court house closer wouldn't ensure that the cases would be tried,a zero tolerance policy would be better.
 
2013-02-12 11:54:29 PM

serial_crusher: clowncar on fire: spongeboob: davidphogan: Karac: What's the objection to saying that crimes committed on Indian reservations can be prosecuted by courts on Indian reservations.

I don't see anyone claiming that you can't be arrested for beating up your girlfriend in D.C. if you actually live in Boston.

They're not US courts.  It's more like letting the Canadians charge you with a crime for beating up your Canadian girlfriend outside of Canada.

Are you sure it is not like allowing Canadians to charge with a crime for beating up your Canadian girlfriend in Canada, because Rubio added that he was concerned with a provision that would grant tribal courts jurisdiction to prosecute crimes against non-Native Americans on tribal lands

Maybe it's more like beating up on your girlfriend at her dad's place and then trying to get to the town sheriff before her dad has an opportunity to deliver his own brand of justice on you.

What if my Canadian girlfriend and I got ino a canoe on an Indian reservation, then paddled it down to the Rio Grande and beat her up right there in the center of the river, between the US and Mexico. Who gets jurisdiction then?


Depends. Do you want to go to prison in America, or do you want the the Zeta cartel to ship your headless body back to your parents?
 
2013-02-12 11:56:07 PM
Maybe we should pass a VAMA just to get all these uninformed jackasses to STFU

Would that make you feel better, you poor oppressed men?
 
2013-02-12 11:56:46 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Maybe we should pass a VAMA just to get all these uninformed jackasses to STFU

Would that make you feel better, you poor oppressed men?


Violence Against White Middle Class Totally Oppressed Men and Men Only Act
 
2013-02-12 11:57:51 PM

spongeboob: g4lt: serial_crusher: One thing I'm failing to get here... Supporters of this act like tribal women weren't getting any justice, like there was just nobody who could prosecute a guy in cases like this.
But, couldn't the actual State that the reservation was in do the prosecuting? Or was there anything actually preventing that? Surely you couldn't just wander around and rape people with impunity on reservations... Could you?

Only if the tribe was a TERO tribe.  Since tribes are sovereign, if they don't want to follow state and local laws, they don't have to.  It's a nonsolution to a nonproblem in actual life though, as most tribes have a form of TERO on the books, and those that don't tend to have rather explicit laws forbidding rape, murder, and mayhem on tribal lands.

What does Tribal Equal rights office(What is the purpose of the TERO program?

The primary purpose of the TERO program is to enforce tribally enacted Indian Preference law to insure that Indian/Alaska Native people gain their rightful share to employment, training, contracting, subcontracting, and business opportunities on and near reservations and native villages.http://ctertero.org/faq.html#question"> have to do with this.


MUCH older definition of TERO, Tribal Enforcement of Regional Ordinances.  Apparently, some idiot bureaucrat in the eighties or nineties decided to overload the acronym and the new definition's taken over.  Because, you know, whether or nor a person is employed is a MUCH higher priority than whether they can get murdered... :(
 
2013-02-12 11:57:57 PM
Violence Against Jort Owners Act
 
2013-02-12 11:58:17 PM

Jackson Herring: ramblinwreck: You like to write that a lot in your posts

ok yeah you are just making stuff up at this point


Now you're just lying to yourself.

Do a quick review of your posts over the past couple of days and see how many times you've asked if people have read what you've said.
 
2013-02-13 12:01:27 AM

ramblinwreck: Do a quick review of your posts over the past couple of days and see how many times you've asked if people have read what you've said.


hey did you read all the times I pointed out that VAWA covers male victims of domestic violence
 
2013-02-13 12:01:41 AM
I feel the need to add to one of my earlier posts.

Fluorescent Testicle: Yeah, it really should be renamed to the "Domestic Violence Act" or something like that, if only to shut up the Republicans

and other MEN'S RIGHTS!!! types pretending that they don't realise it's not gender specific.

/FTFM.
//But seriously, it does need to be renamed.
 
2013-02-13 12:02:08 AM
I mean just because I acknowledge objective, observable reality doesn't mean I don't reserve the right to ridicule reddit men's rights advocates, quite the contrary in fact
 
2013-02-13 12:03:04 AM

Jackson Herring: Lionel Mandrake: Maybe we should pass a VAMA just to get all these uninformed jackasses to STFU

Would that make you feel better, you poor oppressed men?

Violence Against White Middle Class Totally Oppressed Men and Men Only Act


FYI: this is how you turn people on your side against you. Make the debate so toxic and dishonest that even people that agree with your ideas are so turned off by the cynicism and ad hominem attacks.
 
2013-02-13 12:05:39 AM

Jackson Herring: ramblinwreck: Do a quick review of your posts over the past couple of days and see how many times you've asked if people have read what you've said.

hey did you read all the times I pointed out that VAWA covers male victims of domestic violence


Uh, yep. I don't understand the disconnect, because I was saying the same thing.
 
2013-02-13 12:11:35 AM

ramblinwreck: Make the debate so toxic and dishonest that even people that agree with your ideas are so turned off by the cynicism and ad hominem attacks.


this coming from an MRA who is literally crying IRL about feminism
 
2013-02-13 12:12:44 AM

ramblinwreck: Uh, yep. I don't understand the disconnect, because I was saying the same thing.


wow really then what the fark is this shiatty post about then

ramblinwreck: You couldn't give a crap about the bill protecting ALL victims?

 
2013-02-13 12:22:20 AM

Jackson Herring: ramblinwreck: Make the debate so toxic and dishonest that even people that agree with your ideas are so turned off by the cynicism and ad hominem attacks.

this coming from an MRA who is literally crying IRL about feminism


*Sigh* Another "Charge of Hypersensitivity"...

Look, this is my last post for the evening. We all have different viewpoints based on gender, race, life experiences, etc. We all have different ideas of what is fair and just. No one deserves to be abused. Everyone deserves support to escape abuse. If you can't see that we all need that, then I don't know what to tell you.

I wish something like this act existed when my father was sexually assaulted and abused growing up. This is farking real, OK?
 
2013-02-13 12:27:50 AM
 
2013-02-13 12:28:15 AM

dj_bigbird: I thought it was already illegal to hit people.


Now it's MORE illegal to hit women.
 
2013-02-13 12:28:17 AM

g4lt: Craptastic: g4lt: Craptastic: g4lt: So nobody else wants to point out that "22 nays in a 100 member body" is NOT passing by a landslide?  Fine, let me.

Is there a specific definition of "landslide" where it applies to a voting body? I've been unable to find one.

Why would using a well, defined, term in a counterintuitive manner be any more useful than using a well-defined term wrongly?

So... no?

So "if you want something defined, try doing it your damn self"


Weak sauce, junior. You know what's NOT a landslide, but are unable to tell us what IS a landslide. Also, why did you use quotation marks in your reply without providing the name of the person you're quoting? That's just poor grammar, son.
 
2013-02-13 12:29:23 AM
In other news, there are many Republican Senators who are in favor of getting more than twelve women to vote for them in the next go-round
 
2013-02-13 12:29:40 AM
Um, it's almost like none of you read the article. I only made it thru 10 or so posts but nobody seems to understand why people voted against it. You all just want an excuse to say that repubs hate women, it's absurd. Read the article before you post if you don't want to look retarded.
 
2013-02-13 12:43:38 AM

GF named my left testicle thundercles: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/whats-wrong-with- t he-violence-against-women-act/254678/


Interesting link. I have to say, FIRE is quickly becoming one of my favorite political organizations. Unlearning Liberty was a good read.
 
2013-02-13 12:50:46 AM

Craptastic: g4lt: Craptastic: g4lt: Craptastic: g4lt: So nobody else wants to point out that "22 nays in a 100 member body" is NOT passing by a landslide?  Fine, let me.

Is there a specific definition of "landslide" where it applies to a voting body? I've been unable to find one.

Why would using a well, defined, term in a counterintuitive manner be any more useful than using a well-defined term wrongly?

So... no?

So "if you want something defined, try doing it your damn self"

Weak sauce, junior. You know what's NOT a landslide, but are unable to tell us what IS a landslide. Also, why did you use quotation marks in your reply without providing the name of the person you're quoting? That's just poor grammar, son.


Worked for Potter Stewart...
 
2013-02-13 12:57:17 AM

giftedmadness: Um, it's almost like none of you read the article. I only made it thru 10 or so posts but nobody seems to understand why people voted against it. You all just want an excuse to say that repubs hate women, it's absurd. Read the article before you post if you don't want to look retarded.


Maybe you should make it through more than ten posts if you don't want to look like an idiot..

But, having read less than 5% of the thread, you felt sufficiently familiar with its content to accuse people of being retarded.  Having read less than 5% of the thread, you felt comfortable in declaring that "nobody seems to understand why people voted against it."

And, then you came in here to confidently declare that you have figured out not only the entirity of what was being said in the thread, but the motivations behind why it was said.  All this after reading less than 5% of the posts.

Amazing.
 
2013-02-13 01:01:34 AM

TheOther: WTF are women in TX, KY, UT, WY, SC, & OK thinking?


They don't.
 
2013-02-13 01:12:17 AM
Well, this thread left me sad.  Good to learn how many folks are opposed to defending abused women, regardless of context.
 
2013-02-13 01:13:09 AM

The Name: TheOther: WTF are women in TX, KY, UT, WY, SC, & OK thinking?

They don't.


They do, and  they will vote.  It's a matter of time.
 
2013-02-13 01:33:39 AM

AkaDad: [angryblackladychronicles.com image 590x494]

Their faces make want to commit violence.


Their faces are weirding me out like in that distorted from a fisheye lens way. WTF is up with some of those faces.
 
2013-02-13 01:41:17 AM
Meanwhile, there are 22 Senators apparently still in favor of violence against women

And apparently 100 Senators who don't give a shiat about violence against men.
 
2013-02-13 02:12:44 AM

cretinbob: TheOther: WTF are women in TX, KY, UT, WY, SC, & OK thinking?

What makes you think they are allowed to vote?


Maybe they shouldn't.  If they're going to be feeble spineless little coonts, maybe the Democrats should tell them to close their goddamn cumholes until they grow some self respect and a f*cking brain.

KHITBASH = tough love?
 
2013-02-13 02:24:02 AM
This is a bill designed specifically to combat domestic violence and make all people safer but especially the people who have historically had a hard time getting a fair shake within the legal system or even access.

Trolls playing the semantic game pretending they don't know this are obvious morons.

See also: The 22 GOP Senators who voted against this.

/Will the House even vote on this?
//Can they just ignore it?
///Or will they vote on it and fail to pass it?
 
2013-02-13 03:08:07 AM

revelcoot: Princess Ryans Knickers: Good! Men are pigs anyway

Not just men, if I'm reading this correctly:

"Over 160 million women across the country are watching and waiting to see if the House will act on this bill and finally provide them the protections from violence they deserve," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.


Who are these 160 million women deserving of violence?
 
2013-02-13 03:45:51 AM
Oh look it's the "Don't kick a puppy bill". How can you not vote for that?

I do have some objections to the bill regarding due process. I don't give a damn about your anecdotes. I've been on the other side of a violent abusive relationship and I know that the first thing my former spouse did was flip everything upside down by accusing me of the exact same things she was doing. It's interesting how the ACLU had objections to the original bill in 1994 but by 2005 had flipped. I wonder why?
 
2013-02-13 03:50:25 AM
As for the person went on about the men being larger than women. Have you ever had to wrestle a knife away from a woman who was trying to stab you? Have you ever been knocked out with a beer bottle? Good times good times.
 
2013-02-13 03:59:25 AM

Karac: What's the objection to saying that crimes committed on Indian reservations can be prosecuted by courts on Indian reservations. I don't see anyone claiming that you can't be arrested for beating up your girlfriend in D.C. if you actually live in Boston.


I know that tribal punishments sometimes differ from 'recognized' state punishment (jail, prison, community service, etc.).

In 1994 two native Americans from Alaska were sentenced to banishment to isolated islands with only hand tools and very little food. Their crime was small-change urban robbery and the sentence was for one year.

Here's a link:  Do not go to jail . . . go be alone and grow the hell up

Tribal laws vary by tribe . . . and so do the punishments.

 
2013-02-13 04:25:08 AM

Zunigene: Marco Rubio (R-FL)

Sigh


I've given up hope that Rubio is a decent human being.
 
2013-02-13 04:35:01 AM

bestie1: As for the person went on about the men being larger than women. Have you ever had to wrestle a knife away from a woman who was trying to stab you? Have you ever been knocked out with a beer bottle? Good times good times.


How on Earth did you manage to read that post while simultaneously missing the fifty others that pointed out this bill is not gender-specific and applies equally to both men and women?

/I'm going to guess "Deliberately."
 
2013-02-13 04:41:05 AM

johnny_vegas: admittedly a little biased but a good (though superficial) overview of the tribal jurisdiction issue in VAWA....

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/226743-vawa-trib al -provisions-are-constitutionally-sound


Ah, so the reason the Republicans were against this bill is their continued campaign to get rapists to vote for them?
 
Xai
2013-02-13 04:50:45 AM
so what we have learned is republicans are woman beaters.
 
2013-02-13 04:51:07 AM

Karac: dj_bigbird: I thought it was already illegal to hit people.

You would think that.  But sometimes, you'd be wrong.
Such as when Topeka, Kansas repealed it's laws against domestic violence because there were so many cases they couldn't afford to prosecute them.

Want to know why the federal government keeps growing; keeps stepping into local school systems, local law enforcement cases, local matters usually regarded as 'states rights'?  It's because local and state governments keep farking up and someone has to pick up the slack.  Don't blame the plunger because you stopped up the toilet.


Now, that's a line I'm going to have to remember.
 
2013-02-13 05:25:05 AM
On Monday 17 House Republicans wrote Cantor and Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, urging immediate action. The act's "programs save lies, and we must allow states and communities to build upon the successes of current VAWA programs so that we can help even more people," they wrote.

Won't somebody think of the LIES?
 
2013-02-13 05:25:54 AM

spongeboob: cman


Al Gore, 1988: abortion is wrong
Al Gore, 1998: abortion is a right

A lot of things can change in a decade
 
2013-02-13 05:28:16 AM

cman: Enough with the "You are with us or you are with the terrorists" mindset, please.


i915.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-13 05:30:08 AM

thamike: cman: Enough with the "You are with us or you are with the terrorists" mindset, please.

[i915.photobucket.com image 850x76]


1. I wrote that after it went green, so your statement is invalid
2. Can you elaborate on how my message made me look like an ass? Thank you
 
2013-02-13 05:41:07 AM

BSABSVR: TheOther: WTF are women in TX, KY, UT, WY, SC, & OK thinking?

Whatever a man tells them to, or else.


.

Also when you're told from about the time you start walking that you were placed here to serve a man, keep a house and keep God's quiver full of "arrows" you might have a skewed view of things.
 
Displayed 50 of 320 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report