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.

(Huffington Post)   Good: House GOP to vote on Violence Against Women Act next week. Facepalm: They stripped out coverage for lesbians and Native Americans - AGAIN   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 257
    More: Asinine, House GOP, Violence Against Women Act, GOP, LGBT, reauthorization, United States House Committee on Rules, House Majority Leader, domestic violence  
•       •       •

3447 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Feb 2013 at 4:34 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-22 04:51:08 PM
THE NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY.

"Violence against dykes and squaws is OK by us."
 
2013-02-22 04:51:13 PM
a bloo blah bloo misandry
 
2013-02-22 04:51:50 PM

KiltedBastich: Let me see if I understand what you mean, socialism facilitated by technology in order to avoid or curtail the kind of excesses, intrusions and abuses that traditional bureaucratic socialism fosters? Please elaborate if I am in error.


From each according to his bleeps. To each according to his bloops.
 
2013-02-22 04:54:02 PM

rufus-t-firefly: THE NEW Same OldREPUBLICAN PARTY.

"Violence against dykes and squaws is OK by us."


FTFY
 
2013-02-22 04:54:36 PM
If you're still a Republican there's something seriously wrong with you. I'd pity you if it wasn't for the real damage you're doing to the rest of us and our nation.
 
2013-02-22 04:54:39 PM

KiltedBastich: cman: Politics indeed

/BTW, thinking of switching to techno-socialism as my political viewpoints. Any thoughts?

Let me see if I understand what you mean, socialism facilitated by technology in order to avoid or curtail the kind of excesses, intrusions and abuses that traditional bureaucratic socialism fosters? Please elaborate if I am in error.

I am quite willing to discuss the idea, but I want to first make sure I understand what you are asking. No point in debating the topic if we end up misunderstanding each other's positions.


Perhaps socialism with a techno soundtrack.

But seriously, your idea was tried in Allende's Chile, at least as far as economic management:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn

Too bad Nixon and Kissinger couldn't stand by while a democratically elected leader did what he was elected to do.
 
2013-02-22 04:54:41 PM
lennavan:
I still don't get the issue.  When the case gets moved, then the tribal prosecution simply turns over all of the documents, evidence and witness names to the federal prosecutor.

You're absolutely right!
What a nifty idea: This new law gives Federal prosecutors a strong incentive to do exactly the opposite of what they do when they get these cases now!

/peachy keen
//exclamation points
 
2013-02-22 04:56:00 PM

Citrate1007: rufus-t-firefly: THE NEW Same OldREPUBLICAN PARTY.

"Violence against dykes and squaws is OK by us."

FTFY


Well, yeah, but they're rebranding.

You don't have to change your product if you make the packaging say "New and Improved."
 
2013-02-22 04:56:07 PM

neongoats: Jackson Herring: neongoats: Meh, I think it would have better served everyone by being named something something domestic violence act and protect all types, LGBT or straight men and women from domestic violence.

IT DOES farkING PROTECT ALL TYPES

Well then change the farking name of the bill to reflect that. When it comes to politics like this, it helps if appearances match the substance, else you are generating your own farking opposition by intentionally being obtuse.

Not everyone is going to read a line by line itemization of the proposed legislation, but they will likely hear its name.


Then those idiots should just resign from the House
 
2013-02-22 04:59:11 PM
the GOP needs to go away,  how does anything they do better the lives of the people who live here other then a select few who can bribe them?
 
2013-02-22 04:59:37 PM
Shocking.
 
2013-02-22 04:59:52 PM
isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?
 
2013-02-22 05:00:05 PM

KarmicDisaster: Why Native Americans? I can see their hate for lesbians because Jesus totally forgot to specifically mention that his teachings applied to them when he said that they applied to everyone, but what's the deal with the Indians?


It's because of the split between tribal courts and state courts and who has jurisdiction. Currently, tribal courts have primary jdx over anything that happens on tribal land (as sovereign nations), as it should be; but some joker said "But this act means Indians would have to be tried in Federal court! Ohe Noes! This won't do!" and the whole thing got derailed.

It's kind of a valid argument, because domestic violence is totally out of control on reservations and needs addressing; but we all know the GOP is hardly concerned about either Native women's rights or tribal policy as a whole.
 
2013-02-22 05:01:14 PM

skullkrusher: isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?


Is it? I'm pretty sure being gay is not a protected class under federal law, or DOMA wouldn't be legal.
 
2013-02-22 05:02:45 PM
"This legislation lacks necessary protections for victims of violence and rolls back current law."

How would this roll back current law? Don't you just love articles that include quotes but no details that would substantiate them?
 
2013-02-22 05:02:54 PM

skullkrusher: isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?


Nope.
 
2013-02-22 05:03:15 PM

Lost Thought 00: neongoats: Jackson Herring: neongoats: Meh, I think it would have better served everyone by being named something something domestic violence act and protect all types, LGBT or straight men and women from domestic violence.

IT DOES farkING PROTECT ALL TYPES

Well then change the farking name of the bill to reflect that. When it comes to politics like this, it helps if appearances match the substance, else you are generating your own farking opposition by intentionally being obtuse.

Not everyone is going to read a line by line itemization of the proposed legislation, but they will likely hear its name.

Then those idiots should just resign from the House


In what universe exactly?

Is it cool to sponsor a new bill, the "protection from gun violence for white women act." That actually protects everyone, male or female, regardless of if they are white, black, whatever? It's dumb to name a bill tat, right?

Just saying. Liberals(I include myself here), cause themselves arguments that are completely unnecessary for stupid non reasons like this.
 
2013-02-22 05:04:28 PM

Gyrfalcon: tribal courts have primary jdx over anything that happens on tribal land (as sovereign nations)


Again, no. Tribal courts have criminal jurisdiction only under very limited circumstances. Link
 
2013-02-22 05:05:15 PM
Now when its voted down, they can blame those evil libruls for not protecting women.
 
2013-02-22 05:10:21 PM
fark the god-damned GOP.
 
2013-02-22 05:12:39 PM
 
2013-02-22 05:15:31 PM

DamnYankees: skullkrusher: isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?

Is it? I'm pretty sure being gay is not a protected class under federal law, or DOMA wouldn't be legal.


huh... I guess you're right. That's farked up
 
2013-02-22 05:16:47 PM

skullkrusher: isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?


No, it is not. Sexual orientation is not a federally protected class. Some states have made it so, but most have not. Just for comparison, here are the federally protected classes:

Race
Color
Religion
National Origin
Age
Sex
Familial Status
Disability
Veteran Status
Genetic Information
 
2013-02-22 05:16:54 PM

GF named my left testicle thundercles: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
http://deanesmay.com/2012/03/15/uncomfortable-truths-about-the-viole nc e-against-women-act/
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/whats-wrong-with -t he-violence-against-women-act/254678/
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/02/19/vawa-is-just-bad-policy-period/


1) The VAWA protects everyone, not just women.
2) LGBT and Native Americans come in all genders.
3) You clearly have no clue how conditional probability works if you think that graphic is remotely relevant.
 
2013-02-22 05:17:27 PM

neongoats: Is it cool to sponsor a new bill, the "protection from gun violence for white women act." That actually protects everyone, male or female, regardless of if they are white, black, whatever? It's dumb to name a bill tat, right?


Domestic violence against women is a much bigger issue than that against men, and so that's what the bill was primarily targeted at.

You also ignore that until the current breed of crazy republicans, there has never been an argument about this bill before. It's always been approved with massive bipartisan support. You don't need to spend time and effort debating the political ramifications of a name when there's simply not going to be any political rancor over it. And they've just kept the same name, since they're trying to renew a bill, not create something new.

skullkrusher: isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?


Actually, it's still perfectly legal to discriminate against somebody for no reason other than that they're gay. Fire them from a job, stiff them on housing, whatever. They get no protection. Changing that has something like 90% support, but the biggest obstacle politically is that, like you, the vast majority of Americans think that that's already prohibited.

Call your Senators and Representative and ask them to support ENDA- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
 
2013-02-22 05:17:31 PM

DarwiOdrade: Shills are out in force today except in this thread - I wonder why.


Rush already done for the day. Talking points in Monday's show.
 
2013-02-22 05:17:55 PM
Did they take out the redundant visa portion for illegal immigrants too?

I can't click on huffington post articles anymore.  What nutbag puts two autoplay videos on a site?
 
2013-02-22 05:20:21 PM

cptjeff: Actually, it's still perfectly legal to discriminate against somebody for no reason other than that they're gay. Fire them from a job, stiff them on housing, whatever. They get no protection. Changing that has something like 90% support, but the biggest obstacle politically is that, like you, the vast majority of Americans think that that's already prohibited.

Call your Senators and Representative and ask them to support ENDA- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.


discrimination is always a bad thing but especially when it is your own government perpetrating it
 
2013-02-22 05:21:00 PM

The Why Not Guy: skullkrusher: isn't not providing assistance to people because they're gay already prohibited by federal law?

No, it is not. Sexual orientation is not a federally protected class. Some states have made it so, but most have not. Just for comparison, here are the federally protected classes:

Race
Color
Religion
National Origin
Age
Sex
Familial Status
Disability
Veteran Status
Genetic Information


being a farking ginger should be added to that list

/farking ginger
 
2013-02-22 05:22:10 PM
Ok, so maybe I can understand their position on lesbians (taking into account the stupidity of their "good Christain morals"), but how can their position on Native Americans be construed as anything but racist?
 
2013-02-22 05:22:12 PM

skullkrusher: cptjeff: Actually, it's still perfectly legal to discriminate against somebody for no reason other than that they're gay. Fire them from a job, stiff them on housing, whatever. They get no protection. Changing that has something like 90% support, but the biggest obstacle politically is that, like you, the vast majority of Americans think that that's already prohibited.

Call your Senators and Representative and ask them to support ENDA- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

discrimination is always a bad thing but especially when it is your own government perpetrating it


Federal employees have protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation. However there is not a ban at the federal level against other groups engaging in such practices.
 
2013-02-22 05:22:22 PM

neongoats: Is it cool to sponsor a new bill, the "protection from gun violence for white women act." That actually protects everyone, male or female, regardless of if they are white, black, whatever? It's dumb to name a bill tat, right?

Just saying. Liberals(I include myself here), cause themselves arguments that are completely unnecessary for stupid non reasons like this.


It isn't a new bill. It's over 20 years old and just kept getting renewed until the Republicans got all crazy about it this time. So yeah, the could have changed the name but why bother for something that just gets rubber stamped anyway?
 
2013-02-22 05:25:04 PM
Isn't it already illegal to be violent towards women?
 
2013-02-22 05:28:59 PM

SN1987a goes boom: Ok, so maybe I can understand their position on lesbians (taking into account the stupidity of their "good Christain morals"), but how can their position on Native Americans be construed as anything but racist?


It's about not wanting to expand the jurisdiction of tribal courts. The Republican position makes sense insofar as one might want to avoid carving out one solitary exception to the general rule that tribal courts shall have no criminal jurisdiction over non-Indian defendants. On the other hand, tribal courts have extensive jurisdiction over domestic relations matters even where one party is not Indian, and there are immense benefits in allowing the tribal courts to address all of the issues at play in a particular family, especially since the tribes have been in the vanguard of the so-called "wellness court" movement which seeks to treat the legal, medical, and behavioral issues of a broken family holistically.
 
2013-02-22 05:29:22 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: cptjeff: Actually, it's still perfectly legal to discriminate against somebody for no reason other than that they're gay. Fire them from a job, stiff them on housing, whatever. They get no protection. Changing that has something like 90% support, but the biggest obstacle politically is that, like you, the vast majority of Americans think that that's already prohibited.

Call your Senators and Representative and ask them to support ENDA- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

discrimination is always a bad thing but especially when it is your own government perpetrating it

Federal employees have protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation. However there is not a ban at the federal level against other groups engaging in such practices.


The issue here seems to be that there is no ban preventing the government itself from acting in a discriminatory manner which is a farking abomination, imo
 
2013-02-22 05:31:38 PM

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: cptjeff: Actually, it's still perfectly legal to discriminate against somebody for no reason other than that they're gay. Fire them from a job, stiff them on housing, whatever. They get no protection. Changing that has something like 90% support, but the biggest obstacle politically is that, like you, the vast majority of Americans think that that's already prohibited.

Call your Senators and Representative and ask them to support ENDA- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

discrimination is always a bad thing but especially when it is your own government perpetrating it

Federal employees have protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation. However there is not a ban at the federal level against other groups engaging in such practices.

The issue here seems to be that there is no ban preventing the government itself from acting in a discriminatory manner which is a farking abomination, imo


Well yes, that's much of what the gay rights movement has been about.
 
2013-02-22 05:33:05 PM
But don't you dare call them bigots.

/farking bigots
 
2013-02-22 05:36:37 PM
To their defense, some Lesbians chose to be the "man" in the relationship, so why are we covering people who chose to not act like women.

wow...I feel kinda sick after typing that. Is this what being a True ConservativeTM feels like everyday?
 
2013-02-22 05:37:13 PM

Jackson Herring: give me doughnuts: women

the VAWA covers both genders

reality exists


So the LBGT crowd is neither male nor female?
 
2013-02-22 05:37:31 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: cman: Politics indeed

/BTW, thinking of switching to techno-socialism as my political viewpoints. Any thoughts?

Cman: "You know what would really solve this problem?  A metric ton of UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ <the system, is down> UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ
Anyone else: "WTF, why would you do that?  you want more state control over..."
Cman: "I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of my WUBS!
Anyone else: Wubs?  What in the hell are those?
Cman:"They're from my bass cannon!  Haven't you heard of...oh, never mind.  Crank the congressional bass to 11!!"

*DJ cuts in* and that was Vinyl Scratch's latest hit, 'All my Feels - the Democratic Underground Mix'.  Up next is the latest mash-up from DJ Skinnyhead, 'Counting to Potato'.


t2.gstatic.com
 
2013-02-22 05:38:46 PM

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: cptjeff: Actually, it's still perfectly legal to discriminate against somebody for no reason other than that they're gay. Fire them from a job, stiff them on housing, whatever. They get no protection. Changing that has something like 90% support, but the biggest obstacle politically is that, like you, the vast majority of Americans think that that's already prohibited.

Call your Senators and Representative and ask them to support ENDA- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

discrimination is always a bad thing but especially when it is your own government perpetrating it

Federal employees have protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation. However there is not a ban at the federal level against other groups engaging in such practices.

The issue here seems to be that there is no ban preventing the government itself from acting in a discriminatory manner which is a farking abomination, imo


That's why even a lot of us straight people support gay rights. Seriously, call your Senators about ENDA, especially if they're on the HELP Committee. The House is probably a lost cause right now unless the Senate applies a little pressure.
 
2013-02-22 05:41:24 PM

Emposter: But don't you dare call them bigots.

/farking bigots


Who needs to care about your rights anyway!

/Let lesbians in.
//Submitting to native American courts out.
 
2013-02-22 05:41:56 PM
Look, children! This is what human pieces of shiat look like!
 
2013-02-22 05:42:24 PM

I alone am best: Submitting to native American courts out.


Mind if I ask why?
 
2013-02-22 05:43:03 PM
To be fair, native american's aren't people. Or, at least, don't deserve to be treated like one.

Manifest destiny, HO!!!

/I keed.  No really I keed, my daughter part mud blood.
 
2013-02-22 05:47:23 PM
OMFG the repubs really are that damn clueless .
 
2013-02-22 05:54:44 PM

neongoats: In what universe exactly?

Is it cool to sponsor a new bill, the "protection from gun violence for white women act." That actually protects everyone, male or female, regardless of if they are white, black, whatever? It's dumb to name a bill tat, right?

Just saying. Liberals(I include myself here), cause themselves arguments that are completely unnecessary for stupid non reasons like this.


This has been a top news story for six farking months holy shiat
 
2013-02-22 05:55:13 PM

Buffett12: Isn't it already illegal to be violent towards women?


not illegal enough
 
2013-02-22 05:55:19 PM
I think the new Not Quite So Much Violence Against Women, Please Act should be passed in its partiality.
 
2013-02-22 05:55:27 PM
I hope a meteorite strikes the next person to post "isn't violence against women already protected?" People who can't read more than a title shouldn't be allowed to comment on the bill.
 
Displayed 50 of 257 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report