smashweights Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 explain... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearman Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 It seems a little callous and politically motivated, but in politics there's usually more to the picture than meets the eye. At least I hope so. I'm getting a little discouraged with ALL of these idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 I have to read the bill yet, but on the surface it looks pretty fucked up that the GOP voted against it. I bet there was something more to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Link to said bill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 I can't find the bill, but here's who voted against it. The US Chamber of Commerce lobbied against it as well. That's why I keep saying something else had to be in there. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/meet-the-senators-who-vot_n_312976.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFM Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 It was a bill aimed at taking contracts away from KBR and Halliburton. They are accused of covering up rape and gang rapes- of employees even, and still receiving Federal Funding. The Bill sought to end it.I guess those 30 still thought Halliburton et al were still the best mercenaries and profiteers for the job... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmagicglock Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 they are good at what they do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 he said rape twice, I guess he really must like rape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) Edited October 10, 2009 by JRMMiii Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_c_F Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 Punishing a company for the private, non-business-related activities of its employees is pretty messed up.It'd be like shutting down RTA because one of its employees was selling drugs on the side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_c_F Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 PS - Rape is bad. Let's get that straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFM Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 Punishing a company for the private, non-business-related activities of its employees is pretty messed up.It'd be like shutting down RTA because one of its employees was selling drugs on the side.It wasn't for the "activity" itself. It was because of the companies' systemic impedence of the investigations afterwards. While still receiving Federal monies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 Punishing a company for the private, non-business-related activities of its employees is pretty messed up.It'd be like shutting down RTA because one of its employees was selling drugs on the side. The drug trafficker would still have due process via the court system.The correct analogy would be if RTA did it's own investigation into it's employees crimes. Like an RTA Employee Bureau of Investigations (EBI) division of the RTA. And whatever they say - goes. Potential for lifetime imprisonment or a slap on the wrist depending on how that own private company felt about drug trafficking and how the continued sale of drugs, or end to the trafficking would affect their business practice and bottom line profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_c_F Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 It wasn't for the "activity" itself. It was because of the companies' systemic impedence of the investigations afterwards. While still receiving Federal monies. The drug trafficker would still have due process via the court system.The correct analogy would be if RTA did it's own investigation into it's employees crimes. Like an RTA Employee Bureau of Investigations (EBI) division of the RTA. And whatever they say - goes. Potential for lifetime imprisonment or a slap on the wrist depending on how that own private company felt about drug trafficking and how the continued sale of drugs, or end to the trafficking would affect their business practice and bottom line profit.I must have the story wrong then. My mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.