30 Republican Senators voted against the Fraken Amendment which protected women right

[drtom2005]

I thought these were interesting articles. I hope you all read this and see what Republicans stand for. Business no matter what. Humans rights, who cares, especially for the mothers of our children. I am glad that Kit Bond is not running for re-election, because all of my free time in 2010 would be spent stopping him from getting back to office. Is your senator on the list and do you support their vote? Should this vote have been unanimous? If you think not, then please explain. How can you be against this amendement? I would like one of the Senators who voted against this to speak about it.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/16/jones-sue-kbr/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_312976.html

[ensbergcollector]

I thought this was interesting article. I hope you all read this and see what Republicans stand for. Business no matter what. Humans rights, who cares, especially for the mothers of our children. I am glad that Kit Bond is not running for re-election, because all of my free time in 2010 would be spent stopping him from getting back to office. Is your senator on the list and do you support their vote? Should this vote have been unanimous? If you think not, then please explain. How can you be against this amendement? I would like one of the Senators who voted against this to speak about it.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/16/jones-sue-kbr/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_312976.html

do you have a link to the whole bill? as it reads, of course I would have voted in favor of this, but you rarely find a bill that doesn't say one thing but has stuff tacked onto the back.

[drtom2005]

do you have a link to the whole bill? as it reads, of course I would have voted in favor of this, but you rarely find a bill that doesn't say one thing but has stuff tacked onto the back.

I will find it. I heard about it on NPR and could not believe it. I had to check. I will get all of the information for everyone though.

[Yanksfan396]

That is absolutely absurd. For those who are going to criticize the Huffington Post link, use it solely for seeing the list of scumbags.

[drtom2005]

Here is link to the text. It is long and I will be reading it over the next several weeks.
Just hit the link after amendment to get the whole text. If I am wrong to be offended by this, please tell me why.


http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...n=1&vote=00308

[tutall]

I dont think you are wrong to be offended by it but i too will be reading it just to see what is tacked in there... I dont believein the any bill is better than no bill theory and am guessing there is something tacked on that has nothing to do with the case.... if not though shame on those congressmen but honestly i am sure it happens the other way too... Its like saying John Kerry voted against funding the troops.... no he was against the current bill that funded them but not against funding the troops... same concept in my opinion

[Titantron]

DrTom- Is this where all of your other scientific research comes from??? Think Progress and Huffington Post???? That would explain some things.

I havent read it and dont plan to. Its way too long. im sure. Id imagine its just like what I saw on Cspan last night. Lots of republicans will vote against money for our troops. We all know Republicans support the military. The dems are trying to sneak hate crimes legislation into the Bill. Thats what the argument is about. I watched one lefty after another get up there and grandstand about how much they support the military and how shameful it is that Republicans would not support our military. Like I said, No boundaries, No Morals, No shame when it comes to the left. It angers me that they would use our military to force unrelated legislation and smear republicans. I have no doubt that this is something similar. I know it is because your sources are smear machines.

[duane1969]

Well it didn't take me long to find the point of this bill.

I got bored and stopped reading about 1/2 way thru because it is obvious what this bill was about. The entire thing is about limiting what the military can do and either cutting or providing funds for the military.

One little tidbit is about sexual assault, harassment, abuse, and biased hiring. It doesn't say anything about women specifically. There are 35 different parts to this bill and 2 of them address these issues, the rest are about military limitations and spending.

The Republicans did not vote against women's rights, they voted against a bill that gives control over the military to Congress. Once again, this is liberal spin on an issue to make something look like what it is not to try and smear the Republicans.

A list of what I read thru....

SA 2590 - (in regards to issues in Afghanistan) Requires President Obama to provide the public with "expected costs of the increased troop levels...expected length of time for which troop levels will be increased..." (So Obama has to tell us how much it will cost and how long we will be there before he can send troops to Afghanistan)

SA 2593 - (in regards to Afghanistan and Pakistan) Requires testimony in open and closed court about strategy by (among others) The Secretary of Defense, The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, The Commander of the United States Central Command, and The Commander of United States Forces-Afghanistan. (So the SecDef has to reveal military strategy for Afghanistan in open court??? Makes sense)

SA 2595 - Limits how funds for a missile defense system can be spent and requires reports within 60 days of how money was spent in the past.

SA 2596 - Limits early retirement of tactical aircraft without congressional permission.

SA 2597 - Requires the military to train civilians to provide military base law enforcement so that military police can be deployed.

SA 2598 - Requires "APOLOGY TO NATIVE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED STATES" (I am suprised the liberals didn't say that Republicans hate Native Americans too)

SA 2604 - Requires the military to replace private security contractors with military personnel within 1 year.

SA 2606 - Reduces funding for the Maui Space Surveillance System by $10 million. (The MSSS is a space tracking and monitoring system run by the Air Force)

SA 2607 - Increases the military Afghanistan funding by $900 million.

[Titantron]

Thanks Duane. Its too early and i really didnt want to do that. Its funny that I was exactly right and knew before ever even looking at it. Its even more ironic that it is yet another case of the left using the military to smear republicans. Cant wait to hear from the good DrTom about how wrong we are. You posted too many facts, so i'm sure the argument will have to divert back to the simplest Lefty form..........Sexist....Racist........Hateful..... .......Violent......misinformation........and on and on and on. Anyway. Good stuff. thanks Duane.

[gatorboymike]

This proves once and for all that it's all just a game to the right. Partisan politics is infinitely more important to them than human life and safety. And you can be 100% sure that, had this bill gone through while Obama was in the Senate and he'd voted against it, McPalin would have plastered that all over every last one of their ads.