Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
btw, this is similar to federal employees, you can not sue the federal government unless they consent to be sued.. Why should they be any different? Can you sue the Air Force if you are raped, no..
Are defense contractors part of the federal government?
Wrong, the electrical company would be subject to civil actions..
I guess you don't run a business? If workman comp didn't cover them, you
would be liable. Whether or not you were negligent is irrelevant, you would still be liable. You could then sue whoever you wanted if you thought someone else was at fault.
Are defense contractors part of the federal government?
Yes, defense contractors who do services for the federal government, are indeed extensions of the government during the period of their contract. This is why they were immune from liability..
Yes, defense contractors who do services for the federal government, are indeed extensions of the government during the period of their contract. This is why they were immune from liability..
Have you ever paid taxes too Lockheed Martin? Have a police officer from Lockheed Martin arrest you? This statement is absolutely absurd.
This is the very liberal rationale that i'm talking about. You folks automatically dismiss "base" Republicans as if there are no issues in which a middle ground can be met. So what do you do? You continue down the path of destruction until you essentially ensure that no middle ground can be met. That's precisely what Al Franken did by painting those 30 Senators as "pro-rape." The GOP will gain seats, Democrats will be officially be muted, and they'll come crying to the GOP when they need votes. Bet on it.
Of course there can be middle ground met, but not with the base of the Republican Party as it currently exists. They are too off-the-chart to find compromise with.
Jim DeMint? No Way
Jon Kyl? No Way
John Ensign? No Way
John Isackson? No Way
Richard Burr? No Way
Jim Inhofe? No Way
John Barrasso? No Way
Jeff Sessions? No Way
Mike Crapo? No Way
Saxby Chambliss? No Way
Richard Shelby? No Way
David Vitter? No Way
John Thune? No Way
Mike Enzi? No Way
Mitch McConnell? No Way
John Ensign? No Way
John Cornyn? No Way
The purpose of the GOP base is to obstruct any and all legislation which doesn't fit the extremely narrow window of acceptance for the right wing conservative base of the Republican Party. You are also completely disregarding the 8 Republicans who voted for the amendment. Obviously none of them are open for negotiating right?
If the Dems are going to get DeMint, Cornyn, Vitter, Burr and Ensign on board 100% we might as well move George W Bush back into the White House!
Quote:
As for Al Franken, he'll never sponsor and pass a bill of any substance between now and 2010. The Senate agenda is already to packed, and he can forget passing anything beyond 2010. The GOP will not forget how he has portrayed them. "The Junior Pisss-ant from nowhere can now take the floor."
The ultimate thing to remember is that Franken didn't portray them this way. They did themselves with their own votes.
Have you ever paid taxes to Amtrak? Have you ever paid taxes to USPS, have you ever paid taxes to the Federal Reserve? How about a tax to the the police? NO.. You pay taxes to an agency who then HIRES people to act ON THEIR BEHALF. Your question is whats absurd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2008
This statement is absolutely absurd.
What the heck does this have to do with the topic?
The legal issue is whether or not employees of military contractors can sign a binding arbitratiopn agreement as a condition of employment. Don't sign and you are not hired. Keep in mind that plaintiff lawyers hate such agreements, and remember that Democrats are stooges for lawyers.
Here is the real issue here. If the employer had made a fair offer to settle, this would never have come up. If the employee had accepted a fair offer, same thing. Arbitration, in this setting, is binding for job related issues. But rape is hardly job related, so ruled the last appelate court. Damages are in order - of that there is no question; but do they include punitive damages?
Should damages be determined by arbitrators, or a jury? The employer answers arbitrators, the victim answers jury and the court rules "jury" as well.
What Franken wants to do is eliminate the judicial determination as to whether a restrictive arbitration agreement applies by eliminating them. The GOP says no; the GOP is right.
Here is the real issue here. If the employer had made a fair offer to settle, this would never have come up. If the employee had accepted a fair offer, same thing. Arbitration, in this setting, is binding for job related issues. But rape is hardly job related, so ruled the last appelate court. Damages are in order - of that there is no question; but do they include punitive damages?
Why would the employer have to make a fair offer to settle? Did Haliburton cause rape? Did they allow the rape? Did they perpetuate or support the rapist? Tell me how damages are in order?
Why would the employer have to make a fair offer to settle? Did Haliburton cause rape? Did they allow the rape? Did they perpetuate or support the rapist? Tell me how damages are in order?
Why do you ask? I've explained it and you ignore what I said. You don't know or understand because you refuse to know or understand.
Have you ever paid taxes to Amtrak? Have you ever paid taxes to USPS, have you ever paid taxes to the Federal Reserve? How about a tax to the the police? NO.. You pay taxes to an agency who then HIRES people to act ON THEIR BEHALF. Your question is whats absurd.
What the heck does this have to do with the topic?
What does it have to do with the topic? I'm refuting your absurd statement, ask the guy who made it(you) what it has to do with the topic.
The USPS is part of the federal government. Employees of USPS get federal benefits(pensions, healthcare etc). They are paid at levels determined by the federal government GS-whatever, the same as all federal employees.
Do employees of defense contractors get federal benefits(federal health insurance, pension etc)? No. Are they paid at this scale(GS)? No. Do they get a pension paid for by the government? No. Do they work for the government? No. Are these companies part of the governnment? Wait for it..... that would be NO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
