Forums | MacLife

bedstuy · 2009-10-07 10:44 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
selling weapons to Iran is fine.

Well, you know Reagan did send a cake and a Bible to Tehran when he first started to do that.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 10:45 pm

Was it yellow cake?

bedstuy · 2009-10-07 10:47 pm

noes

Seriously though, I wasn't aware of the cake and Bible until recently. How extremely odd.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 10:53 pm

Any pizzas?

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:03 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
I also note that given many opportunities to condemn Halliburton/KBR's and Blackwater's rape, murder, prostitution, and various other crimes and indiscretions you choose instead to mumble noncommittal thoughts and wonder why the Democrats are so mean

Bull smurf.

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:04 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
resedit wrote:
It should also of course be pointed out that no fine print relieves employees of criminal prosecution.
Actually, the government has given the civilian contractors immunity from prosecution in Iraq, and has chosen not to prosecute them in American courts.

That has nothing to do with this bill, which is about arbitration contracts, fairly standard in business as insurance costs are much higher without them.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:08 pm

Yes, we should worry about business' insurance costs more than brutal rape. Good Republican thinking.

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:11 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
Yes, we should worry about business' insurance costs more than brutal rape. Good Republican thinking.

The bottom line is that they are standard.
The government won't have as much selection with who they can do business with, driving cost up.
If they really want to make a difference, they'll pass a law stating that such arbitration clauses do not apply to sexual crimes, regardless of whether or not a .gov contract is involved.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:11 pm

So is your problem that the bill goes to far or doesn't go far enough? I'm confused.

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:15 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
So is your problem that the bill goes to far or doesn't go far enough? I'm confused.

To be honest, I don't know if I have a problem with the bill or the addition.
I do have a problem with your inflammatory thread title when the addition to the bill covered far more than just sex crimes.

It also covers arbitration over equal rights, for example.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:17 pm

resedit wrote:
Tallgeese wrote:
I also note that given many opportunities to condemn Halliburton/KBR's and Blackwater's rape, murder, prostitution, and various other crimes and indiscretions you choose instead to mumble noncommittal thoughts and wonder why the Democrats are so mean
Bull smurf.

I did a search for "Halliburton" author "resedit".

I see "Yawn, another Halliburton thread". I see you saying that Halliburton shouldn't have to know what its subcontractors are enslaving (yet curiously, every ACORN branch is responsible for every other one), but I don't see you condemning anything, certainly not in the terms you use to excoriate ACORN's advice to fake pimps. Maybe you can prove me wrong.

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:18 pm

I don't comment a lot either way in Halliburton threads.
The reality is there are very few companies that can do what they do, so we have to use them whether we like it or not.

jerwin · 2009-10-07 11:21 pm

The reality is there are very few companies that can do what they do, so we have to use them whether we like it or not.

Recruit more soldiers.

Chickenhawk · 2009-10-07 11:21 pm

resedit wrote:
I don't comment a lot either way in Halliburton threads.
The reality is there are very few companies that can do what they do, so we have to use them whether we like it or not.

Are we talking about building contractors or oilfield services? Cuz we don't need to contract out to a company that can do both.

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

Who do you suggest we contract out to, and what experience do they have on the scale required?

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

resedit wrote:
I don't comment a lot either way in Halliburton threads.

So you agree that you don't condemn them and never have. Thank you.

jerwin · 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

Chickenhawk wrote:
resedit wrote:
I don't comment a lot either way in Halliburton threads.
The reality is there are very few companies that can do what they do, so we have to use them whether we like it or not.
Are we talking about building contractors or oilfield services? Cuz we don't need to contract out to a company that can do both.

No bid contracts get messy when multiple parties are involved.

Chickenhawk · 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

resedit wrote:
Who do you suggest we contract out to, and what experience do they have on the scale required?

Building contractors or Oilfield services?

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:27 pm

Also, only five threads with "Blackwater" author "resedit".

No condemnation there, either.

Fascinating.

Also,
ACORN

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:30 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
resedit wrote:
I don't comment a lot either way in Halliburton threads.
So you agree that you don't condemn them and never have. Thank you.

I don't know if I ever had.
Probably not here, there's no need to here, it's already done to excess here.

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:32 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
Also, only five threads with "Blackwater" author "resedit".

No condemnation there, either.

Fascinating.

Also,
ACORN

So the things you want me to comment on aren't what I have commented on.

Excuse me for finding it a bit disturbing that you wish to dictate which subjects I comment on.
I'm not your bitch.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:32 pm

resedit wrote:
Tallgeese wrote:
resedit wrote:
I don't comment a lot either way in Halliburton threads.
So you agree that you don't condemn them and never have. Thank you.
I don't know if I ever had.
Probably not here, there's no need to here, it's already done to excess here.

resedit wrote:
Bull smurf

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:34 pm

resedit wrote:
Tallgeese wrote:
Also, only five threads with "Blackwater" author "resedit".

No condemnation there, either.

Fascinating.

Also,
ACORN
So the things you want me to comment on aren't what I have commented on.

Excuse me for finding it a bit disturbing that you wish to dictate which subjects I comment on.
I'm not your bitch.

I'm not dictating anything.

I'm just saying that your priorities are on display for all to see.

Punishing ACORN > rape and murder by government contractors

resedit · 2009-10-07 11:34 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
I'm just saying that your priorities are on display for all to see.

No.
You are making assumptions about my priorities based upon on how you think people should post.

Tallgeese · 2009-10-07 11:36 pm

If all you have is jokes about rape and murder by government contractors AND you have strong condemnation for ACORN, one can only assume that you feel more strongly about ACORN than about rape and murder by government contractors.

Forums | MacLife

#26 2009-10-07 10:44 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

#27 2009-10-07 10:45 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#28 2009-10-07 10:47 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#29 2009-10-07 10:53 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#30 2009-10-07 11:03 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

#31 2009-10-07 11:04 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

resedit wrote:

#32 2009-10-07 11:08 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#33 2009-10-07 11:11 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

#34 2009-10-07 11:11 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#35 2009-10-07 11:15 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

#36 2009-10-07 11:17 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

resedit wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

#37 2009-10-07 11:18 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#38 2009-10-07 11:21 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#39 2009-10-07 11:21 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

resedit wrote:

#40 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#41 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

resedit wrote:

#42 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Chickenhawk wrote:

resedit wrote:

#43 2009-10-07 11:23 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

resedit wrote:

#44 2009-10-07 11:27 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

#45 2009-10-07 11:30 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

resedit wrote:

#46 2009-10-07 11:32 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

#47 2009-10-07 11:32 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

resedit wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

resedit wrote:

resedit wrote:

#48 2009-10-07 11:34 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

resedit wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

#49 2009-10-07 11:34 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Tallgeese wrote:

#50 2009-10-07 11:36 pm

Re: Why don't Republicans care about rape victims?

Board footer