Vitter Confronted By Rape Victim Over Franken Amendment Vote

I thought this was interesting.

First he hides behind Obama then walks out of the room.

YouTube - Vitter Town Hall, Baton Rouge, 10/31/09

 

Vitter is a worm. But hell most politicians are.

 

So the Franken amendment won't allow companies to receive dod money if they put in their employment contracts that cases against the company go to arbitration instead of court right? Franken then outlines a rape accusation by a Haliburton employee that had the clause in her contract. I still follow. But her case is going to court in spite of that clause in her contract. So are these clauses actually enforceable? It seems like the lady in Franken's case got around it so why is the legislation necessary? Is it because there was mountains of red tape to get through before it was even decided she could take her case to court?

 

Because if its criminal like this one, the language shouldnt be where you have to go to arbitration in any case, regardless if she got around it or not, there was potential for her not to even be able to sue these people.

 

if you are raped, why wouldnt you bring charges against the person who did it? what does the company have to do with it? seems like BS democrat feelgood nonsense, designed to make republicans look bad.

 

It was done on company time, during a company project. Maybe you should read what happened.

 

So the point is that a court may rule against you and that you may not get to court? That makes sense.

So onto the actual law. I agree with it in principal but it seems like there should be a happy medium between "all issues go to arbitration" and "no issues go to arbitration". Certainly an accusation of rape or other felony criminal act should be able to go to court but this tactic probably does cut down on frivolous lawsuits.

As far as the video. I couldn't hear everything everyone was saying but Vitter definitely acted like an ass by just turning and walking away from her. I guess he's just mailing in his term waiting for the porn star to take his spot.

 

I think the opposition was because the bill would kinda dictate employment contracts, because in the woman's employee contract, it stated that she had to go to arbitration. So the company (Haliburton) argued that it had to be argued in private arbitration, not open court. Which is a douche bag move, considering this was rape, not some run of the mill slander or gossip.
I understand the opposition, I just dont agree with it, this is the a government contract, not private business to private business contract.

 

He knows he is up double digits in the polls on Charlie Melancon.

 

Here is an article from thinkprogress.com

criminal at that point