Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Who supports Polanski?

think that all homo sapiens can understand how the mere thought of an organization that receives government money through contract mechanisms being tangentially involved in setting up a fake tax shelter for a fake pimp and his fake prostitution ring of fake prostitutes can justifiably lead to lawmakers going absolutely cross-eyed with white-hot, impotent rage. But what happens when a similarly taxpayer-endowed contractor attempts to cover up employee-on-employee gang rape by locking up the victim in a shipping container without food and water and threatening her with reprisals if she report the incident? Somehow, it doesn't engender the same level of anger!

Franken's amendment ended up passing, 68-30. Here's a list of the Senators who showed broad support for Roman Polanski by voting against it:


Asked by sweet-a-kins at 5:38 PM on Oct. 7, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (14)
  • To clear this up---A woman who worked for Halliburton was gang raped and when she wanted to press charges,they locked her up and refused to allow her to report them. So--she called her Father and he called a senator (She had her cell phone)They were able to go get her away from the Halliburton monsters and now there is a move that Sweet-a-kins told you about to allow women who were assaulted ,raped to take her assailants to court.
    I don't know how that relates to Polanski. But the idea that women could not take her assailants to court is sickening. Polanski was involved with a 14 year old...but her Mother set up the encounters with Polanksi , obviously she wanted her daughter to be in the movies. @@ So both Polanski and the girl's mother should be prosecuted.

    Answer by Lindalu2 at 5:57 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Credit new Senator Al Franken however, for introducing an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill that would punish contractors if they "restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court." You'd think that this would be a no-brainer, actually, but that didn't stop Jeff Sessions from labeling Franken's effort a "political attack directed at Halliburton." Franken, of course, pointed out that his amendment would apply broadly, to all contractors, because otherwise, 'twould be a bill of attainder, right? Right?


    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 5:38 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Alexander (R-TN)
    Barrasso (R-WY)
    Bond (R-MO)
    Brownback (R-KS)
    Bunning (R-KY)
    Burr (R-NC)
    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    DeMint (R-SC)
    Ensign (R-NV)
    Enzi (R-WY)
    Graham (R-SC)
    Gregg (R-NH)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Kyl (R-AZ)
    McCain (R-AZ)
    McConnell (R-KY)
    Risch (R-ID)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Shelby (R-AL)
    Thune (R-SD)
    Vitter (R-LA)
    Wicker (R-MS)


    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 5:39 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Ok.....really...ya need to post a link because I have NO IDEA what that rant was about. Be happy to respond when it makes sense. You usually are at least understandable but this one is just not all there. Link please...thank you. :)


    Answer by momof030404 at 5:42 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • I don't get it. How does this bill relate to the rape of a 13-year-old girl in the United States. And voting against a defense bill means you support Polanski? So this was the only provision in the bill? They couldn't possibly be voting against the bill for any other reason?

    You are off the mark and off your rocker on this one. And, personally, I think you owe all of those people an apology for even suggesting that's the reason they voted against the bill.

    Answer by lvpenguino at 5:42 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Exactly what I was thinking/wondering lv

    Answer by tnmomofive at 5:48 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Look, I would have voted for his provision, too. I have to think there is a reason they voted against it - maybe not a good reason, but a reason all the same. But to say they voted against an amendment to show support for Roman Polanski? I'm not buying.

    Answer by lvpenguino at 5:52 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Why would the senate get together and have a VOTE on something that is a justice department issue. This still doesn't make sense.


    Answer by momof030404 at 6:00 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • Why wouldn't the person be prosecuted under the law? How would Haliburton or any other company stop local authorities from arresting someone and putting them through the court system? It only stops a civil suit, not a criminal suit. Not that I'm supporting stopping a civil suit, just saying....

    And I'm still not getting the Polanski tie. Were they wearing "Free Polanski" t-shirts when they voted?

    Answer by lvpenguino at 6:03 PM on Oct. 7, 2009

  • "And I'm still not getting the Polanski tie. Were they wearing "Free Polanski" t-shirts when they voted? "

    Ditto. I have no idea what you are talking about, Sweet. A link would be helpful. Haven't seen anything regarding this on the news.

    Answer by mancosmomma at 6:09 PM on Oct. 7, 2009