Feb 052013
 

Nothing should be more clearly non-partisan than protecting women from violence.  Opposing such a basic sentiment could not be more overtly shameful.  Nevertheless, that is exactly what eight Republican Senators have done.

5vawaEight Senators on Monday voted not to consider the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, a bill that protects victims of domestic violence. The Senators who voted against moving to debate on the bill were: Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Tim Scott (R-SC), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Rand Paul (R-KY), Pat Roberts (R-KS), and James Risch (R-ID).

VAWA’s reauthorization has been caught up in partisan gridlock over added provisions that would protect undocumented immigrants, as well as LGBT and Native American victims of domestic violence. Congress failed to reauthorize the bill by the end of 2012, and the Senate is now considering the same legislation again, in its new legislative session… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Think Progress>

Photo credit: YWCA

These Republicans claim to object, because the bill includes protection for undocumented immigrants, LGBT, and Native American women.

Frankly, that’s absurd.  If a woman happens to be undocumented, lesbian, or Native American, does that make violence against her OK?  Hell. no!  Nevertheless, in support of their own racism and bigotry, these Republicans would deny protection to all women.

Share

  30 Responses to “Eight Republicans Vote Support for Violence Against Women”

  1. A rose is a rose is a rose…

     

    I don't understand their thinking.

  2. What a bunch of Sierra  Hotel  India  Tango!!

  3. I hope women remember this when these assholes once again solicit our votes- Looks like to them only White, middle class are deserving of legal protection ;
    Would not be at all surprised to learn any or all of them are abusers themselves.

  4. This is appalling.

    But the truly sad thing is that it won't compare to what House rethuglicans will do to the Bill.

    The GOP – a Party only a misogynist could love.

  5. Please of please stop calling that idiot from Texas by his middle name.  I'm talking about that Cuban Communist Canadian Born Senator from Tx Rafael Edward Cruz.

    His birth name given him by his father is Rafael which he does not use or go by.  Why is that?  Is he ashamed of his real name and makes him sound Mexican so he uses Ted instead because it sounds more American?

    Not only is he against the Violence Against Womens Act but against common sense gun regulation as well.  He also has two little girls and his wife has deep pocket ties too Goldman Sachs and like his Anchor Baby Cuban Buddy Marco Rubio prefer preferential treatment for Cuban arriving illegally since they can stay if their feet touch dry land.

    They were both against the Dream Act that the President supported and now Rubio R-FL want to pretend to support a pathway to citizenship since the RFN's are losing the Latina Vote to the Democratic Party.  I say screw all Repugs and F*** the NRA as well.

    Have a great day.

  6. Texas Ky Idaho Carolina.Utah.  All the intellectual's States. 

  7. Watch out fellows.  The law of karma is that you get back what you send out into the universe.  Maybe when you get reborn in your next life perhaps you will be an illegal, lesbian or an Amer. Indian and you  will be  stolen into prostitution and have to have 30 men a day rape you.  I wonder how you will feel then.

  8. I looked up the meaning of GOP and I swear it said it stands for Group of Penises.  I feel like mailing them all viagra since it is obvious they need help to be stand up guys.

  9. Some way must be found to stop this systematic  destruction of women and our rights.  If you can't vote for this bill, then come up with one you can vote for.  As someone once said, It could be your wife, daughter, mother or another female in your family who was attacked.  Then what?  Would they thank you for not having done all you could to protect them.  I doubt it.

  10. From the Huffington Post:

    The provision would give tribal courts limited jurisdiction to oversee domestic violence offenses specifically committed against Native American women by non-Native American men on tribal lands. Currently, federal and state law enforcement have jurisdiction over domestic violence on tribal lands, but in many cases, they are hours away and lack the resources to respond to those cases. Tribal courts, meanwhile, are on site and familiar with tribal laws, but lack the jurisdiction to address domestic violence on their land when it is carried out by a non-Native individual. The result is that non-native men who abuse Native women on tribal lands — something that happens at astronomically high levels — are more or less immune from the law under the current system.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/deb-fischer-vawa_n_2617388.html

    Are Republican/Teabaggers afraid that the Native American courts would not be fair to non natives, who are significant contributors towards the violence against native women?  Isn't that a whole lot of projection from the Republican/Teabaggers?  After all, if I recall correctly, and TC you'll know better than me because of your volunteer work, aren't Native Americans  proportionately over represented in the US prison system, as African Americans are?

    Women are women no matter where they live, what their emotional orientation is, and no matter what their immigration status is.  Makes me wonder how visiting women would fare without a VAWA.  They have no legal status in the US.

    Vote as many Republican/Teabaggers as possible out of office in 2014, and target the rest for removal at the first available date there after.  Send them all into history!

  11. What is wrong with these men…? 

    Maybe they would understand a bit better if their wives were victims of violence…

    Violence against women is just plain wrong.

    This is a simple bill that has passed through Congress previously. What is the problem…

    Oh wait, are these the usual g o p puke obstructionists… Yep, that's it! Ugh!

    .

  12. Rand Paul is a lying hypocrite scumbag. When he ran for office, his bodyguard threw a woman to the ground at one of his rallys, then he kept his foot on her neck until the police arrived. What did she do to provoke Rand’s ire? She carried a sign that was unfavorable to Rand’s campaign. He doesn’t have any respect for women. In fact, I doubt if he has any respect for other humans of either gender.

  13. The only explanation is, these guys are 'wife-beaters' and don't want to get caught and bought up on charges.They are Republicans, good Christian men taking the Biblical, "spare the rod and spoil the child' approach to children and women, one in the same. Then add in the Native women and Lesbians and there you have it, beatings all around! The appropriate name for this party would be Hillbilly Thinkers of America. People like 'the Donald' fit in, but the negative is, he has oodles of money to support this backwood, 18th Century philosophy which backs the second Amendment, the right to bare arms.  We are now in the 21st C. and times and uses for guns have changed. So to compare, the laws protecting women from violence are as archaic as the gun laws.

    Good luck American ladies and you country prides itself for being so democratic and a protector of all…as long as you have the male genetalia to protect you!

    • Welcome, Nancy. :-)

      I wouldn't go quite that far, but it's clear that most Republican legislators, view women as property, not as the independent responsible individuals you are.