Now that Franken has resigned...

[Faun]

You're the one claiming illegal aliens voted for her. There is no question I need to answer when you can't prove your claims.

Nor can you.

There's nothing I need to prove when he couldn't prove his claims.

When the motor-voter law was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, it opened fraudulent voting up to the masses.

Nonsense. Motor-voter laws prohibit registering illegal aliens to vote.

 

[Cellblock2429]

/——/ I worked in Fortune 50 companies for 35 years and witnessed affirmative action. We had to pass up qualified, motivated candidates for AAs who would do the least work possible and taunt management to fire them so they can sue. Your pie in the sky ideas are failures

Not only is that not case law evidence, it seems you're ready to skip over all the numbers, too.
Are we supposed to take your word for it that the number of NON-AA employees who sued for wrongful termination was less, and on different grounds? Also, you seem to have skipped telling us whether they attempted to sue on discrimination grounds, because if they did, there would be case law precedent where a specific AA statute was referenced.
I encourage you to help enlighten us by filling in exactly which statute in AA law was violated.

Somehow I suspect we'll get CRICKETS for a response.
Somehow I suspect your firm just had lazy, complacent and underpaid, or overworked HR staff that just hired anyone without due diligence, and it's more convenient for management to just blame Affirmative Action.

No one in government puts a gun to HR's head to "pass up qualified, motivated candidates for substandard ones".
Is the HR manager actually READING resumes and actually TALKING TO candidates or scanning the resumes into a computerized ranking system and then talking AT the candidate from a canned script?
Do they even have the TIME to do so?
Keywords have turned hiring into a pass-the-buck game, with HR complaining it can’t find talent!
Well, HR isn’t looking for talent. HR isn’t looking for anything! Phony algorithms are keeping the talent unemployed while HR gets paid to do something else.

I've been in meetings where top level management complained that they "couldn't find people".
HR managers who there piped up that they were a member of several large job-search networking groups, with membership in the thousands in the area. HR offered to put them in touch, help them post positions, and contacted them multiple times afterwards to help facilitate this. Nobody took HR up on it.
They just wanted HR to keep plopping resumes into the same phony algorithms and crunching the numbers.
Garbage IN = Garbage OUT.

I asked for CASE LAW cites. I did that for a reason. I asked for that because if your gripes are real, and based on actual firsthand experience, you would be able to cite case law instances where it was an actual Affirmative Action statute being argued.
Five bucks says it had absolutely nothing to do with AA at all, and that you're just passing the buck.

/----/ I said THREATENED TO SUE. I only knew one who actually did. She was caught stealing, was terminated and she sued for discrimination. The company settled for $100,000. You big dummy.

 

[Correll]

It was an honest question, wasn't it?
When people find out what Affirmative Action really is, it sounds like the honorable thing to do.

Gosh, and I thought the goal of any organization, whether private or government was to hire the best-qualified person for the job. Not the best person of a certain race, then the best of another race and so on. A quota system. You're not looking for the best-qualified person but rather the best of each chosen group, regardless of skills.

Why do you think Pocahontas lied about being a Native American all these years?

Textbook example of not knowing what Affirmative Action is ABOVE.
Affirmative Action does not play favorites with regard to qualifications for the following reasons, which are codified into the law and can be demonstrated.

1. Affirmative Action creates a field in which OPPORTUNITIES are equalized.

2. Affirmative Action grants equal ACCESS TO said opportunities.

3. If a candidate is picked through Affirmative Action and cannot demonstrate an ability to do the job, there is
NOTHING in Affirmative Action law that states an employer is required to KEEP THAT person.
The candidate must demonstrate the qualifications necessary to be PICKED for the job and must demonstrate those abilities. If they are unable to do so, they are not entitled to seek protection under Affirmative Action to appeal for a chance to keep the position they were hired for, or even GET that job in the first place.

I await anyone who can demonstrate case law evidence to the contrary that would disprove ANYTHING I said in the above response.

THe New Haven Firefighter case showed that that is not true.


The massive sat bonus blacks get for having black skin in Ivy League admissions, shows that that is not true.

 

[Markle]

You're the one claiming illegal aliens voted for her. There is no question I need to answer when you can't prove your claims.

Nor can you.

There's nothing I need to prove when he couldn't prove his claims.

When the motor-voter law was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, it opened fraudulent voting up to the masses.

Nonsense. Motor-voter laws prohibit registering illegal aliens to vote.

Getting a license, all they have to do is check a box saying they are a citizen. Don't ask don't tell. Bingo, you're registered to vote.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It was an honest question, wasn't it?
When people find out what Affirmative Action really is, it sounds like the honorable thing to do.

Gosh, and I thought the goal of any organization, whether private or government was to hire the best-qualified person for the job. Not the best person of a certain race, then the best of another race and so on. A quota system. You're not looking for the best-qualified person but rather the best of each chosen group, regardless of skills.

Why do you think Pocahontas lied about being a Native American all these years?

Textbook example of not knowing what Affirmative Action is ABOVE.
Affirmative Action does not play favorites with regard to qualifications for the following reasons, which are codified into the law and can be demonstrated.

1. Affirmative Action creates a field in which OPPORTUNITIES are equalized.

2. Affirmative Action grants equal ACCESS TO said opportunities.

3. If a candidate is picked through Affirmative Action and cannot demonstrate an ability to do the job, there is
NOTHING in Affirmative Action law that states an employer is required to KEEP THAT person.
The candidate must demonstrate the qualifications necessary to be PICKED for the job and must demonstrate those abilities. If they are unable to do so, they are not entitled to seek protection under Affirmative Action to appeal for a chance to keep the position they were hired for, or even GET that job in the first place.

I await anyone who can demonstrate case law evidence to the contrary that would disprove ANYTHING I said in the above response.

THe New Haven Firefighter case showed that that is not true.


The massive sat bonus blacks get for having black skin in Ivy League admissions, shows that that is not true.

Ricci v. diStefano (New Haven Firefighter case) was not about Affirmative Action.
The legal argument was based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
And if anything, the case argued that the City of New Haven made a pig's ear out of the way it attempted to APPLY any affirmative action, because simply DISCARDING test scores is not something Affirmative Action would support at all.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?
Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?
What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?
I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

/——/ I worked in Fortune 50 companies for 35 years and witnessed affirmative action. We had to pass up qualified, motivated candidates for AAs who would do the least work possible and taunt management to fire them so they can sue. Your pie in the sky ideas are failures

Not only is that not case law evidence, it seems you're ready to skip over all the numbers, too.
Are we supposed to take your word for it that the number of NON-AA employees who sued for wrongful termination was less, and on different grounds? Also, you seem to have skipped telling us whether they attempted to sue on discrimination grounds, because if they did, there would be case law precedent where a specific AA statute was referenced.
I encourage you to help enlighten us by filling in exactly which statute in AA law was violated.

Somehow I suspect we'll get CRICKETS for a response.
Somehow I suspect your firm just had lazy, complacent and underpaid, or overworked HR staff that just hired anyone without due diligence, and it's more convenient for management to just blame Affirmative Action.

No one in government puts a gun to HR's head to "pass up qualified, motivated candidates for substandard ones".
Is the HR manager actually READING resumes and actually TALKING TO candidates or scanning the resumes into a computerized ranking system and then talking AT the candidate from a canned script?
Do they even have the TIME to do so?
Keywords have turned hiring into a pass-the-buck game, with HR complaining it can’t find talent!
Well, HR isn’t looking for talent. HR isn’t looking for anything! Phony algorithms are keeping the talent unemployed while HR gets paid to do something else.

I've been in meetings where top level management complained that they "couldn't find people".
HR managers who there piped up that they were a member of several large job-search networking groups, with membership in the thousands in the area. HR offered to put them in touch, help them post positions, and contacted them multiple times afterwards to help facilitate this. Nobody took HR up on it.
They just wanted HR to keep plopping resumes into the same phony algorithms and crunching the numbers.
Garbage IN = Garbage OUT.

I asked for CASE LAW cites. I did that for a reason. I asked for that because if your gripes are real, and based on actual firsthand experience, you would be able to cite case law instances where it was an actual Affirmative Action statute being argued.
Five bucks says it had absolutely nothing to do with AA at all, and that you're just passing the buck.

/----/ I said THREATENED TO SUE. I only knew one who actually did. She was caught stealing, was terminated and she sued for discrimination. The company settled for $100,000. You big dummy.

Oh sure, and at this point, I'm going to wager that you work in the lumber aisle at Home Depot, not as some executive for a Fortune 500 company. There is ample evidence for my claim, at least as much evidence as your claims anyway.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

You're the one claiming illegal aliens voted for her. There is no question I need to answer when you can't prove your claims.

Nor can you.

There's nothing I need to prove when he couldn't prove his claims.

When the motor-voter law was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, it opened fraudulent voting up to the masses.

Nonsense. Motor-voter laws prohibit registering illegal aliens to vote.

Getting a license, all they have to do is check a box saying they are a citizen. Don't ask don't tell. Bingo, you're registered to vote.

Sigh, but we'll just skip over all the wheels that get set into motion the very second you deliberately falsify information on a state driver's license application, because Lord knows, the DMV never does due diligence and follow up? Are you fucking kidding me? Do you even DRIVE a car at all?
Maybe Stormfront has its own sovereign driver's license and you're carrying one around in your wallet right now.

This is very entertaining.
I like to think that I dabble in BULLSHIT from time to time for my own amusement but I now realize that I must bow at the knee of a true master.

 

[Dr Grump]

Hi [his] daddy gave him money and he still has managed to file for Chapter 11 on more than 6 occasions.

Why lie? President Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy.

Wow, Democrats sure are in a panic! President Trump piling one success on top of another success!

Even my own quote says Chapter 11. And I was wrong, it wasn't more than six times. It was six times.

Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?

 

[Faun]

You're the one claiming illegal aliens voted for her. There is no question I need to answer when you can't prove your claims.

Nor can you.

There's nothing I need to prove when he couldn't prove his claims.

When the motor-voter law was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, it opened fraudulent voting up to the masses.

Nonsense. Motor-voter laws prohibit registering illegal aliens to vote.

Getting a license, all they have to do is check a box saying they are a citizen. Don't ask don't tell. Bingo, you're registered to vote.

Since you’re not a very believable person, care to post a link to show you’re not insane as you appear?

 

[Correll]

It was an honest question, wasn't it?
When people find out what Affirmative Action really is, it sounds like the honorable thing to do.

Gosh, and I thought the goal of any organization, whether private or government was to hire the best-qualified person for the job. Not the best person of a certain race, then the best of another race and so on. A quota system. You're not looking for the best-qualified person but rather the best of each chosen group, regardless of skills.

Why do you think Pocahontas lied about being a Native American all these years?

Textbook example of not knowing what Affirmative Action is ABOVE.
Affirmative Action does not play favorites with regard to qualifications for the following reasons, which are codified into the law and can be demonstrated.

1. Affirmative Action creates a field in which OPPORTUNITIES are equalized.

2. Affirmative Action grants equal ACCESS TO said opportunities.

3. If a candidate is picked through Affirmative Action and cannot demonstrate an ability to do the job, there is
NOTHING in Affirmative Action law that states an employer is required to KEEP THAT person.
The candidate must demonstrate the qualifications necessary to be PICKED for the job and must demonstrate those abilities. If they are unable to do so, they are not entitled to seek protection under Affirmative Action to appeal for a chance to keep the position they were hired for, or even GET that job in the first place.

I await anyone who can demonstrate case law evidence to the contrary that would disprove ANYTHING I said in the above response.

THe New Haven Firefighter case showed that that is not true.


The massive sat bonus blacks get for having black skin in Ivy League admissions, shows that that is not true.

Ricci v. diStefano (New Haven Firefighter case) was not about Affirmative Action.
The legal argument was based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
And if anything, the case argued that the City of New Haven made a pig's ear out of the way it attempted to APPLY any affirmative action, because simply DISCARDING test scores is not something Affirmative Action would support at all.

The very concept of Affirmative Action, as it is applied in America today, requires discrimination in favor of blacks.


The City of New Haven did what they felt they had to do to protect themselves from being sued for discrimination against blacks.

All the dem appointed justices on the Court agreed. If we had had a liberal court, with one more dem appointed Justice, that blatant anti-white discrimination would be the law of the land thanks to precedent.


So, don't pretend that that is not what you libs want.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?

Surely you are aware of the studies documenting massive and widespread discrimination in favor of blacks and browns and against whites and asians in Ivy League admissions?

Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?

Fuck you, you piece of shit.

What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?

Fuck you some more, you piece of shit.

I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

What you are, is a race baiting asshole. Fuck you some more.

 

[Markle]

Hi [his] daddy gave him money and he still has managed to file for Chapter 11 on more than 6 occasions.

Why lie? President Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy.

Wow, Democrats sure are in a panic! President Trump piling one success on top of another success!

Even my own quote says Chapter 11. And I was wrong, it wasn't more than six times. It was six times.

Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?

Donald Trump has never declared personal bankruptcy.

How many casinos in Atlantic City have declared bankruptcy?

 

[Markle]

You're the one claiming illegal aliens voted for her. There is no question I need to answer when you can't prove your claims.

Nor can you.

There's nothing I need to prove when he couldn't prove his claims.

When the motor-voter law was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, it opened fraudulent voting up to the masses.

Nonsense. Motor-voter laws prohibit registering illegal aliens to vote.

Getting a license, all they have to do is check a box saying they are a citizen. Don't ask don't tell. Bingo, you're registered to vote.

Since you’re not a very believable person, care to post a link to show you’re not insane as you appear?

Thank you for sharing.

 

[Dr Grump]

Hi [his] daddy gave him money and he still has managed to file for Chapter 11 on more than 6 occasions.

Why lie? President Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy.

Wow, Democrats sure are in a panic! President Trump piling one success on top of another success!

Even my own quote says Chapter 11. And I was wrong, it wasn't more than six times. It was six times.

Fact Check: Has Trump declared bankruptcy four or six times?

Donald Trump has never declared personal bankruptcy.

How many casinos in Atlantic City have declared bankruptcy?

Never said he had.....

 

[Faun]

You're the one claiming illegal aliens voted for her. There is no question I need to answer when you can't prove your claims.

Nor can you.

There's nothing I need to prove when he couldn't prove his claims.

When the motor-voter law was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, it opened fraudulent voting up to the masses.

Nonsense. Motor-voter laws prohibit registering illegal aliens to vote.

Getting a license, all they have to do is check a box saying they are a citizen. Don't ask don't tell. Bingo, you're registered to vote.

Since you’re not a very believable person, care to post a link to show you’re not insane as you appear?

Thank you for sharing.

And thank you for demonstrating you can’t prove your delusions are real. See that? I knew you are insane.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The very concept of Affirmative Action, as it is applied in America today, requires discrimination in favor of blacks.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own FACTS.

The City of New Haven did what they felt they had to do to protect themselves from being sued for discrimination against blacks.

All the dem appointed justices on the Court agreed. If we had had a liberal court, with one more dem appointed Justice, that blatant anti-white discrimination would be the law of the land thanks to precedent.

Now I'm going to go all Lexis Nexis on your ass and quote the liberal justices verbatim, so that the world can see for themselves what a lying sack of balls you are. This isn't going to end well for you, but as can be seen in your quotes below, it already isn't ending well, and you're having a case of "the sadz" because yaw widdle fee-wings are hurted".
New Haven did a shit job of trying to apply Affirmative Action, and that's a fact.

So, don't pretend that that is not what you libs want.

I don't need to pretend anything because I am capable of explaining in succinct terms what it is I want, and it's not reverse discrimination, it's affirmative action.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?

Surely you are aware of the studies documenting massive and widespread discrimination in favor of blacks and browns and against whites and asians in Ivy League admissions?

Then it should no trouble at all for you to CTRL-V them and let everyone see what those studies actually said, instead of your V-dare interpretation.

Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?

Fuck you, you piece of shit.

I believe the term you're searching for is, "you garlic eating **** mutt" (I'm a Jew-talian, so you should have a field day with it)

What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?

Fuck you some more, you piece of shit.

Awww, no kisses? No reacharound? I guess our date didn't go well. Aziz Ansari had the same problem with little bitches like you.

I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

What you are, is a race baiting asshole. Fuck you some more.

Projection, followed by irony.

 

[Correll]

The very concept of Affirmative Action, as it is applied in America today, requires discrimination in favor of blacks.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own FACTS.

I then went on to explain and support my conclusion. For you to single it out, and respond to it, as though it were an unsupported assertion, is you being a dishonest ass.

The City of New Haven did what they felt they had to do to protect themselves from being sued for discrimination against blacks.

All the dem appointed justices on the Court agreed. If we had had a liberal court, with one more dem appointed Justice, that blatant anti-white discrimination would be the law of the land thanks to precedent.

Now I'm going to go all Lexis Nexis on your ass and quote the liberal justices verbatim, so that the world can see for themselves what a lying sack of balls you are. This isn't going to end well for you, but as can be seen in your quotes below, it already isn't ending well, and you're having a case of "the sadz" because yaw widdle fee-wings are hurted".
New Haven did a shit job of trying to apply Affirmative Action, and that's a fact.

So, don't pretend that that is not what you libs want.

I don't need to pretend anything because I am capable of explaining in succinct terms what it is I want, and it's not reverse discrimination, it's affirmative action.[/QUOTE]


Yet the lib justices all voted in favor of the above reverse discrimination.


If that is not what you want, you are on the wrong side of this debate.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?

Surely you are aware of the studies documenting massive and widespread discrimination in favor of blacks and browns and against whites and asians in Ivy League admissions?

Then it should no trouble at all for you to CTRL-V them and let everyone see what those studies actually said, instead of your V-dare interpretation.[/QUOTE]


Sure.

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Pub_Minding the campus combined files.pdf


"being Hispanic conferred an admissions boost over being white (for those who applied in 1997) equivalent to 130 SAT points (out of 1600), while being black rather than white conferred a 310 SAT point advantage. Asians, however, suffered an admissions penalty compared to whites equivalent to 140 SAT points."

Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?

Fuck you, you piece of shit.

I believe the term you're searching for is, "you garlic eating **** mutt" (I'm a Jew-talian, so you should have a field day with it)[/QUOTE]


I'm not judging you on your ethnicity, but on your actions. Your actions show you to be a race baiting piece of shit.

What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?

Fuck you some more, you piece of shit.

Awww, no kisses? No reacharound? I guess our date didn't go well. Aziz Ansari had the same problem with little bitches like you.[/QUOTE]

I'm not the one reduced to race baiting and Godwin smears, loser.

I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

What you are, is a race baiting asshole. Fuck you some more.

Projection, followed by irony.

[/QUOTE]



No, irony, I made a number of valid points, and you responded with race baiting and Godwin smears.


That shows what type of person you are, ie a race baiting asshole.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The very concept of Affirmative Action, as it is applied in America today, requires discrimination in favor of blacks.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own FACTS.

I then went on to explain and support my conclusion. For you to single it out, and respond to it, as though it were an unsupported assertion, is you being a dishonest ass.

The City of New Haven did what they felt they had to do to protect themselves from being sued for discrimination against blacks.

All the dem appointed justices on the Court agreed. If we had had a liberal court, with one more dem appointed Justice, that blatant anti-white discrimination would be the law of the land thanks to precedent.

Now I'm going to go all Lexis Nexis on your ass and quote the liberal justices verbatim, so that the world can see for themselves what a lying sack of balls you are. This isn't going to end well for you, but as can be seen in your quotes below, it already isn't ending well, and you're having a case of "the sadz" because yaw widdle fee-wings are hurted".
New Haven did a shit job of trying to apply Affirmative Action, and that's a fact.

So, don't pretend that that is not what you libs want.

I don't need to pretend anything because I am capable of explaining in succinct terms what it is I want, and it's not reverse discrimination, it's affirmative action.

Yet the lib justices all voted in favor of the above reverse discrimination.


If that is not what you want, you are on the wrong side of this debate.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?

Surely you are aware of the studies documenting massive and widespread discrimination in favor of blacks and browns and against whites and asians in Ivy League admissions?

Then it should no trouble at all for you to CTRL-V them and let everyone see what those studies actually said, instead of your V-dare interpretation.[/QUOTE]


Sure.

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Pub_Minding the campus combined files.pdf


"being Hispanic conferred an admissions boost over being white (for those who applied in 1997) equivalent to 130 SAT points (out of 1600), while being black rather than white conferred a 310 SAT point advantage. Asians, however, suffered an admissions penalty compared to whites equivalent to 140 SAT points."

Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?

Fuck you, you piece of shit.

I believe the term you're searching for is, "you garlic eating **** mutt" (I'm a Jew-talian, so you should have a field day with it)[/QUOTE]


I'm not judging you on your ethnicity, but on your actions. Your actions show you to be a race baiting piece of shit.

What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?

Fuck you some more, you piece of shit.

Awww, no kisses? No reacharound? I guess our date didn't go well. Aziz Ansari had the same problem with little bitches like you.[/QUOTE]

I'm not the one reduced to race baiting and Godwin smears, loser.

I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

What you are, is a race baiting asshole. Fuck you some more.

Projection, followed by irony.

[/QUOTE]



No, irony, I made a number of valid points, and you responded with race baiting and Godwin smears.


That shows what type of person you are, ie a race baiting asshole.[/QUOTE]

 

[ptbw forever]

The very concept of Affirmative Action, as it is applied in America today, requires discrimination in favor of blacks.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own FACTS.

I then went on to explain and support my conclusion. For you to single it out, and respond to it, as though it were an unsupported assertion, is you being a dishonest ass.

The City of New Haven did what they felt they had to do to protect themselves from being sued for discrimination against blacks.

All the dem appointed justices on the Court agreed. If we had had a liberal court, with one more dem appointed Justice, that blatant anti-white discrimination would be the law of the land thanks to precedent.

Now I'm going to go all Lexis Nexis on your ass and quote the liberal justices verbatim, so that the world can see for themselves what a lying sack of balls you are. This isn't going to end well for you, but as can be seen in your quotes below, it already isn't ending well, and you're having a case of "the sadz" because yaw widdle fee-wings are hurted".
New Haven did a shit job of trying to apply Affirmative Action, and that's a fact.

So, don't pretend that that is not what you libs want.

I don't need to pretend anything because I am capable of explaining in succinct terms what it is I want, and it's not reverse discrimination, it's affirmative action.

Yet the lib justices all voted in favor of the above reverse discrimination.


If that is not what you want, you are on the wrong side of this debate.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?

Surely you are aware of the studies documenting massive and widespread discrimination in favor of blacks and browns and against whites and asians in Ivy League admissions?

Then it should no trouble at all for you to CTRL-V them and let everyone see what those studies actually said, instead of your V-dare interpretation.

Sure.

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Pub_Minding the campus combined files.pdf


"being Hispanic conferred an admissions boost over being white (for those who applied in 1997) equivalent to 130 SAT points (out of 1600), while being black rather than white conferred a 310 SAT point advantage. Asians, however, suffered an admissions penalty compared to whites equivalent to 140 SAT points."

Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?

Fuck you, you piece of shit.

I believe the term you're searching for is, "you garlic eating **** mutt" (I'm a Jew-talian, so you should have a field day with it)[/QUOTE]


I'm not judging you on your ethnicity, but on your actions. Your actions show you to be a race baiting piece of shit.

What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?

Fuck you some more, you piece of shit.

Awww, no kisses? No reacharound? I guess our date didn't go well. Aziz Ansari had the same problem with little bitches like you.[/QUOTE]

I'm not the one reduced to race baiting and Godwin smears, loser.

I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

What you are, is a race baiting asshole. Fuck you some more.

Projection, followed by irony.

[/QUOTE]



No, irony, I made a number of valid points, and you responded with race baiting and Godwin smears.


That shows what type of person you are, ie a race baiting asshole.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
You typed absolutely nothing in this point, idiot.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Pub_Minding the campus combined files.pdf

You know what? You're right, the university study has a lot of truth in it. Affirmative Action at the private university level is a hot mess. You win points for that one.

At the hiring level, in business, not so much. Different companies apply Affirmative Action with varying degrees of success. The industry I work in, or worked in (Film-TV production - semi-retired now) has had a lot of success.
The tech industry has done well for the most part, and healthcare is well represented.
Even the financial industry is doing better.

That doesn't mean that all businesses understand how to apply it, and it doesn't mean that civil service knows how to either, at least not at the city or county level.
I'm still going to bring the Supreme Court arguments in for New Haven but you win on the university points.

You're still wrong about Affirmative Action being reverse racism.
Failure to understand, implement and apply AA is the responsibility of those who are tasked with doing so.
The idea is to present equal opportunities that were not historically available.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The very concept of Affirmative Action, as it is applied in America today, requires discrimination in favor of blacks.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own FACTS.

I then went on to explain and support my conclusion. For you to single it out, and respond to it, as though it were an unsupported assertion, is you being a dishonest ass.

The City of New Haven did what they felt they had to do to protect themselves from being sued for discrimination against blacks.

All the dem appointed justices on the Court agreed. If we had had a liberal court, with one more dem appointed Justice, that blatant anti-white discrimination would be the law of the land thanks to precedent.

Now I'm going to go all Lexis Nexis on your ass and quote the liberal justices verbatim, so that the world can see for themselves what a lying sack of balls you are. This isn't going to end well for you, but as can be seen in your quotes below, it already isn't ending well, and you're having a case of "the sadz" because yaw widdle fee-wings are hurted".
New Haven did a shit job of trying to apply Affirmative Action, and that's a fact.

So, don't pretend that that is not what you libs want.

I don't need to pretend anything because I am capable of explaining in succinct terms what it is I want, and it's not reverse discrimination, it's affirmative action.

Yet the lib justices all voted in favor of the above reverse discrimination.


If that is not what you want, you are on the wrong side of this debate.

Your second reference makes no sense whatsoever. Would you care to try being more specific?

Surely you are aware of the studies documenting massive and widespread discrimination in favor of blacks and browns and against whites and asians in Ivy League admissions?

Then it should no trouble at all for you to CTRL-V them and let everyone see what those studies actually said, instead of your V-dare interpretation.

Sure.

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Pub_Minding the campus combined files.pdf


"being Hispanic conferred an admissions boost over being white (for those who applied in 1997) equivalent to 130 SAT points (out of 1600), while being black rather than white conferred a 310 SAT point advantage. Asians, however, suffered an admissions penalty compared to whites equivalent to 140 SAT points."

Are you even capable of citing any case law whatsoever, or are you content to get your information from Stormfront?

Fuck you, you piece of shit.

I believe the term you're searching for is, "you garlic eating **** mutt" (I'm a Jew-talian, so you should have a field day with it)

I'm not judging you on your ethnicity, but on your actions. Your actions show you to be a race baiting piece of shit.

What's next, citing Arno Mayer as a Jewish Holocaust denier?

Fuck you some more, you piece of shit.

Awww, no kisses? No reacharound? I guess our date didn't go well. Aziz Ansari had the same problem with little bitches like you.[/QUOTE]

I'm not the one reduced to race baiting and Godwin smears, loser.

I'm onto you guys, but the problem for you is, I'm much smarter than you guys.

What you are, is a race baiting asshole. Fuck you some more.

Projection, followed by irony.

[/QUOTE]



No, irony, I made a number of valid points, and you responded with race baiting and Godwin smears.


That shows what type of person you are, ie a race baiting asshole.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
You typed absolutely nothing in this point, idiot.[/QUOTE]

No, I will give him the win for the university study.
I doubt public universities do such a shit job, neither of my kids complained and they are both white.
They don't know anyone else who does either.