Quinnipiac’s female athletes granted class action status

CTPost.com
Michael P. Mayko, Staff Writer
Published: 10:53 p.m., Monday, May 24, 2010

BRIDGEPORT — The discrimination case brought against Quinnipiac University by female athletes got bigger Monday.
U.S. District Judge Stefan R. Underhill made it a class action case ruling that “all present, prospective and future female students at Quinnipiac University who have been harmed by and want to end” sex discrimination in the allocation of athletic opportunities, financial assistance or benefits provided to varsity athletes may seek to join the case.
Underhill will try the case, without a jury, on June 21.

Full Story: http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Quinnipiac-s-female-athletes-granted-class-action-498423.php

Read More...

May 28, 2010   Posted in: Affirmative Action News  Comments Closed |

Evaluating the Legal Defensibility of Regression Models Designed to Investigate and Remediate Pay Disparities: Lessons from Rudebusch v. Hughes

By Dan A. Biddle

“…some employers have been concerned with the potential of “reverse discrimination” or Equal Protection-based lawsuits that may arise after making pay adjustments to a given group. Faced with liability from potential class action suits or audits from “classical” pay disparity issues on one side and Equal Protection cases on the other, some employers view themselves in a “pickle.” Indeed, some employers that act in good faith to conduct (and later act upon) proactive pay equity studies may find themselves open to an Equal Protection suit from the group that received no pay changes.
When the courts evaluate such circumstances, some have extracted three criteria from the U.S. Supreme Court case, Johnson v. Transportation Agency[i][i]: (1) evaluating whether a “manifest imbalance” exists (which typically includes statistical significance as a minimum threshold); (2) evaluating whether the rights of individuals who were not part of the remedial pay were “unnecessarily trammeled”; and (3) evaluating whether the remedial pay adjustments were along the lines necessary to “attain a balance.”[ii][ii] The Johnson decision also dictates that the burden shifts to the employer to provide a nondiscriminatory rationale for its decision after the plaintiff demonstrates that sex was taken into account in an employer’s employment decision. The employer can establish such a rationale by pointing to an existing affirmative action plan.
When applying the Johnson framework to an Equal Protection pay case, the Ninth Circuit in Rudebusch pointed out that previous Appellate Courts (both the Fourth and Eighth Circuits) have adopted the Johnson approach in their analysis of pay equity claims. While agreeing that the Johnson case provided the proper framework for a pay equity case, they noted that there were “some significant conceptual differences between affirmative action in the promotional context and remedial measures used to cure pay inequity (p. 25)” because the Johnson case involved voluntary affirmative action efforts for promotional decisions—which is quite different than pay equity.
There are two major lessons that can be learned from the Rudebusch case. First, before making pay adjustments to a group, be sure the regression model clearly shows that the gender or race variable is statistically significant after controlling for job qualification factors. Second, make sure that the regression model is sound, accurate, and reliable…”

To view the full article, please click here:

http://www.biddleaap.com/docs/Rudebusch_Lessons.pdf

Read More...

May 28, 2010   Posted in: Affirmative Action News  Comments Closed |

What Is Sovereignty Under Jewish Enemy Rule?

Christopher Jon Bjerknes

http://www.jewishracism.com

http://www.jewishracism.blogspot.com

Many have noted that the philosophy of Plato and Socrates mirrors and was perhaps the foundation of, or perhaps even arose from, Judaism. Aristotle, also, came close to the Jewish model, with his love of the law as if potentially a divine and perfect method of rule.

On its face, Judaism would appear to advocate its countless laws as sovereign over all mankind. But Jewish law contains internal contradictions and unresolved issues, so many in fact, that under Jewish law the Jew can justify any action he would take.

I find the views of the Greeks to be naive. The Jews have a basic understanding and basis for their sovereign rule over the Goyim, over the nations. Jewish sovereignty is a mere guiding principle, “Do always and only what is good for the Jews to the extent that it affects Jews individually or collectively.” The opinions as to what may or may not be in the Jews’ interest are formed based on Jewish law and Jewish authorities, but these laws and opinions are not sovereign and are easily set aside in favor of pragmatic concerns.

This being the case, Americans suffer under a hostile sovereign and enemy force, the Jewish principle that the State and society must always and only do what is good for the Jew. The Jews view as good for themselves the attainment of all wealth, all media, all political influence, and the destruction of Gentile health, Gentile power, and Gentile genetics, ultimately the destruction of all Gentiles.

This Jewish rule manifests itself into action and substance through the control of public opinion and the exercise of political and private power. Jewish sovereignty over Americans is very much a function of the mentality and mindset of Americans, which the Jews carefully regulate and create. It is also the product of disunity among Americans, the effective vacuum of non-consensus being filled by the Jewish sovereign principle of doing what is good for the Jews.

Understanding how the Jews rule and the nature of their sovereignty allows us to break the yoke of their power. Immigration is presently a hot topic. If sovereignty in a democratic republic resides in the masses and is expressed through their representatives, then the goal of the State ought to be to benefit the masses in sustainable ways. In order to do this, the State must have a working definition of the folk whose best interests the State is intended to serve.

This presents the Jews with a method of attack in America. The Jews have actively sought to undermine every image of what it is to be an American, and instead promote the destructive myth that to be an American is to be international and to subvert your interests for those of others, those others being always the Jews or any other group the serving of which destroys America.

Should the POWER PARTY take control of the powers of the State, we will need a much better working definition of what it is that is American, and what our immigration policy should be and how we are to judge its merits and design its structure. The first question I ask myself when considering immigration on its most superficial level, is in what other countries, or regions of countries, do I feel most at home? For me, the answer is clearly northern European countries and the regions of other countries which resemble northern European culture. This is obviously in part a product of the region of the United States in which I reside, but I nevertheless suspect that those Americans from Florida would in general feel more at home Toronto, than in New Delhi; and that those Americans from Pheonix would feel more at home in Stockholm than in Cairo, though many now would feel quite at home in Mexico City, which brings me to my point.

The Jews are deliberately changing our demographics to make America anything but American, and to make it impossible to define America as anything other than international. At the close of the Second World War, large numbers of Germany’s finest scientists came to America and they contributed greatly to our prestige and sovereignty, without changing our culture or pitting us one against the other or destroying our unity or our unity of purpose. The same cannot be said of the general immigration, legal and illegal, from Latin America and Asia in the post-WWII era. The Asians have arisen as our worst and most exploitive competitors (internally and externally and due to the Jews) and the Latin Americans are a growing Communist threat (internally and externally and due to the Jews).

If we are to import more people, and I do not think we need many more unless there is a rational purpose behind the importation, then a first superficial concern is logically to ask ourselves, would we feel at home in the place from which this person is coming? Will they feel at home here, or will they tend to try to change America into something else?

There was a time when it served our interests to import large masses of people, but that time has largely passed. We have labor saving devices, and slavery was a tragedy and a mistake for all involved. It was also a genocide on an almost incomprehensible scale. We have native genius beyond all other nations and we should be nurturing it, rather than importing foreign talent.

Read More...

May 28, 2010   Posted in: Racism News  Comments Closed |

Dr. David Duke Rends Rand and Rachel: New One Not Needed, for It Resides Between Their Licentious Lips

Christopher Jon Bjerknes

http://www.jewishracism.com

http://www.jewishracism.blogspot.com

After witnessing Dr. Duke post some articles with commentary favorable to Rand Paul, I had a sinking feeling in my gut when I saw that he had presented a new video statement regarding wretched Rand Paul. I was worried Duke might have run to the enemy’s defense and grossly disappointed me by contradicting his decades’ long opposition to Jewish power. Shame on me for doubting Duke, if only momentarily. My concerns were quickly allayed as I watched Dr. Duke’s appeal to his fellow politicians to defend America’s interests, not Israel and Jewish interests, as Duke tore into the Zionist Paul and the Jewish propagandist Rachel Maddow, two pathetic peas in a putrid and poisonous pod:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf0qJXG8IVM

I wonder if Dr. Duke would be interested in an interview by me?

Read More...

May 28, 2010   Posted in: Racism News  Comments Closed |

We Do Not Need or Want a Revolution: We Need a Defensive War Against the Enemy Usurpation of Our Nation by the Jews

Christopher Jon Bjerknes

http://www.jewishracism.com

http://www.jewishracism.blogspot.com

The Jews are attempting to provoke us to attack ourselves with a revolution. The Jews often attempt to weaken nations with national strikes, market crashes, wars, etc. in order to render them ripe for revolution. The present talk of revolution originates with the Jews and the Jews intend to destroy us with a revolution, which will in actuality be a Jewish counter-revolution against the American Revolution.

We do not need to destroy our government, our industry, our agriculture or our society. On the contrary, we need to purge our government, our industry, our agriculture and our society of the enemy Jews who have usurped our country and led us on a path to our ultimate demise.

We do not a revolution and we do not need to destroy ourselves. We need to a war on the enemy that is destroying us.

We should not be talking about waging a war on ourselves with a revolution, rather we should declare a war on the Jews who declared war on us some 2,500 years ago.

We do not need an alternative tax scheme to the Federal Income tax, we can instead largely or completely eliminate it and all other taxes by regulating loan capital and the money supply. We do not need or want a monetary system based on precious metals. Instead we need and should desire a monetary system based on the productive capacity of American labor and American natural resources, which are abundant and highly competitive internationally, but even were they not, could still sustain an Autarkic system in America.

We do not need to merely curb illegal immigration, but we must also correct the abuse of legal immigration to change our national complexion and end the corruption of society to render it disunited and international. We must also improve the education, industry, professional classes, and loan capital structures of our society to render us independent and internationally competitive. Merely chasing out the illegal will accomplish none of these needed measures.

Government will have to play a large role in these reforms and new initiatives, and those who want to weaken our government and ask us to champion the policies of our own demise are merely latching on to immigration issues and gun rights, so that they can ultimately internationalize us by weakening our government, let our society go to pot, and allow international wealth to rule every facet of our lives for the purposes of exploitation rather than the improvement of the lot of the average American. The gold standard is meant to take away our sovereignty and render us slaves to international bankers who will then control our national money supply and create an international monetary system based on the fraud of gold in reserve, which they do not in fact possess.

We do not need or want revolution in America. We do not need or want to wage war on ourselves.

We need and must declare a war on the enemy who has usurped us, a war on the hostile, aggressive and parasitic enemy Jews.

Read More...

May 28, 2010   Posted in: Racism News  Comments Closed |

CNN – Obama: ‘Bond with Israel is unbreakable’ – Video



CNN – Obama: 'Bond with Israel is unbreakable'
President Obama hosts the first-ever event held at the White House to honor Jewish American Heritage MonthFrom:BarackObamaFan123Views:208 3ratingsTime:02:30More inNews Politics

See original here:
CNN – Obama: ‘Bond with Israel is unbreakable’ – Video

Read More...

May 28, 2010   Posted in: Jewish American Heritage Month  Comments Closed |

Obama hosts American Jewish Heritage ceremony – Video



Obama hosts American Jewish Heritage ceremony
Tonight President Barack Obama and the First Lady Michelle Obama are hosting the first ever reception to celebrate Jewish American Heritage month. It is a celebration of contributions to America made by the Jewish people, it has been around since 2006 but this year might have special meaning.From:RTAmericaViews:641 17ratingsTime:04:50More inNews Politics

Read the original here:
Obama hosts American Jewish Heritage ceremony – Video

Read More...

May 27, 2010   Posted in: Jewish American Heritage Month  Comments Closed |

Regina Spektor – "The Sword



Regina Spektor – “The Sword the Pen” (live at the White House)
Performed at a reception in honor of Jewish American Heritage MonthFrom:capnkoonsViews:42571 309ratingsTime:04:33More inMusic

View original post here:
Regina Spektor – "The Sword

Read More...

May 27, 2010   Posted in: Jewish American Heritage Month  Comments Closed |

Regina Spektor – "Us" (live at the White House) – Video



Regina Spektor – “Us” (live at the White House)
(joined in progress) Performed at a reception in honor of Jewish American Heritage MonthFrom:capnkoonsViews:151480 574ratingsTime:03:00More inMusic

Read this article:
Regina Spektor – "Us" (live at the White House) – Video

Read More...

May 27, 2010   Posted in: Jewish American Heritage Month  Comments Closed |


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."