Today’s blacklisted American: George Mason University to blackball whites and men in hiring

The Civil Rights Act of 1964: repealed by George Mason University.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964:
Doesn’t exist at George Mason University.

The new bigotry on American campuses: In an email sent out to his entire faculty in mid-May, George Mason University president Gregory Washington demanded that the university’s hiring practices specifically discriminate in favor of minorities and women over whites and men.

Washington further argued that the faculty at GMU do not proportionally represent the ethnicities of the student body or the surrounding region. A vision of diversity and inclusion in hiring “is a recognition of the reality that our society’s future lies in multicultural inclusion,” he said in his email.

This begins by redefining “best” to include “lived experiences” as a top hiring criteria alongside professional aptitude, he stated. In short, “We either believe that diversity and inclusion can improve our performance, or we don’t,” Washington stated.

Consequently, Washington recommended hiring based jointly on teaching ability, research achievements, and openness to diversity. The result, he argued, will support minorities who don’t have equal access to opportunities for success.

To really get a flavor of Washington’s discriminatory recommendations you need to read his whole email. » Read more

Today’s blacklisted Americans: No whites allowed during some events in Massachusetts school district

No whites allowed invitation at public school event

The new bigotry: The Wellesley public school district in Massachusetts has organized an event in which it expressly banned — in writing — the attendance of all whites.

A screen capture of the text of the invitation [pdf], taken from the legal complaint by a parents-rights group, is to the right, with the pertinent language highlighted.

Then, when parents complained, the district’s administration doubled down, justifying its racist policy with platitudes and dishonest rationalizations.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Anyone who is white, Christian, or male at Cigna

Cigna training presentation
According to Cigna’s training, these are bad things.

They’re coming for you next: Company documents as well as interviews have confirmed that the health insurance company Cigna actively discriminates against whites in its hiring practices, as well as runs training sessions using Critical Race Theory that aims at making all whites, males, and Christians ashamed of what they are, because by definition such people are automatically racist bigots.

The original story is here. From the first link:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted Americans: Trump supporters blackballed by employers

Survey graphic
Click for full image.

Blacklists are back and the Democrats got ’em: According to a new survey, those who publicly supported Trump or expressed conservative opinions on social media are being willingly blackballed by the hiring managers in corporate America.

A new survey of hiring managers provided to Secrets found that backing Trump on social media is the top reason to reject a job applicant.

The apparent reason: Human resources departments want to avoid “tiffs” between employees. “Likely to avoid future office tiffs, a significant portion of hiring managers admitted to negatively judging candidates based on the political content posted. For 27% of hiring managers, social media posts endorsing Donald Trump for president would negatively impact their decision to hire a candidate,” read the analysis of the poll done for Skynova, an online business software company.

While the list of political positions that causes employees heartburn in the graph above also includes some pro-Democratic Party positions — such as endorsing Joe Biden, supporting unions and a minimum wage — the majority are pro-Trump or conservative positions. Though there is a small chance you might be denied a job if you publicly stated your leftist beliefs, you almost certainly will be blackballed if you dared speak out against such beliefs.

Moreover, leftist workers are now eagerly looking for ways to blacklist conservative companies as well. From the survey:
» Read more

AZ Dept of Ed: 3-month-old white babies are already racists

They’re coming for you next: The Arizona Department of Education has created what it calls an “Equity Toolkit” for use by parents and teachers that claims that 3-month-old white babies are already racists, and that the schools should take “pro-active” action against white children, continuously.

More details here.

The toolkit teaches, among other things, that babies start to become racist at just three months of age. The toolkit insists that babies must be spoken to about race, as “letting children draw their own conclusions based on what they see” leads to racism. It is unclear how allowing children to think for themselves leads to racism.

It also suggests that white children specifically are strongly biased in favour of their own race by the time they are five years old, but claimed that such a phenomenon does not exist among black and “latinx” children.

The toolkit also teaches that if a white person disputes the accusation “that they are a racist [it] is taken as evidence of racism. The reading says that white people deny their own racism ‘to feel better about themselves.'”

I have already written my state representative, a conservative Republican, though I have doubts much will come of it. As I told him,

Do you think your leadership might be able to move their asses and put an end to this bigoted school program, now?

I have my doubts. Prove me wrong.

I do not expect much from him, even though I know he will sincerely want to do something. His Republican Party leadership in Arizona is a bunch of quisling backstabbers whose only goal is to gather campaign donations and compromise with corrupt and bigoted Democrats. They have been useless for years, which is why they are steadily losing ground in the state.

Today’s blacklisted Americans: McDonald’s aggressively discriminating against white men

They’re coming for you next: McDonald’s has now established policies that will require firm statistical hiring quotas for its top management jobs aimed at discriminating against white men and favoring minorities, regardless of qualifications.

A press release on the McDonald’s website says that part of the bonuses awarded to top company executives will be based upon their efforts to hire women and what the company terms “historically underrepresented groups” for top corporate positions.

“Beginning in 2021, the Company is incorporating quantitative human capital management-related metrics to annual incentive compensation for its Executive Vice Presidents,” the company said. “In addition to the Company’s financial performance, executives will be measured on their ability to champion our core values, improve representation within leadership roles for both women and historically underrepresented groups, and create a strong culture of inclusion within the Company,” the company said.

Other reports indicate that an executive’s annual bonuses could be penalized by as much as 15% if he or she fails to meet these goals.

In other words, if you don’t favor women and minorities in your promotions and hiring, discriminating specifically against white men merely because of their sex and race, your bonuses will be reduced.

Nor is this policy of racial discrimination limited to the company’s top management.

The company’s diversity website notes that in America, 70 percent of those hired in 2019 were women (54 percent) or minorities (33 percent).

The company was even more focused on non-white, non-male applicants through its University program in 2019–2020, with 81 percent of those admitted being women or minorities.

All of these policies are 100% illegal based on all of the civil rights laws passed in the past half century. Period. The law forbids you to consider race, religion, creed, or sex in your hiring and promotion practices.

No matter. When it comes to oppressing some races and sexes the law no longer matters. What matters is punishing today’s innocent generation for the sins of long dead past generations.

So, remember this the next time you stop for a hamburger. Your money will be supporting an inherently racist company which determines who it will hire and promote not by their talent, skills, and performance, but by their race and sex. According to McDonald’s the quality of a person’s character be damned!

Boeing’s CEO vows to hire based on race, not qualifications

The coming dark age: Boeing’s CEO today vowed to raise the number of blacks working at the company by 20%, apparently with no regard to qualifications.

Boeing is seeking to increase black US employees throughout the company by 20 percent and mandate benchmarks for hiring people of color, Chief Executive Dave Calhoun told employees in a memo on Friday reviewed by Reuters.

…The changes at Boeing, a stalwart defense contractor with its corporate headquarters in Chicago and largest factories in Washington state and South Carolina, appeared to mark the first concrete steps by the planemaker to address the issue. “We understand we have work to do,” Calhoun said in the memo, which was released on the 57th anniversary of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech and included references to the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Wisconsin on Sunday.

Boeing declined to provide its current number of black employees or a timeline for the new target.

The planemaker separately has had to lay off thousands of workers as it grapples with the financial fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic and the 17-month-old grounding of the 737 MAX after two fatal crashes.

In the memo, Calhoun said the company would establish an internal Racial Justice think-tank to guide its policies.

As a company, Boeing’s bad performance in almost every area in the last year is bad enough. If they are going to lay off thousands and then replace some with workers based merely on racial quotas the company’s future will be worse, since their ability to produce quality airplanes and spacecraft is certain to go down.

And for those hate-mongers who will immediately try to accuse me of saying blacks are not as smart, go to hell. The goal should be to hire the best, instead of members of a specific race. If you favor one race over another you simply prove yourself to be a bigot, as this company’s CEO is now amply doing.

I also hope a lot of fired Boeing employees sue Boeing for racial discrimination.

California Democrats vote to allow all forms of discrimination

Fascist California; The Democrats controlling all levels of the government in California this week voted to repeal their constitutional statutes that forbid discrimination based on race, sex, ethnicity, or national origin.

This quote makes clear the goal of the bigoted Democrats:

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, the San Diego Democrat who is carrying ACA5 [the bill’s official designation], said mass uprisings in recent weeks against police brutality and systemic racism have shown that new solutions are needed to address the discrimination that remains in many communities.

“As we look around the world, we see there is an urgent cry — an urgent cry for change,” Weber said on the Assembly floor. “After 25 years of quantitative and qualitative data, we see that race-neutral solutions cannot fix problems steeped in race.” [emphasis mine]

So if race neutral polices won’t work, it appears she is suggesting they put into law race-biased policies, kind of like the Nazis did. In this case they will aim to specifically favor the Democrats’ rainbow coalition of minorities — specifically blacks, homosexuals, and illegal immigrants — to the detriment and oppression of everyone else.

Of course, these benefits will not apply to any blacks or homosexuals or immigrants who happen to be conservative. In that case their minority status is now null and void, as it can do nothing to help Democrats maintain power.

None of this should surprise us. After fifty years the Democratic Party is finally returning to its roots as the party of segregation, discrimination, and race hatred. They are simply rephrasing it slightly to fool people.

The law will have to still be approved by the voters in November, but since these Democrats are also forcing through California mail-only voting, they will have no problem fixing the results to their satisfaction.

California bans Christian clubs at its colleges

Modern fascism: Christian clubs at California colleges have been banned because the clubs insist that their elected leaders must be Christians.

Leaders of Cru, formerly known as Campus Crusade for Christ, as well as the two other Christian clubs at San Luis Obispo that were derecognized – InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and Chinese Christian Fellowship – have insisted that they couldn’t allow any non-Christians to be leaders.

“We have no issue with anybody of any kind of race, religion coming to our weekly meetings and being a part of who we are,” San Luis Obispo Missionary Leader Jamey Pappas said. “It’s a question of who’s going to be leading our students in a Bible Study, mentoring them individually, or deciding what kind of content goes into our weekly meeting, and we want people who agree with what we’re about.”

More evidence that the concept of freedom of association is dead in America, and with it freedom itself. The result here is that it is impossible to have a religious organization on these campuses. (Note that the Islamic clubs have joined with the Christian clubs to fight the policy.)

Since I have no doubt that atheist and gay clubs accepted this policy knowing that college administrators will look the other way if they discriminate because they are considered “politically correct,” I think these religious clubs should test the policy for real. Pick an atheist club and swamp it with religious members so that a religious person gets elected as leader. We will quickly find out that the real intent of these policies has nothing to do with preventing discrimination but to squelch the freedoms of traditional American values in favor of new ideologies.

Florist rejects attorney general’s deal to settle lawsuit over same-sex weddings

The Washington florist whose entire assets a judge has ruled can be confiscated because she refuses to participate in a same-sex wedding because of her Christian religion has rejected outright a settlement offered to her by the state’s attorney general.

Ms. Stutzman [the florist] rejected Friday a settlement agreement offered by Mr. Ferguson [the attorney general] that would have required her to pay $2,001 in damages and legal fees after a judge ruled last week that she violated state law by declining to provide services for a same-sex wedding. “My primary goal has always been to bring about an end to the Defendants’ unlawful conduct and to make clear that I will not tolerate discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” Mr. Ferguson said in a statement.

The agreement also would require Ms. Stutzman to agree “not to discriminate in the future,” which means she must provide custom floral arrangements for same-sex weddings or stop doing weddings altogether, said Peter LaVallee, a spokesman for the state attorney general’s office.

In rejecting the offer, Stutzman was very blunt about her reasons.

“Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about,” Ms. Stutzman said in a letter to Mr. Ferguson. “It’s about freedom, not money. I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important.

“…I pray that you reconsider your position. … I kindly served Rob [the gay plaintiff] for nearly a decade and would gladly continue to do so. I truly want the best for my friend. I’ve also employed and served many members of the LGBT community, and I will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this case.”

She concluded, “You chose to attack my faith and pursue this not simply as a matter of law, but to threaten my very means of working, eating, and having a home. If you are serious about clarifying the law, then I urge you to drop your claims against my home, business, and other assets and pursue the legal claims through the appeal process.”

The mildness of the attorney general’s offer suggests to me that he is feeling some political heat. He looks like a tyrant and a bad guy who is trying to destroy this woman expressly because of her religious beliefs. He thus wants this case to end with a victory, but to end as quickly as possible.

When asked in a survey if they would discriminate against conservatives, the academic community freely admitted that it would gladly do so.

The tolerance of the left: When asked in a survey if they would discriminate against conservatives, the academic community freely admitted that they would gladly do so.

One question, according to the researchers, “asked whether, in choosing between two equally qualified job candidates for one job opening, they would be inclined to vote for the more liberal candidate (i.e., over the conservative).” More than a third of the respondents said they would discriminate against the conservative candidate. One respondent wrote in that if department members “could figure out who was a conservative, they would be sure not to hire them.”

Then there’s this:

Mr. Inbar and Mr. Lammers found that conservatives fear that revealing their political identity will have negative consequences. This is why New York University-based psychologist Jonathan Haidt, a self-described centrist, has compared the experience of being a conservative graduate student to being a closeted gay student in the 1980s.

In 2011, Mr. Haidt addressed this very issue at a meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology — the same group that Mr. Inbar and Mr. Lammer surveyed. Mr. Haidt’s talk, “The Bright Future of Post-Partisan Social Psychology,” caused a stir. The professor, whose new book “The Righteous Mind” examines the moral roots of our political positions, asked the nearly 1,000 academics and students in the room to raise their hands if they were liberals. Nearly 80 percent of the hands went up. When he asked whether there were any conservatives in the house, just three hands — 0.3 percent — went up.

This is “a statistically impossible lack of diversity,” Mr. Haidt said.

What is horrifying to me is that this prejudiced behavior is taking place within our society’s supposingly most educated community., the place where thoughtful, rational debate is supposed to be cherished and honored. How can we have a just and fair-minded culture if our elite education system is home to this kind of close-minded and hateful bigotry?

The testimony of the fired JPL employee who is claiming religious discrimination continued on Monday.

The testimony continued on Monday of the fired JPL employee who is claiming the science center fired him because of his religious beliefs.

[David Coppedge] trial’s started last week, and on Monday [he] testified that his supervisor Gregory Chin had wrongly accused him, threatened his freedom of religion and created a potentially hostile working environment. “You are pushing your religion in this office and harassing people with this religion,” Chin said, according to Coppedge, who added: “He was angry and he got angrier.”

Coppedge said he asked Chin why he considered intelligent design anything but science. “Dave, intelligent design is religion,” Chin replied, according to Coppedge. Chin warned him against discussing religion or politics with colleagues, he said.

“I felt threatened .. I said: ‘Greg, this gets into issues of free speech and freedom of religion … this could be construed as creating a hostile work environment’,” he added.

Real scientists should never feel threatened by anything Coppedge was saying, and should in fact enjoy debating the issue. Unfortunately, I have learned that such open-mindedness is found with increasing rarity in modern intellectual society, especially when it comes to Judeo-Christian beliefs. This is why I tend to believe Coppedge’s story.

Gender politics at NASA

O joy! It’s time to favor gender over achievement at NASA. The Obama administration is considering using governmental authority at NASA and other agencies to guarantee that the same number of women receive science, technology, engineering, and math degrees as men. The actual White House statement emphasizes the need “to ensure equity in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education programs.” [emphasis mine].

If you want to be really annoyed, download NASA’s Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity documentation [pdf] and read how institutions are expected to do “periodic reviews of data broken down by gender. . . to ensure program policies and practices are not having a negative impact on program participation.” [page 5]

In other words, NASA should decide whether to provide education funds to universities, based not on the ability of those universities produce qualified engineers and scientists of any sex but on the number of women in their programs.