Posted on 09/12/2010 10:11:56 AM PDT by truthandlife
Court documents obtained Saturday by THE WEEKLY STANDARD reveal surprising new details about the gender discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Christine O'Donnell in 2005 against her former employer, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a conservative non-profit based in Delaware.* O'Donnell, who is now challenging moderate congressman Mike Castle in the September 14 Delaware GOP Senate primary, sought $6.95 million in damages. In a court complaint, she extensively detailed the "mental anguish" she suffered after allegedly being demoted and fired because of her gender. And, although she didn't have a bachelor's degree until this year, O'Donnell implied she was taking Master's degree classes at Princeton University in 2003.
O'Donnell alleged in a July 1, 2005 complaint filed in district court that she had been demoted because ISI's conservative philosophy dictated that women must be subordinate to men. She claimed she was fired when she contacted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding her demotion. ISI told the Delaware News Journal that she had been "terminated for operating a for-profit business."
O'Donnell's finances, honesty, and stability have been called into question in light of her false and strange claims. The court complaint raises further questions on all fronts. O'Donnell, who made an annual salary of $65,000 at ISI as director of communications and public affairs, sought up to $6,952,477 million in damages, claiming, among other allegations, that ISI had defamed her and had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. O'Donnell sought:
--Up to $3,952,447 in "Direct Damages, including back pay" and "lifetime lost income and liftetime damage to reputation."
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
Irrelevant? Your argument was that she was CHOSEN. Now you say it’s irrelevant that she wasn’t chosen, but that she won by default?
Castle didn’t run because he knew he’d lose. As did every other possible candidate apparently. He ran for the house and won his re-election. He ran this year because he knew he could win. He’s an opportunist.
I’m sure I don’t mind, though I’m not sure which part you would like to use.
NO
MORE
RINOS
No, it’s not odd. What is odd is if Castle won, and ran again in 2012, and someone in 2012 claimed that he had lied about his college, you would apparently argue that if it was true, we would have learned about it this year.
That is what is odd.
None of this is news, if Castle thought this would stick he would’ve used it a long time ago.
Bill Kristol was one of the earliest and most vocal supporters of Sarah Palin, and he still is.
I guess it’s easier for you to argue by straw man, then actually answer a question about your own belief.
I just asked which of O’Donnell’s two explanations you thought was the truth. And your response gives evidence for my opinion that this is no longer about thinking, or reasoning, it is about backing someone no matter what the truth.
Which is fine, except for the part about denying the truth or attacking others who care about it.
This was well known in May of this year.
I posted links to it here on May 27.
Not news.
We will just have to agree to disagree.
I intend to vote for Christine this coming Tuesday.
Even though she is a liar, bill paying cheat and probably murdered her mother.
Because I am an idiot.
You may have the last word since you want it so bad.
Naional Standard = Old Guard GOP = scorched earth to help Castle at all odds.
“Your primary argument is that there is no such thing as the GOP establishment”
NO, the primary argument is that this lawsuit is a real story, and that it indicates she is a flawed and unelectable candidate, who has made false statements.
This is a tough call, because Castle is an uber-RINO, and any conservative would be better, even a flawed one.
But O’Donnell supporters have to acknowledge that nominating O’Donnell may well throw the seat to the lib Dem. It may even be worth it(!) to avoid a RINO, but lets see things for what they are.
That is a perfect position for you to have, so long as when the video surfaces, you don’t bear false witness against those who disclose it by pretending it’s a lie.
That's wonderful, and Sarah has endorsed Christine O'Donnell.
>>>1) O’Donnell finished her degree in 2004, and just waited until now to pay.
2) O’Donnell just finished up her degree, finishing up a general elective course required for graduation.
Be careful, they are both claims made by O’Donnell, so whichever you pick, you will be “smearing” her.<<<
You don’t know what in the hell you are talking about!!!!!
She finished her course-work and was fully expecting to graduate having met the course requirements - but since she still owed money to the college, at the ceremony they gave her a degree folder with bursars bill instead of the diploma.
By the time she finished paying that off, the college said - well it has been a while and our rules require you to take another course so you will be a current student and eligible to graduate. They play the same crap games on transfers of credits. So, she took a course - didn’t choose underwater basketweaving or other BS course, she took one of substance.
THEN the college awarded her the degree she had earned years ago.
You have no interest in the truth, just trying to propagate smears!
I just hope she doesn’t file a sexual harrassment lawsuit against you. :-)
She’s more conservative than castle, and that’s the most important thing right now.
She articulated her positions on Mark Levin’s show- Castle wouldnt even come on the show.
You are losing sight of the the bigger picture. If you’re so perfect, why aren;t you running for office? Afraid of your own skeletons>?
This was discussed in 2008.
Here is the PBS website discussing it.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2008/biography.php?office=S&state=DE&num=1
Here is what they said in 2008.
She was fired less than a year later, prompting her to sue ISI for gender discrimination. O’Donnell dropped the lawsuit earlier this year, saying she could not afford to pursue it.
This is not news.
Neither. The problem is that it has the look of a retaliatory “bleed the bastards dry” type pf suit because she was fired and there are some issues with her claims about her damages.
And I don’t see anyone questioning why she was fired for running a for-profit business within the organization when that apparently is a no-no. So she gets fired for trying to make more money so then she sues to make more money.
If she was so devastated by the trauma of these events, how was she able to function thereafter and go on to run for high political office? The whole thing makes her look like a hustler.
I don’t know, when I knew less, I was more of a supporter of O’Donnell than I am now.
“’Seriously? A supposed conservative suing a conservative group over its conservative philosophy is not troubling to you?”
Not in this case.
“conservative philosophy dictated that women must be subordinate to men”
So you support this philosophy?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.