commented on Race Trouble
Anyone who believe universities are in the slightest bit tolerant of racism is completely unfamiliar with universities. There's so little racism that they have to make it up, like the Oberlin and Duke hoaxes, or even change the entire meaning of the concept so that someone can be labeled racist without having a bigoted thought pass their lips or even enter their head.
This is just a silly, jeering piece of nonsense, but I can't say I'm surprised.
commented on So... I Just Got a Phone Call
SPLC is about generating hysteria for cash. Nothing else. They're so bad you have to wonder if they were ever serious about anything. Some chick at Oberlin freaks out over someone walking around in a blanket and hallucinates a klansman, Morris Dees sends out an appeal letter. Protect the endangered Obies from hatecrime! But hey, it's not like you're a reporter or anything, like you should dig a little deeper. You don't have time for that. Just keep their hatelist handy, that'll do it.
commented on Black People Are Poor Because They Eat too Much Good Chicken
@32: May well not have been random. Media are working overtime to portray it as such but if three white kids had executed a black man and it was later discovered one had written on Facebook that he hated 90% of whites ... do I need to finish that thought? Is there any point?
commented on City Council Members Vote Ex-Offender Bill Out of Committee to Full Council
I'm usually a right-wing nut, but this law makes total sense.
First, if you're relying on job applicants to check a box stating they've been convicted of a felony, which applicant is more likely to cause trouble: the one who honestly checks 'yes' or the one who dishonestly checks 'no'? You're essentially weeding out the cohort of honest ex-convicts and letting in the liars and sociopaths.
Then there's the provision that (from KOMO): "[the law] would only allow employers to ask for criminal background checks after evaluating and identifying several qualified candidates. Similar laws are on the books in five other states."
Who's going to be conducting background checks on the first pass? Waste of time and money.
So by eliminating the check box, you're actually getting to know the candidate before including their criminal record in the evaluation, which seems absolutely fair. I don't see how this adds any onerous regulation at all to the hiring process.