“So you spend your life as a hanger-on eh? Thinking that hanging around with the Turd as we lovingly call him at MSNBC makes you a bigger man than you really really really are….”

So Ken, how did you get that gig; making that baby wailing sound at the beginning of “Thin Ice” on Pink Floyd’s “The Wall?”

Never mind that your basic premise (employers can’t ask questions at interviews) is (as usual) false and ill informed, what magic question you think would have prevented this situation?

Thanks.I am trying to work “Moon Shadow” into one of my answers.

No I ‘ m pretty small potatoes compared to your intellect but, you know, if you’d let me call you by German name, Der Ken, and then spell it backwards it would just about describe your thought patterns.

You can find their names in Loving v. Virginia, and Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. Maybe you’ve heard of those cases. Most literate people have.

To directly answer your question,I suspect they “got off” as many of them as the law permitted to “get off.” If all of them were convicted they would make your list, or are you the type that thinks everyone who is ever charged is guilty?

I knew and worked with two of them.

So we went from maybe 1 out of 25 hirings being tainted because someone was biased to a system of not knowing the background of ANYBODY that gets hired.

*******
Oh very young what will you leave us this time. You’ re only dancing on this earth for a short while.

You see there once was a place south of Maryland and east of the Mississippi stretching all the way down to the Gulf Coast where 100% of all applicants from a particular race were excluded from employment, marrying who they wanted, and even getting an education along with the rest of us. A bunch of wacky, troublesome lawyers like Bernie Cohen, Oliver Hill and Thurgood Marshall got that changed, and I guess we just couldn’t stop doing the right thing which your modern and youthful eyes find so offensive. We’ll just have live with your criticism. Ok?

So we went from maybe 1 out of 25 hirings being tainted because someone was biased to a system of not knowing the background of ANYBODY that gets hired.

Nice job attorneys; once againg taking a system that worked 96% of the time and turning it into a system that is 100% disfunctional; all for 40% of the lawsuit proceeds.

NICE JOB.

Perhaps you’re too young to remember a time before your dreaded nemesese, lawyers, began defending job applicants’ rights. One assumes you may be at too young an age based on the immaturity of your arguments. However, I do recognize that a developed intellect and maturity can escape some at every age. But I digress.

Before those rights were enforced, hiring decisions were too often made based on a bias either toward or against an applicant’s race, family affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, religion and a host of other non-employment related factors rather than qualifications. Where this system may also result in some bad hires, certainly you’re not suggesting these practices are preferable or produced a better, more equitable result.

I believe that mindless repetition of a thought is a symptom of serious mental disease. Get checked.

Since then my memo line always reads, “My Liquor!”

Don’t blame anybody for the fact these misfits are being hired other than the attorneys that are suing employers for digging too deep into prospective employees past habits and lifestyles.

The fact is employers cannot ask any questions of prior employers or even the prospective employee her/him self that would have prevented this.

Thanks legal profession.