Politicizing the Government Gets Personal

Now I have an even better idea of what those fired US Attorneys went through.  Why?  Because the US Justice Department discriminated against me because I'm a Democrat:

From the AP:


Report: Justice Dept. passed over Dems, liberals

WASHINGTON - Ivy Leaguers and other top law students were rejected for plum Justice Department jobs two years ago because of their liberal leanings or objections to Bush administration politics, a government report concluded Tuesday.

In one case, a Harvard Law student was passed over after criticizing the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. In another, a Georgetown University student who had previously worked for a Democratic senator and congressman didn't make the cut.

I have good reason to believe that I was one of those "top law students" evidently passed over.


As early as 2002, career Justice employees complained to department officials that Bush administration political appointees had largely taken over the hiring process for summer interns and so-called Honors Program jobs for newly graduated law students. For years, job applicants had been judged on their grades, the quality of their law schools, their legal clerkships and other experiences.

But in 2002, many applicants who identified themselves as Democrats or were members of liberal-leaning organizations were rejected while GOP loyalists with fewer legal skills were hired, the report found. Of 911 students who applied for full-time Honors jobs that year, 100 were identified as liberal -- and 80 were rejected. By comparison, 46 were identified as conservative, and only four didn't get a job offer.

The political filtering of applicants ebbed for the three years between 2003 and 2005, the inquiry found, then resumed by 2006.

Of 602 Honors candidates that year, 150 were identified as liberal -- including 83 who were cut. Five of 28 self-described conservatives were rejected.

I made it through two rounds of interviews for entrance into DOJ's Honors Program in 2002.  I was told I was a finalist for a position, until in the final round I was interviewed by some grey-bearded guy who I had previously never met and who I was told had final say over all Honors Program hires.  There was nothing overly political about the interview, nor did I self identify as a Democrat.  A simple Google search using my name, however, would have easily shown my political allegiances.  Ultimately, they hired someone else.  I'm happy I didn't get the job, as I've found the private sector to be very rewarding professionally (as well as financially).  Still, though, I worked my ass off to get in the door at Justice and am disheartened to find out now, years later, that I may not have been properly judged on my own merits.

I shouldn't worry, though.  I'm sure the crooks responsible are getting what they deserve:


Although federal law prohibits discriminating against government job applicants based on their politics, it's unlikely that any of those involved in the hiring process will be penalized since they no longer work at the department. A Justice official said the department is not considering pressing criminal charges or taking or civil actions against them.

Oh wait.

Disgusting.

You can read the full story here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080624/ap_o n_go_ca_st_pe/justice_inquiry_hiring

There's more...

I have a crush on Michelle Obama!

Thats right, I admit it.  I have the hots for Sasha Obama's mama!  She's brilliant, accomplished, outspoken, and - lets face it - gorgeous.  Heck, she's a fox!  Much has been said about whether Barack Obama can nail down the female vote now that Hillary has now been eliminated from the contest.  What hasn't been discussed is the huge asset Michelle Obama is to Barack in bringing in the boys.

In the coming months, we can expect the continuation of the experience vs. judgment debate.  Michelle Obama is proof enough for me that Barack's judgment is beyond reproach.

There's more...

Question for Hillary Supporters: IF

I'm trying to discern just how much of a lead Obama has to have before Hillary's supporters on this site will say "enough" and call for her to wrap it up.

I therefore ask the following question:

IF:

A.  Come June, Obama has more pledged delegates than Clinton, even counting the bogus primaries in Florida and Michigan;

B.  Come June, Obama leads in the popular vote; and

C.  Come June, the remaining uncommitted superdelegates call a special meeting to announce who they are supporting (as has been suggested) and do not provide Clinton enough additional votes to overcome Obama's pledged delegate lead;

will you THEN urge Clinton to drop out of the race so the party and nominee can focus on defeating McBush in November?

Well, what say you?

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads