Thanks for the link to the 10/18 Esquire article. It was one I saw referenced but hadn't yet had time to research. You made access easy. Yeah, more perverted, distorted, twisted rationales from our glorious government to prosecute one more folly in which people will assuredly die for the amusement, or material acquisition of Cheney-Bush. It makes me physically ill. They are as pleased to torture truth as they are those detained. I do not understand, nor can I relate to, their notion of a shared humanity. I might have been opposed on principle, but ignorant of the specifics, as we went into Iraq. I'll make no such claim should we go into Iran. Doubtless, these folks will be made as fair game as Valerie Plame for their efforts.

I've relinked the article at my sig for others. It's worth reading folks, if you haven't already seen it.

I flagged this topic/issue in Pam's post yesterday, hoping she would clarify the piece about exemptions. Exemptions by who, and to serve what purpose? I suppose I should go over to her site and research it myself. Bottom line, I find the whole of workplace discrimination disturbing, for many of the same reasons ondelette mentions, because it's profoundly difficult to distinguish discrimination from suitability.

Hiring, in itself, is a discriminatory practice - selecting the best candidate from those who are less best? What does that mean, exactly? Long ago I came to the conclusion that meritocracy is a myth. The issues that ondelette raises, are issues I've heard over, and over again - in a wide range of employment venues. Witness, ADA; the Adults with Disabilities Act. That's one I know a little more about having been on both ends of it - helping folks with documented disabilities get hired by others, as well as being in a position to hire myself. Without beating the legalese to death, to me, it is a Gordian Knot. There doesn't seem to be a culturally (?) acceptable way to cut through it.

How do you select one candidate out of a pool where *all* have met the basic qualifications for the job? When all meet the quals you've advertised, your secondary criteria become important. Who determines what those secondary criteria are? Is it education? Experience? Diversity? Gender? Customer preferences? Or, some cost feature? As a white female of a certain age, I feel your pain quite deeply, ondelette, for reasons which very different than yours.

Dammit, Glenn. This is nuts. Three outstanding substitutes, ranging over an array of topics, all of which are of interest to me, ranging over three distinct threads, with an array of brilliant folks (who seem new to me) commenting - never mind the 'regulars' who are already exceptional, and it's darned difficult to keep up. I feel like someone who's on a diet (time constrained) being confronted with a desert bar! This is so not fair! And, you expect me to keep it together for a week? Ha! I think this is some secret plot you designed to make me barking mad. Understand! I was already crazy as it was.

[Sorry for the interruption.]

Well said, Jim White. And, your point about consequences is critical. (BTW, Pete Stark just offered a formal apology for his amusement remarks. FireDogLake and OpenLeft have the details.) Were there no consequences for the press' inability to sort the deceit from the truth, and Name The Elephant, there would be no cause for alarm. But the press won't call the offenders out. Heck. Half the time they don't even seem interested in fact-checking the worst offenders so as to be ready for them the next time. He said-she said 24/7/365. It really is a disgrace, and the disgrace comes without penalty for the offenders (the lying politicians or the complicit press). And, if it weren't for this tiny matter like a looming war with Iran, ya know, I could almost shrug. We have accumulated too many dead bodies here, in Afghanistan, and Iraq to be sanguine about more dead bodies in Iran. And, the press seems quite willing to keep us stupid about the lies our government has fed us, in addition to the lies about what's happened to our civil liberties. It do make me want to wretch.

According to a comment at FDL, Stark was informed that either he apologized or the vote to censure him would pass. There are some details available at FDL and OpenLeft. In the meantime, you remember that dessert bar analogy? Well, while I think my brain may be getting fatter, I'm increasingly inclined to vomit anything I eat.

Thanks Chris for clearly naming yet another Elephant In The Room.