Cornell Antisemite rejects interview, proudly telling Jewish employer he won’t work for a Jew

[cowboy fan]

He instigated? How? By being Jewish? Does the applicant indicate ANY other reason for rejecting the interview? You admit that what the applicant said was inappropriate. Why would you move beyond that and try to blame anyone else? You aren't making sense.

What "actions" are you referring to?

He instigated? How? By being Jewish? Does the applicant indicate ANY other reason for rejecting the interview? You admit that what the applicant said was inappropriate. Why would you move beyond that and try to blame anyone else? You aren't making sense.

What "actions" are you referring to?

Already been discussed. The owner has a pattern of instigation on social media. Pay attention.

Do you think taxpayer money should be spent on this personal interaction?

 

[cowboy fan]

Do you think taxpayer money should be involved in this personal interaction?

Any of you alleged “conservatives” want to weigh in here?

 

[rosends]

Already been discussed. The owner has a pattern of instigation on social media. Pay attention.

again, how does this "instigate" an applicant? Did the applicant reference a "pattern of instigation"? He has a problem with Jews. You are trying to invent a narrative to justify anti-semitism. Why?

Do you think taxpayer money should be spent on this personal interaction?

why is that relevant to someone's making an anti-Semitic statement?

 

[Zincwarrior]

Cornell is private so I believe it can do what it likes. I would imagine in a public university 1st Amendment issues come into play and he could not be disciplined as its external.

 

[cowboy fan]

again, how does this "instigate" an applicant? Did the applicant reference a "pattern of instigation"? He has a problem with Jews. You are trying to invent a narrative to justify anti-semitism. Why?

You are trying to justify spending taxpayer money on a personal interaction. Why?

 

[cowboy fan]

why is that relevant to someone's making an anti-Semitic statement?

How is spending tax dollars relevant to someone’s personal interaction?

 

[cowboy fan]

Cornell is private so I believe it can do what it likes.

Cornell gets gov money, including fed money.

 

[Dekster]

I don't know what in the applicants response constitutes "proudly telling" them. I read it and he seemed uncomfortable based on his past interactions with some but not all Jewish people he had encountered. He can do as he likes. The law says the employer cannot discriminate against applicants. It does not say that applicants can't discriminate against potential employers.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Cornell gets gov money, including fed money.

Yers, however it is a private entity which gives it greater leeway. A public university is entangled with Bill of Rights items more deeply as its a government entity.

 

[cowboy fan]

Yers, however it is a private entity which gives it greater leeway. A public university is entangled with Bill of Rights items more deeply as its a government entity.

They can call it what they want. Directly taking taxpayer money makes one public.

 

[Zincwarrior]

They can call it what they want. Directly taking taxpayer money makes one public.

Not in a legal sense. I am not stating a position, just what first blush whether they are subject to the First Amendment. Obviously government funding can be limited based on the standards of the funding, but I don't believe thats what you are referring to.

 

[cowboy fan]

Not in a legal sense.

De jure vs. de facto.

 

[Zincwarrior]

De jure vs. de facto.

I am saying if they expelled him he would not have a First Amendment right to dispute it. Are you arguing otherwise?

 

[cowboy fan]

I am saying if they expelled him he would not have a First Amendment right to dispute it. Are you arguing otherwise?

Of course he would. Are you serious?

 

[Zincwarrior]

Of course he would. Are you serious?

Yes. Cornell is private. They have the right to follow their internal policies. If you disagree, well we disagree.

 

[cowboy fan]

Yes. Cornell is private. They have the right to follow their internal policies.

Unless overruled by a court.

 

[rosends]

You are trying to justify spending taxpayer money on a personal interaction. Why?

what tax payer money? I'm focused on the hateful thing the applicant said. You know it was wrong but you want to shift focus to something else. Why? If you have a separate thing you want to discuss, start a different thread.

 

[cowboy fan]

what tax payer money?

It was reported to Cornell, who is investigating it.

 

[rosends]

I don't know what in the applicants response constitutes "proudly telling" them. I read it and he seemed uncomfortable based on his past interactions with some but not all Jewish people he had encountered. He can do as he likes. The law says the employer cannot discriminate against applicants. It does not say that applicants can't discriminate against potential employers.

the question isn't about what he "can" or "can not" do, but what we, as a society are condoning. People are becoming empowered to make public statements which dismiss all Jews simply because they are Jews. The freedom to express your opinion doesn't mean to escape the societal impact and consequence of your opinion.

 

[rosends]

It was reported to Cornell, who is investigating it.

so you should complain to Cornell. Meanwhile, on this thread, you should be discussing what the applicant said and what it reflects in terms of the growth of anti-Jewish sentiment in the US.