When Dan Bader of Newport Beach took out an ad looking for a “professional” for the 480 sq ft room he was renting, he never thought in a million years that the ad would lead to a discrimination suit and over $40k in legal fees:
In 2006, Newport Beach resident Dan Bader placed an innocuous ad in Craigslist, seeking a tenant for a 480-square-foot room in his house. He wrote, “Well suited for professional adults” and “Perfect for 1 or 2 professionals.” Any normal person would see that for what it is: a realistic description of a small room. But the housing council, which proclaims its mission as “fostering diversity in housing,” saw ominous motives. Officials viewed the ad as a form of discrimination against people with children and filed a complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing. With such actions, we’ll definitely see less diversity in housing as fewer people are willing to subject themselves to these Orwellian anti-discrimination enforcers.
Mr. Bader was forced to attend a hearing in Los Angeles and told that the complaint would be dropped if he paid $4,000 in fines and agreed to take five years’ worth of re-education classes at $250 a pop – even though the state ruled that he does not discriminate. The four grand would go to the Fair Housing Council, which funds its operations in part from fines assessed from the people the agency targets.
Sure, the state ultimately dropped the suit after the housing council retracted its complaint – not out of any obvious decency, but because the council was happy that Mr. Bader was being forced to pay its attorney fees. The council gets its money, which is all this seems to be about. Meanwhile, Mr. Bader owes a total of about $44,000 in fees to his own attorney and to this council for a frivolous charge.
The Fair Housing Council funds its operation in part by fines from the people they target. In other words, the more people they take to court and receive judgments from, the more money they make. The Fair Housing Council is not that different than the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The HRC takes on all sorts of frivolous cases because the more cases it has the more it can show why it is needed.
The FHC and the HRC are also similar because both are brutally oppressive to the citizenry and can have a tremendous financial burden on the defendant, whether guilty or not. The defendant doesn’t have any avenue for recourse once the *trial* begins. It costs the plaintiff nothing to take the defendant to the FHC or the HRC, but it costs the defendant tens of thousands of dollars.
However, this is the world we live in. Small, dirty little dishrags who have the nerve to call themselves part of the human race, are given enough power by our corrupt governments, to make people angry and miserable, and not a damn thing can be done about it. Their personal grievances and agendas trump the rights of the citizenry. It’s hard to imagine that even the commies are laughing at us.