Meet Obama’s “Safe and Drug Free Schools” Czar

Obama’s appointment of Kevin Jennings as the “Safe and Drug Free Schools” Czar is just another example of his radical agenda to indoctrinate children and force the liberal homosexual agenda on students and parents. The position of Safe Schools Czar does not require Senate confirmation, which conveniently avoids public scrutiny of the man appointed to this high ranking Department of Education position. After reading the facts here, you will find a plan of action for demanding this man’s resignation.

Kevin Brett Jennings (born May 8, 1963) is an educator, author and administrator. He is currently the Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools at the U.S. Department of Education. Jennings is a former high school teacher. He holds degrees from Harvard University, Columbia University’s Teachers College, and the Stern School of Business at New York University. He founded the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in 1990, a national homosexual activist group targeting children in the public schools. In 1992 he was named co-chair of the Education Committee of the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth in Massachusetts. Jennings has authored six books on gay rights and education, including one which won the Lambda Literary Award.”

The idea of “Safe and Drug Free Schools” sounds reasonable. Parents should not have a problem with the Department of Education administering a federal program to educate kids about violence, name-calling and other forms of bullying, right?  Let’s take a closer look:

Americans first became acquainted with the term “safe school” through the initiative of the Reagan administration to curb alcohol and drug use in schools.  The term has been redefined by an agenda to single out homosexuals for more protection than others.  In a 1990 report for the Massachusetts Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth Jennings explains that “safe school” is to mean pro-homosexual school.  Jennings boasts of using the term “safe” in the report in order to put opponents of pro-homosexual curriculum “on the defensive”. The template Jennings uses on a national scale, (in hundreds of districts and thousands of schools across the country) is to fabricate an epidemic of bullying and violence to homosexuals in schools. This is managed in part by citing bogus statistics of artificially high numbers of incidents of sexual-orientation-based “bullying”, “harassment” or violence.

The only solution for ending the epidemic is through the creation of “allies” of the straight students in a school or school district. This is accomplished through a “safe-schools” or “anti-bullying” curriculum that forces homosexual propaganda on kindergarten through 12^th grade students.

THINK:  Does that “No More Bullying” program that is being presented at your child’s school have a different feel to it now?

The organization Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), founded in 1990 by Kevin Jennings, defines “safe schools” as “hate crimes for kids.” The model legislation as defined by GLSEN seeks to create protected categories like “sex, gender…sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.” Conveniently, the most common harassment issue students face – they way they look or body size – is absent from protection by GLSEN.

 Jennings said it himself in a 1995 speech where he admitted that the rhetoric about “safety” was a political device. His words: “threw our opponents on the defensive, and stole their best line of attack. This framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling.”  Jennings continued this talk in a 1997 speech where he embraced the idea of actively promoting homosexuality. He said he looked forward to a day when “people, when they would hear that someone was promoting homosexuality, would say, ‘Yeah, who cares?’” In 2000, an unsigned article on the GSLEN website offers this proof of the agenda:  “The pursuit of safety and affirmation are one and the same goal.”

There is no question that Kevin Jennings wants homosexuality to be taught in public schools in this country.  Jennings has written (in one of his 6 books on homosexuality) that schools should include a “diversity policy that mandates including LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] themes in the curriculum.”  He has also made his opinion of heterosexual education known with the statement of, “Ex-gay messages have no place in our nation’s public schools. A line has been drawn. There is no ‘other side’ when you’re talking about lesbian, gay and bisexual students.” There is no tolerance for “both sides of the issue” from this man.

Kevin Jennings is equally dedicated to educating teachers on how to promote homosexuality in schools. He wrote the foreword for the book Queering Elementary Education, which includes an essay of   “‘queerly raised’ children are agents” using “strategies of adaptation, negotiation, resistance, and subversion.”

What may be the most obvious reason Americans should be afraid of Kevin Jennings’ involvement with children is his handling of an incident with a 15 year-old student while he was teaching at Concord Academy, a private boarding school in Massachusetts.  Referring to Jennings’ own writing (in his book One Teacher in Ten), he tells about a young male sophomore, “Brewster,” who confessed to Jennings “his involvement with an older man he met in Boston.” But at a GLSEN rally in 2000, Jennings told a more explicit version of “Brewster’s” story.  In the speech, Jennings quotes the boy and then comments: “‘I met someone in the bus station bathroom and I went home with him.’ High school sophomore, 15 years old. That was the only way he knew how to meet gay people.”

As a teacher, in a position that a student felt he could confide, Jennings response to the boy was, “I hope you knew to use a condom.” Jennings did not report the incident to the school, the authorities or the boy’s parents. As it is described, this admission by a 15 year-old student is a crime known as statutory rape. The parents have a right to be informed, as do the school and the proper authorities. If there is suggestion of a crime against a minor child, it is the requirement of an educator (or any adult) to report the accusation.

 It does not stop here for Kevin Jennings. In March of 2000, GLSEN (co-sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Education) held a conference for public school teachers and students in Massachusetts, called, “TeachOut.”  At this conference children as young as 12 years old were taught by state employees how to engage in various extremely dangerous (and disgusting) homosexual sex acts.  Teachers were instructed on how to promote the homosexual agenda in the classroom.

***I will not describe the acts that were presented during the conference. You may refer to the links at the end of this story for more information.***

Safe and Drug Free Schools Czar Kevin Jennings is also on record for praising Harry Hay, an outspoken supporter of NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association). This group claims their agenda to be the abolition of age consent laws. According to BOB HAMER, FORMER FBI AGENT, this is not exactly true. In an interview with Sean Hannity, the former FBI agent describes his infiltration of the NAMBLA organization. When asked about the group’s agenda, this is what Hamer had to say:

“At no time during my three-year infiltration was there ever any discussion about modifying age of consent laws, abolishing age of consent laws. Every conversation that I had was about where to go to have sex with little boys, how they could attract little boys, how they could groom little boys. That was their agenda.”

 “At one of the conferences that I attended, there was a discussion about — that it was actually OK, proper, there was nothing wrong with having oral sex on an 18 month old boy. The rationale being that little boys play, you know, play with themselves. They enjoy touching themselves.”

If you haven’t heard enough, here’s one more for fact for you:

Kevin Jennings founded Gay Straight Alliance (GSA) in 1988. This group in partnership with Frameline, distributes indoctrination videos to hundreds of schools (elementary included). Under the name Youth In Motion, the two groups comprised a partnership and produced the video called “Boy in a Bikini.” The indoctrination cartoon video is of a cross-dressing boy and promotes homosexuality. 

According to reports from parents in California schools, they were not notified of the videos and learned of them after they had been presented to the students.

THINK:  “Boy in Bikini” video and other vile indoctrination propaganda videos co-produced by GSA founder and Safe and Drug Free Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings. Children are subjected to this indoctrination without parental consent.

Remember the Speech President Obama gave to students on the first day of the 2009 School year? No big deal, right? Just an encouraging message to school kids?  Writing for www.americanthinker.com,   Troy Silva does a nice job of reading between the lines of the President Obama’s speech: 

“Maybe You’ll decide to stand up (referring to “allies”) for kids who are being teased or bullied (disagreeing with) because of who they are or how they look (homosexual or transvestite), because you believe. Like I do, that all kids deserve a safe (pro-homosexual) environment to study and learn.” 

Average adults listening to the speech probably did not catch the meaning. The indoctrinated students are, no doubt, catching on.

Kevin Jennings is not qualified under any ethical standard to be entrusted with the safety of this nation’s public school children.

 Here is your CALL TO ACTION:

Send an E-mail to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan urging him to call for Jennings’ resignation. Tell your Congressmen to also press Duncan for his resignation.

Links to Senators & Congressmen:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

PLEASE SEND THIS LINK TO YOUR FRIENDS AND ASK THEM TO KEEP THE PRESSURE ON! We cannot allow the this administration to indoctrinate our children and destroy our country! You can make a difference!

 DO YOU TRUST THIS MAN? Do you trust the people he surrounds himself with?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32472

 ***For details on “TeachOut” see:

1. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/06/obama-appointee-kevin-jennings-fisting-and-fk-em-to-the-religious-right.html

2. http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/fistgate/index.html

***These links are as detailed as I care to get with this information. If you want more, you can research the program further on your own.

 http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/kevin_jennings_twisted_termino_1.html#

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,561044,00.html

White House Defends Czars

A Senate hearing was held on Tuesday, October 6, 2009 to examine the history and legality of the appointment of President Obama’s “czars”.   In the hearing titled “Examining the History and Legality of Executive Branch ‘Czars,’” the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution gathered five constitutional law experts to examine constitutionality of the czar appointments by the president. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) Chairman of the Senate Judiciary constitution subcommittee said in his opening statement, “I called this hearing today because I think this is a serious issue that deserves serious study.”

This hearing follows a letter from Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) and signed by five other Senate Republicans that was sent to President Obama last month.  The letter raised questions about the appointment of 18 czar positions which have not been confirmed by the Senate or even established by law. This raises “serious issues of accountability, transparency and oversight” while circumventing Congress’ constitutionally established process of “advise and consent.’’

Senator Feingold’s statement during the hearing included this: 

“Determining whether these czars are legitimate or whether they will thwart congressional oversight requires analysis of the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and a discussion of some complicated constitutional and administrative law principles. I am therefore very pleased that we have such an accomplished group of witnesses who can help us determine whether there is a basis for concern here or not, and if so, what are possible remedies that Congress ought to consider….”

The Senator concluded his opening remarks [regarding the czars that are of particular interest to him] with this:

 “These officials are housed within the White House itself. Three weeks ago, I wrote to the President and requested more information about these positions, such as the Director of the White House Office of Health Reform and the Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change. The response to that letter finally came yesterday, and I will put the response in the record and plan to question our witnesses about it.”

The American people have expressed their concern for the appointment of these positions with the absence of any oversight. Senators have expressed the same concern and question the constitutionality of these appointments.  Experts on Constitutional law have taken up the issue. 

What is President Barack Obama’s response?  SILENCE. 

Feingold shared the news with the committee this way:

“The White House decided not to accept my invitation … to explain its position on the constitutional issues we will address today.”

Feingold continued:

“That’s unfortunate. It’s also a bit ironic since one of the concerns that has been raised about these officials is that they will thwart congressional oversight of the executive branch.”

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave this statement as explanation for the absence of witnesses to the hearing:

“I would assume that Congress and Senator Feingold have more weighty topics to grapple with than — than something like this.”

This condescending attitude is all too familiar.

In a letter to Congress, posted on Feingold’s Senate website,  White House Councel Greg Craig argued that the advisers do not violate the Constitution’s requirement for appointments to receive the advice and consent of the Senate, since they don’t exercise independent authority.

If the appointment of these czars is legitimate, why are President Obama and his supporters so afraid to tell us who they are? If these people have the President’s ear and they are advising him on issues that affect Americans and the Constitution, then why all the secrecy?

The reason is because this president continues to surround himself with appointees who share his radical views. Before he was elected, we saw Obama’s associations with Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers. We were told not to judge the man by the people he associates himself with. Then, Obama, himself told us that if we want to know his views on issues, we should look at the people he surrounds himself with.

Well. Here we are. Look at just a few of the czars that we have gotten to know:

[Former] Green Jobs Czar Van Jones– self proclaimed communist, co-founder of Weather Underground, board member of the Apollo Alliance (which has ties to ACORN, SEIU, and Center for American Progress).

Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein- Anti-1^st Amendment; Anti-2^nd Amendment; Anti-Hunting; believes animals should have equal rights as humans.

Safe & Drug-Free Schools Czar Kevin Jennings- Gay Activist, founder of Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN); promotes homosexuality through education programs; neglected to notify the parents of a 15-year-old boy who told him he had had relations with an older man (Instead, told the boy, “I hope you used a condom.”).

These are just a few names that have raised eyebrows among the people of this country and even some in Congress.  This is a sampling of the radical extremists whom Obama has chosen as his advisors.

THINK:  Why shouldn’t President Obama’s appointees be subjected to Senate hearings to determine whether or not they are suited to be in positions of authority in this country?

DO YOU TRUST THIS MAN? Do you trust the people he surrounds himself with?

Cloture Vote Leads to Confirmation of Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein

On Thursday, September 10, 2009, while Americans were discussing President Obama’s healthcare speech from the night before, the U.S. Senate voted to confirm Cass Sunstein as the new Regulatory Czar. This “up or down” vote came the day after the Senate voted to invoke cloture for the confirmation of this very dangerous man. Do you know who Cass Sunstein is? Do you know what cloture in the U.S. Senate means? Do you think it doesn’t matter; you can’t do anything about it anyway?  Well, it DOES matter! Arming yourself with the information matters! I’m going to breakdown exactly what happened and why this very serious confirmation that took place right under the noses of the American people matters!

To understand the severity of this action, you need to understand the answers to the following questions:

•  What is cloture?
• Who is Cass Sunstein?
• What kind of power does Cass Sunstein have?
• Why does this matter to me?

Here is the breakdown: 

WHAT IS CLOTURE?

The definition of cloture is this:  the closing or limitation of debate in a legislative body especially by calling for a vote [1]  The Senate requires a minimum of 60 votes to invoke cloture. Once cloture has been invoked, debate over the issue is [extremely] limited and the Senate then calls an “up or down” vote to pass the issue. [2]

THINK:  Senate votes to stop debate on a very controversial man who will have the power to regulate our country into the FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION that President Obama has promised will take place. The U.S. Senate made the arrogant decision to eliminate the opportunity for Americans to learn exactly who this man is! They closed the debate so that the truth as to who this man is and what he believes would not be exposed prior to his confirmation.

WHO IS Regulatory Czar CASSS SUNSTEIN?

• One of Barack Obama’s closest ideological academic friends and intellectual “soul mate” to the president. (Obama: “Cass is not only a valued advisor, he is a dear friend”)
• Taught with President Obama at the University of Chicago Law School
• Harvard Law School professor; prior to that, was a professor at the Univ. of Chicago Law School (1981-2008)
• Academic specialties: constitutional law, administrative law, and regulatory policy

WHAT DOES CASS SUNSTEIN BELIEVE?

On the issue of the 2^nd Amendment: Cass Sunstein believes that the right to bear arms is not an individual right, but a Federal right.  In his book, “Radicals in Robes”(p.220) , Sunstein writes,  “[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms. ”

THINK: He is saying that gun control laws are fine. The Constitution (fundamentalism) does not protect an individual’s right to bear arms.

Cass Sunstein also believes that hunting should be banned. In a speech he made at Harvard University in 2007, Cass Sunstein made the statement that, “[Humans’] willingness to subject animals to unjustified suffering will be seen … as a form of unconscionable barbarity… morally akin to slavery and the mass extermination of human beings.”  

THINK: Hunting is comparable to slavery and mass extermination of humans?

From here, you have to look at Sunstein’s views on animal rights: He has extremely radical views on the rights of animals. In 2004, Susntein wrote “Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives …”[3] In Sunstein’s opinion, animals should have the right to sue humans. He has also written that he would like to establish legal rights for livestock, wildlife and pets. Just when you start to think this can’t get any more ridiculous, Cass Sunstein also has said that animals should have a right to property, too!

 THINK: This new Regulatory Czar will also serve to remove your right to own a pet. He will stifle the progress of medicine (among other things) and limit the food products that are derived from animals. This is evidenced by his writings in “The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer” (Aug. 2002). The exact wording is this: “[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, in scientific experiments, and in agriculture.”

Cass Sunstein’s view of the 1st Amendment is made clear by statements he made in his internet book Republic.com 2.0 (p. 137). Here, Sunstein writes “A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government.”  He has said that he wants to balance the internet through a legislative (laws) effort that would regulate broadcasting in the interest of Democratic Principles. 

THINK: If Cass Sunstein, or some other government representative, does not like what a person is saying over the airwaves or on the internet, they will be regulated into silence. The 1^st Amendment guarantees the right to free speech. By silencing any dissent (1st amendment rights regulated) you will not even be aware of what is happening! The very people who are attempting to spread the word of TRUTH will be silenced by this administration.

On taxes, Sunstein has told his readers they are selfish for opposing the size, scope, expansion and skyrocketing expense of the government. In his own words: “In what sense in the money in our pockets and bank accounts are fully ours. Did we earn it by our autonomous efforts? Could we have inherited it without the assistance of probate courts? Do we save it without the sport of bank regulators? Could we spend it if there were no public officials to coordinate the efforts and pool the resources of the community in which we live. Without taxes there is no liberty.” [4]

THINK: Cass Sunstein is telling you that he believes that without the government, you are nothing. Without the government, you would have no place to work to earn money. No bank to store your money and no community in which to live. This is a socialist/Marxist theory.

Cass Sunstein believes the United States should adopt a Second Bill of Rights. He wrote in 2004, “In a nutshell, the New Deal helped vindicate a simple idea. No one really opposes government intervention. Even the people who most loudly denounce government interference depend on it every day.” [5]

THINK:  The Founding Fathers gave no thought (for better or worse) to including social and economic guarantees in the Bill of Rights. As an American, you have the” Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” There has never been a guarantee of equal results. For the government to change the founding documents to include equal social and economic rights for all citizens is to FUNDAMENTALY TRANSFORM the United States of America! This will take our great country from a free republic to a socialist (at best) state!

HOW DOES CASS SUNSTEIN IMPLEMENT HIS VIEWS?

Cass Sunstein will not change laws. He will serve to make EVERYHTNG more difficult.

Start with gun control.  He won’t offer laws to eliminate individual gun ownership. He will implement “regulations” that will make obtaining and keeping a gun next to impossible. To understand this, look at the state of New York. It is not illegal to own a gun there, but just TRY to get one!

Look at his views on animal rights. He believes animal rights are equal to humans. He won’t pass a law to ban meat; he will work with the environmental agencies to ensure that feed is harder to obtain and grazing land will be further protected. This will make feeding livestock next to impossible. There is an example of this type of regulation in California. An environmentalist group sought to save the smelt. Water to grazing land was reduced and animals did not survive.

THINK: Ranchers have been put out of business. Livestock products (meat, dairy, etc) are forced into limited supply. Limited supply drives up the cost of the available products.

Cass Sunstein will regulate animals’ rights to the point that if you have a rat in your house, you won’t be able to get rid of it because it has the “right” to live there. The rat will now own property – your home!

Cass Sunstein has said he wants to make laws that will require broadcasters and internet sites to include information the government deems necessary.

THINK: If an [American citizen] individual speaks or writes something that is not in line with the government, they will be required to include the state sponsored propaganda in their talks or writings.

WHY DOES THIS MATTER TO ME?

This matters to you because President Obama has promised to FUNDAMENTALY TRANSFORM this country! Cass Sunstein will aid in the transformation by regulating every aspect of Americans’ lives! The goal is to overwhelm the system and intentionally force it to collapse.

Cass Sunstein clearly describes the process by which he will FUNDAMENTALY TRANSOFRM America in his book “NUDGE”. In the book, Sunstein talks about little “nudges” that eventually effect the change that is the ultimate goal.

  [1]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cloture

 [2]http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/cloture.htm

[3] – 2004 book Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions  p. 252

 [4] “Why We Should Celebrate Paying Taxes,” The Chicago Tribune, April 14, 1999

 [5] The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’s Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need it More Than Ever, Basic Books, New York, 2004, p. 19

 1st Amendment Text:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 2nd Amendment Text:  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 More on Cass Sunstein’s opinions: http://stopsunstein.com/media/pdf/Sunstein%20quote%20file.pdf

Van Jones steps down – Don’t let your guard down, America!