[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Foxnews

resident Obama's "safe schools czar," under fire from critics who say he's unfit for his job, acknowledged Wednesday that he "should have handled [the] situation differently" years ago when he was a schoolteacher and didn't report that a 15-year-old boy told him that he was having sex with an older man.

Kevin Jennings, the founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, was teaching high school in Concord, Mass., in 1988 when the boy, a sophomore, confessed an involvement with a man he had met in a bus station bathroom in Boston. Jennings has written that he told the boy, "I hope you knew to use a condom."

Are you fricking kidding me? How do these people get into these positions? This is exactly why the czar system needs to go. Why are no other outlets running anything on this guy?

How do you put him in charge of SAFE SCHOOLS?

He should be removed immediately. It doesn't matter if it was 1988, he chose his political agenda over a illegal relationship that he had a duty to report as a teacher.

What a scumbag.

[The Final Dakar]

Obama needs a "Vetting Czars" Czar.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Obama needs a "Vetting Czars" Czar.

Quote of the Day!

[BadKosh]

An interesting question is "If the czar, who is a presidential appointee screws up, can 0bama be impeached for the czars actions?"

[The Final Dakar]

You wish.

[hyteckit]

We should change his title from safe school czar to Pastor Kevin Jennings.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

You wish.

So do the czars act without responsibility?

Who do they answer to?

What responsibility does Obama have in appointing these czars?

[SpaceMonkey]

I'm sick of czars. Next time, Obama should appoint a kaiser.

[The Final Dakar]

I imagine they're responsible in the same way every other person Obama appoints to a position is responsible.

[ort888]

If Obama is president of America, does that mean that anything any American does is technically his fault?

[OreoCookie]

Eeeh, what's so bad about what he said?

[The Final Dakar]

I think the main issue is that he didn't report it to the proper authorities.

[SpaceMonkey]

Considering that Jennings has openly talked about this incident for years after including it in a 1994 book, yet has still won accolades from numerous education associations, I'm not inclined to believe that this experience is going to negatively affect his performance as director of the Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (also, side note: not really a "czar" position).

[SpaceMonkey]

Obama's new K-12 school health, wellness, and dairy quality assurance kaiser secretly plans to make your children fat!

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Considering that Jennings has openly talked about this incident for years after including it in a 1994 book, yet has still won accolades from numerous education associations, I'm not inclined to believe that this experience is going to negatively affect his performance as director of the Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (also, side note: not really a "czar" position).

More of a "Führer" position?

[OreoCookie]

You missed an h, it's Führer.
But Kaiser is also ok, I reckon, although it's more old-fashioned.

[SpaceMonkey]

"Czar" has become drastically overused by the media to imply that certain people have much more authority than they really do. It really should be used to describe an executive branch official that has been given broad inter-agency authority, such as Richard Clarke's position as "counter-terrorism czar" in the Clinton and Bush administrations (his last formal title was National Security Council Special Advisor), or the various "drug czars". In this case, Jennings is running a particular DOE department, not an inter-agency agenda.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by ort888 

If Obama is president of America, does that mean that anything any American does is technically his fault?

His czars, who are largely unaccountable even to Congress, are being scrutinized. We're finding out that many off them have radical left-wing views, views that don't sit well with the moderate and center-right portions of the public.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

You missed an h, it's Führer.
But Kaiser is also ok, I reckon, although it's more old-fashioned.

Oops. I Googled my spelling, and it existed, so I ran with it. I knew it didn't look right.

[The Final Dakar]

Your misspelling has caused quite the furor.

[Laminar]

Yeah, looks like I pissed off the spelling Führer. I shouldn't of done that.
Come on grammar Führer, give me your worst.

[The Final Dakar]

Obama will be held accountable for your idiocy.

[hyteckit]

Quote of the day:

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/...-ethics-probe/

“I was counseling him as a physician and as an ordained deacon. That is a privileged communication that I will never reveal to anybody. Not to the (Senate) Ethics Committee, not to a court of law, not to anybody.”

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) talking about his knowledge of the John Ensign affair and his privileged information as an ordained deacon.



Kevin Jennings, just say you are a pastor or an ordained deacon, so the conservatives will leave you alone.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Considering that Jennings has openly talked about this incident for years after including it in a 1994 book, yet has still won accolades from numerous education associations, I'm not inclined to believe that this experience is going to negatively affect his performance as director of the Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (also, side note: not really a "czar" position).

Which speaks volumes about those particular "education associations". When you openly admit that you weren't inclined to report statutory rape violations when it was your responsibility to do so, and you still get "accolades" and government positions, I think we can see part of "the problem".

Are Democrats, which surely comprises the "education associations" in question (as they normally back only Democrats) really prepared to be labeled the "rape tolerant" party between this and the actions of Hollywood Democrats in regards to Roman Polanski? Is that really the niche they want to fill? Unless someone in a leadership position comes out and stops this nonsense, I'm betting this is just one more nail in their coffin come 2010.

Kevin Jennings, just say you are a pastor or an ordained deacon, so the conservatives will leave you alone.

Coburn wasn't told of any illegalities involving a minor, or anyone else. Your red herring fails.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Which speaks volumes about those particular "education associations". When you openly admit that you weren't inclined to report statutory rape violations when it was your responsibility to do so, and you still get "accolades" and government positions, I think we can see part of "the problem".

Are Democrats, which surely comprises the "education associations" in question (as they normally back only Democrats) really prepared to be labeled the "rape tolerant" party between this and the actions of Hollywood Democrats in regards to Roman Polanski? Is that really the niche they want to fill? Unless someone in a leadership position comes out and stops this nonsense, I'm betting this is just one more nail in their coffin come 2010.

Thanks for being part of the problem. Demanding accountability is one thing. Discounting someone entirely based on one incident in his early professional career that he's talked openly and intelligently about for years as part of why he feels so strongly about safe schools is something else. Get back to us when you're interested in having a conversation instead of just taking partisan shots.

Evidently there is some disagreement about whether this was even statutory rape, based on the age of the student at the time:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200910010014

Appearing on Morning Joe, the Politico's Mike Allen advanced the right-wing attack that Department of Education official Kevin Jennings neglected his obligation to report a 1988 conversation in which a high school sophomore disclosed to Jennings his "involvement" with an older man. However, Allen did not note that Jennings' attorney wrote in a 2004 letter that the student was 16 years old, which is -- and was at the time -- the legal age of consent in Massachusetts, and that Jennings would only be required to report the conversation if he had reason to believe the student was a victim of abuse.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Are Democrats, which surely comprises the "education associations" in question (as they normally back only Democrats) really prepared to be labeled the "rape tolerant" party between this and the actions of Hollywood Democrats in regards to Roman Polanski?

Awesome. Just...awesome.

[BadKosh]

Why do so many of Obamas administration seem to be the bottom of the barrel. Why can't they find people with higher morals and some class. The line of tax evaders and scum that couldn't even accept appointments indicate a trait of liberals.

[Snow-i]

BadKosh,

Thats what I was wondering.

And don't get me wrong, I think its not an exclusive trait to the dems. This country needs to smack the politicians we have upside the head for being so blatantly corrupt and shallow.

Whether or not this guy "can do his job" he never should have been selected for it anyways. Why would you even THINK about putting someone with that type of incident in charge of SAFE SCHOOLS*?


*If he had another type of position this wouldn't be so outrageous....but come on!

[nonhuman]

I like how someone makes one possible mistake that might or might not have actually violated any law or statute and suddenly he's deemed completely unfit to hold an office forever. Even if there was a problem, perhaps he's learned from the experience, grown, and actually become a more appropriate person for the job than he would have otherwise because of this.

[BadKosh]

The mistake is not finding someone better.

[Snow-i]

Nonhuman, if there's no one that has a better track record than he for promoting safety in schools, then we as a country are truly doomed.

The best we can offer has a morally questionable past?
The best we can offer puts an agenda above a student's safety?
We have no one that could do the job better without an incident like this?

I don't buy it. Again, these politicians need to be smacked upside the head; hopefully that will remind them about the nature of the positions they hold.

[andi*pandi]

Any republican that boy confessed to would have likely lynched the poor kid for being teh gay.

[hyteckit]

Boy was 16 at the time. Age of consent is 16 in Massachusetts.

Only fake news agencies like Fox News and the Washington Times reported the boy to be 15, so they can spread the gay sex and illegal sex cr*p conservatives love so much.


Mike Allen runs with Fox News' smear, suggests Jennings broke the law | Media Matters for America

Conservatives and facts don't mix.

If conservatives want to go after people/organization who hid illegal sexual relationships and gay sex, go after churches.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Conservatives and facts don't mix.

Kind of like liberals and morals don't mix.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Kind of like liberals and morals don't mix.

Like I've said, conservatives and facts don't mix.

[BadKosh]

So where is your fact that the kid was 16 and not 15?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Thanks for being part of the problem. Demanding accountability is one thing. Discounting someone entirely based on one incident in his early professional career that he's talked openly and intelligently about for years as part of why he feels so strongly about safe schools is something else.

Discounting someone because when it came time for them to do the right thing in their job, they admitted they didn't have the guts to do it?

Yeah...that's a good reason to discount them to be in charge of that thing FOR THE ENTIRE NATION. People make mistakes, most of which no one else finds out about. No one says he should be tarred and feathered, or not allowed in the education business at all, ever. He just isn't fit to be in a top leadership role because he's made it clear that his values and decision making isn't the best in the world.

It's already been commented on that it would seem that Obama is dragging the bottom of the barrel as far as "czars" go and that's the point. These people should be shining examples of leaders who have shown good judgement and done "the right thing". Not tax evaders and people who would turn a blind eye to rape in schools.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

So where is your fact that the kid was 16 and not 15?

Where's Fox news and Washington Time's evidence that the boy was 15?

[hyteckit]

Churches are immoral.

The church hid illegal sexual acts with minors from the government. And most of them were gay sex acts too.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Where's Fox news and Washington Time's evidence that the boy was 15?

Exactly my point. All is conjecture. Kevin Jennings doesn't seem to know either. He spoke several times about the incident, but didn't state the age the same in any of his comments. I looked at about 25 sources and found nothing concrete.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Exactly my point. All is conjecture. Kevin Jennings doesn't seem to know either. He spoke several times about the incident, but didn't state the age the same in any of his comments. I looked at about 25 sources and found nothing concrete.

So Fox News and Washington Times once again making up fake news.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Exactly my point. All is conjecture. Kevin Jennings doesn't seem to know either. He spoke several times about the incident, but didn't state the age the same in any of his comments. I looked at about 25 sources and found nothing concrete.

In his book, he describes running into "Brewster" again on April 3, 1993, and gives Brewster's age then as 22. The incident in high school took place in "spring of 1988." Therefore the boy could have been 16 or 17, but not 15.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

His czars, who are largely unaccountable even to Congress, are being scrutinized. We're finding out that many off them have radical left-wing views, views that don't sit well with the moderate and center-right portions of the public.

Umm, who do you think the czars should be accountable to Congress? Why do you think an executive branch appointee should be held accountable to the legislative branch and not to the executive branch?

In this particular case we are talking about an executive branch appointee who is accountable to his superiors within the executive branch (both the Secretary of Education and the President of the United States). Why do you think this person should be held accountable by Congress?

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

In his book, he describes running into "Brewster" again on April 3, 1993, and gives Brewster's age then as 22. The incident in high school took place in "spring of 1988." Therefore the boy could have been 16 or 17, but not 15.

GET YOUR FACTS OUT OF HERE. allcaps

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

In his book, he describes running into "Brewster" again on April 3, 1993, and gives Brewster's age then as 22. The incident in high school took place in "spring of 1988." Therefore the boy could have been 16 or 17, but not 15.

Using conservative math, the boy is 14 or 15.

And Earth is 6000 years old.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Nonhuman, if there's no one that has a better track record than he for promoting safety in schools, then we as a country are truly doomed.

The best we can offer has a morally questionable past?
The best we can offer puts an agenda above a student's safety?
We have no one that could do the job better without an incident like this?

This is the second or third time you have mentioned that Kevin Jennings "put [a personal] agenda above student safety"? What personal agenda do you think he was trying to advance by not reporting what he was told? (Remember, the student was at the legal age of consent so there was no requirement for Kevin Jennings to report what he was told.)


And what about the student's safety was compromised by Kevin Jennings not reporting the student's confession to authorities?


And why do you think Kevin Jennings should have reported the student's encounter to the authorities?
--Because it involved an older person having sex with a younger person?
--Because it involved an older man having sex with a teen boy?
What if it had been an older woman and a teen boy? Would you feel the need still to have Kevin Jennings report the encounter?
What if it had been an older man and a teen girl? Would you feel the need still to have Kevin Jennings report the encounter?



You talk a lot about how this bothers you but you don't specify what about this story that bothers you. So, provide us some specifics as to why this bothers you.

[dcmacdaddy]

As for my opinion on the matter, I think Kevin Jennings should have informed school authorities he knew a sexual relationship was taking place between a student and an adult--I don't care whether or not it is a same-sex or opposite-sex relationship--so the school could refer the student to a group that could provide counseling on acceptable forms of sexual behavior/interaction and on practicing safe sex. Since the student was of legal age to have sex I think Kevin Jennings responsibility should have been to inform school authorities so they guide the student towards counseling that could better help the student deal with the ramifications of a) being young and gay b) being young, gay, and sexually active c) being young, gay, and sexually active with a much older person. (With the intent that through such counseling the student would have learned that casual sex with strangers is not safe and sex with anyone much older than you is likely to be unhealthy for the younger person.)


I do not think that the biggest concern Kevin Jennings should have had was with the nature of the sexual encounter but rather that he help the student to become better prepared to be safe as a sexually active teen. In other words, I do not think the fact the student was gay had/has anything to do with how he should have handled the experience. The way I see it, a student confessed in a teacher that they were sexually active and the teacher--knowing that the student was of legal age to be sexually active--should have worked with the school authorities to guide the student into programs that would help the student make good decisions regarding being a sexually active teen.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Since the student was of legal age to have sex I think Kevin Jennings responsibility should have been to inform school authorities so they guide the student towards counseling that could better help the student deal with the ramifications of a) being young and gay b) being young, gay, and sexually active c) being young, gay, and sexually active with a much older person. (With the intent that through such counseling the student would have learned that casual sex with strangers is not safe and sex with anyone much older than you is likely to be unhealthy for the younger person.)

And I think the reason why Jennings did not do as you suggest is probably that in 1988 there was no policy for school authorities to refer anyone for this kind of counseling.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

And I think the reason why Jennings did not do as you suggest is probably that in 1988 there was no policy for school authorities to refer anyone for this kind of counseling.

Yeah, I think that's what would be good about having someone like him in a position of authority. He could work to create programs for schools to help students in such a situation. It's too late for a lesson in abstinence--if the student has confessed already to being sexually active--so the school should be able to help the student by referring the student to a program on how to be a safe, sexually active teen.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Using conservative math, the boy is 14 or 15.

And Earth is 6000 years old.

Using liberal news sources you get too many different versions to prove one way or another.