In latest bigoted smear, Fox leads right-wing media assault on Jennings' involvement with anti-AIDS group
Advancing the newest ludicrous and bigoted attack in a long series of failed efforts by conservatives to smear Education Department official Kevin Jennings and force his firing, Fox News' Sean Hannity and the Washington Times editorial board have insisted that Jennings' past involvement with the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) somehow disqualifies him from serving in the Obama administration. But such arguments are absurd, given that ACT UP, an anti-AIDS activist organization, has been credited with both creating awareness of the AIDS epidemic in America and facilitating more effective treatment of the disease.
Conservatives say ACT UP link is grounds for firing Jennings
Hannity uses Jennings' link with ACT UP as evidence Jennings "does not deserve that position." On the October 16 edition of his Fox News show, Hannity expressed his usual outrage toward all things Kevin Jennings: "We now found out from Worldnet Daily this week that he was once a member of the radical group Act Up. Are you saying that Sean Hannity is on a witch hunt when I think this man does not deserve that position?" [Hannity, 10/16/09]
Wash. Times called Jennings "unsuitable" for his job due to his association with ACT UP. In an October 22 editorial, The Washington Times stated: "Mr. Jennings' membership in ACT UP merely reinforces how unsuitable he is for the honor of serving as a presidential appointee."
ACT UP credited with helping AIDS patients get medicine "much faster" and increasing awareness of the epidemic
NY Times: ACT UP helped change distribution of AIDS drugs to allow patients to "obtain them much faster." According to a 1990 New York Times article: "Pressure by [ACT UP] has not only helped keep the epidemic in the news; it has also helped bring major changes to the way the Federal Government tests and distributes experimental drugs, allowing patients to obtain them much faster." The Times further reported:
Perhaps Act-Up's clearest imprint has been its role in speeding the dissemination of new drugs, a change that may affect treatment of many diseases in addition to AIDS.
At the outbreak of the AIDS epidemic, the Food and Drug Administration would typically allow the distribution of drugs only after testing both their safety and efficacy, a process that kept many promising but unproved drugs off the shelves for years. Many AIDS patients argued that they did not have time to wait.
Act-Up conducted a two-front assault to get the Government to release safe drugs faster, even if their medical benefits were still not completely known: It gained enough expertise to second-guess the experts. And it threw fits, heckling committee meetings of the Food and Drug Administration, and calling a key official a murderer and a Nazi. ''We were beastly to her,'' [ACT UP founder Larry] Kramer said.
In the last year, Act-Up members say, their pressure has played a significant role in making available faster than usual two new drugs -- ganciclovir and DDI -- and in lowering the price of an old one, AZT.
Former New York City health commissioner: ACT UP had "enormous effect" on changing drug distribution system that was previously ''unfair and constraining.'' The 1990 New York Times article further reported: "'There's no doubt that they've had an enormous effect,' said Dr. Stephen C. Joseph, the former New York City Health Commissioner who himself has been a target of Act-Up's ire. 'We've basically changed the way we make drugs available in the last year.' " The Times reported that Joseph "credits Act-Up with helping change aspects of a system that had been 'unfair and constraining.' "
Former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: ACT UP played "a significant role" in expanding access to experimental drugs. The New York Times also reported:
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is among those officials previously reviled by Act-Up -- in 1988 Mr. Kramer wrote an article calling him ''an incompetent idiot'' and a ''monster.'' Dr. Fauci now credits the group with playing a constructive role.
''Did Act-Up play a significant role in the whole idea of expanded access to experimental drugs?'' Dr. Fauci said. ''The answer is yes.''
New Yorker: ACT UP "brought the issue of AIDS to center stage." "The original New York chapter [of ACT UP], founded in 1987, spawned sister organizations in other cities, some of them overseas, and the group brought the issue of AIDS to center stage by mounting smart, brash protests." [The New Yorker, 11/9/92 (subscription required)]
New Yorker: ACT UP's protests "inspired speedier trials of new drugs," helped force government to acknowledge AIDS victims. "By creating vivid controversies, ACT UP has inspired speedier trials of new drugs, and ... played a part in forcing the government to acknowledge tens of thousands of cases of AIDS among women and intravenous-drug users whose illnesses hadn't been included in the official definition of the disease." [The New Yorker, 11/9/92 (subscription required)]
Fox Nation, Gateway Pundit, WND smear Jennings with false charge of "Anti-Christian Art Porn Exhibit"
WND: "Obama's safe-schools boss sponsors radical porn." In an article headlined "Obama's safe-schools boss sponsors radical porn," the conservative website WorldNetDaily reported that Jennings "is being credited for helping sponsor a Harvard University display honoring the work of the radical homosexual organization Act Up."
Fox Nation: "Safe School Czar Linked to Anti-Christian Porn Exhibit?":
Gateway Pundit: "Jennings funded a pornographic anti-Christian art show." In a post headlined "Figures. Pornographic Anti-Christian Harvard Art Show Funded By Obama's Safe Schools Czar," Gateway Pundit's Jim Hoft wrote that "Obama's Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings funded a pornographic anti-Christian art show now on display at Harvard University."
Exhibit actually features "posters, stickers, and other visual media" used by ACT UP's AIDS activists
From a July 2 press release announcing the exhibit:
The Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts and the Harvard Art Museum present ACT UP New York: Activism, Art, and the AIDS Crisis, 1987--1993, an exhibition of over 70 politically-charged posters, stickers, and other visual media that emerged during a pivotal moment of AIDS activism in New York City. On view at the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts October 15--December 23, 2009, the exhibition chronicles New York's AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) through an examination of compelling graphics created by various artist collectives that populated the group. The exhibition also features the premiere of the ACT UP Oral History Project, a suite of over 100 video interviews with surviving members of ACT UP New York that offer a retrospective portal on a decisive moment in the history of the gay rights movement, 20th-century visual art, our nation's discussion of universal healthcare, and the continuing HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Wash. Times, Hannity regularly smear Jennings
Wash. Times repeatedly smears Jennings with false claim that he failed to report "sexual abuse" of student. In an October 4 editorial, The Washington Times advanced the discredited falsehood that Jennings "violated Massachusetts law" over 20 years ago by "covering up" the "sexual abuse" of one of his students and also advanced the manufactured link between Jennings and the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) because of Jennings' past praise of gay rights activist Harry Hay. In fact, the student in question has confirmed that he was, indeed, 16 years old at the time of the incident, which is -- and was -- the legal age of consent in Massachusetts, and in the 1997 speech in which Jennings mentioned Hay, Jennings' praise was of Hay's work as an early gay rights activist and had nothing to do with NAMBLA. At one point, the Times advanced the smear that Jennings allowed "sexual abuse" to compare Jennings to former Rep. Mark Foley.
Wash. Times distorted Jennings' comments to claim he "spoke about the promotion of homosexuality in the public school curriculum." The Washington Times grossly distorted comments Jennings made to a GLSEN audience in 2000 to claim he "spoke about the promotion of homosexuality in the public school curriculum," advancing the conservative Family Research Council's attack that Jennings was "promoting a pro-homosexual agenda in America's schools." In fact, in the audio files posted by the Times, Jennings promoted a curriculum that demands "respect [for] every human being regardless of sexual orientation, regardless of gender identity, regardless of race or religion or any of the arbitrary distinctions we make among people" and said that efforts to promote a specific sexual orientation through schools were ineffective.
Wash. Times posts doctored transcript to claim Jennings called for mandatory "LGBT course" for teachers. The Washington Times' Kerry Picket reprinted a doctored transcript -- originally posted by a conservative blog -- of 2008 comments by Jennings to falsely claim Jennings had said he wanted teachers to be required to "take an LGBT course" -- a claim also echoed by The Fox Nation. In fact, responding to an audience member who asked about how to combat stereotypes held by teachers based on race, gender, and ethnicity as well as sexual orientation, Jennings did not call for a mandatory "LGBT course," but rather called for a mandatory course on "issues of bias in the classroom" for aspiring teachers in order for them to be aware of "how biases can influence how you interact with your students."
Hannity repeatedly made false claim that Jennings did not tell authorities about "statutory rape" of 15-year-old. Hannity repeatedly advanced -- despite evidence to the contrary -- the false claim that Jennings covered up statutory rape. He subsequently admitted that "the kid has since come out, and he said, 'No, no, I was 16 at the time,' " but added, "I'm not convinced of the timeline."
Hannity asks, "Does Kevin Jennings support the group NAMBLA?" On the October 7 edition of his Fox News show, Hannity asserted there were "shocking new allegations about President Obama's safe schools czar," and then asked: "Does Kevin Jennings support the group NAMBLA?" In fact, in a 1997 speech often cited by conservatives attempting to smear Jennings as a supporter of NAMBLA, Jennings reportedly said, "One of the people that's always inspired me is Harry Hay, who started the first ongoing gay rights groups in America. In 1948, he tried to get people to join the Mattachine Society." Jennings' remarks include no mentions of NAMBLA. Upon Hay's death in October 2002, numerous obituaries noted that Hay was a pioneer of the American gay rights movement -- just as Jennings noted in his 1997 speech.
Transcript
From the October 16 edition of Fox News' Hannity (retrieved from the Nexis database):
HANNITY: And we continue with our "Great American Panel." All right. You said, so it's a witch hunt that we're on about these czars. I have a question for you. If you have a guy that's our safe schools czar, has a history of drug and alcohol abuse and tells a sophomore in high school, when the sophomore says that he's having a sexual relationship with an older man, "I hope you used a condom."
When he praises a guy associated with the North American Man Boy Love Association, Harry Hay. We now found out from Worldnet Daily this week that he was once a member of the radical group Act Up. Are you saying that Sean Hannity is on a witch hunt when I think this man does not deserve that position?
Would it have been acceptable if it were a pornographic pro-Christian art show?
I note that you placed the words 'heterosexual AIDS epidemic' in quotes, but that phrase appears nowhere in this post. Exactly what are you talking about and from where are you getting your information?
ACT-UP certainly did raise awareness about the risks of HIV transmission through heterosexual sex, and with good reason: several high profile media outlets were claiming with medical authority that women in the United States would be unlikely to contract HIV through heterosexual sex, even with an HIV-infected partner. (Rather famously, Cosmopolitan Magazine published a piece called, "Reassuring News About AIDS: A Doctor Tells Why You May Not Be At Risk" in the late 1980's, claiming that women in the U.S. were at less risk from AIDS than were women in Africa because "men in Africa take their women in a brutal way." The 'article' was ridiculously irresponsible and did little more than reproduce stereotypes and fears about homosexuals and Africans. ACT-UP protested Cosmo and brought great attention to the issue. You're not trying to suggest that this was a bad thing, are you?)
If you want to discuss transmission vectors and someone's use of the word "epidemic", be my guest, but bring citations to reliable news and data.
And yes, you don't have to be gay to contract the AIDS virus, you nitwit.
Now why don't you specify what you mean by "ACT UP's work countering misinformation and irresponsible journalism about HIV and AIDS that played upon stereotypes of race and sexuality."
You did nothing of the kind. You began by stating that ACT UP "promoted the idea of the 'heterosexual AIDS epidemic'", but the article to which you linked says nothing about ACT UP. I'm still waiting for evidence that ACT UP promoted such an idea and how you think ACT UP's actions reflect upon Mr. Jennings.
As for what I meant, what part of my previous comment in which I described ACT UP's work was unclear?
ACT-UP didn't do anything wrong by debunking that it was just a gay disese and by saying that heterosexuals needed to be worried about it too.
So, associating Jennings with ACT-UP in an attempt to smear Jennings is a bogus charge. ACT-UP didn't do anything wrong.
It's a strawman argument that has no legs.
(Since you apparently didn't read fully through my previous comment, I've added emphasis here to help call your attention to several salient points.)
The smear of ACT-UP has no basis - even the link he provided was debunked, apparently!
In other words, they are standing by the factual accuracy of the original article.
By the way, I'd still like to know how any of this relates to ACT UP, which is what you originally asserted.
I'm not aware of any time or place when they did that. Can you document your claim? I'm betting that the best you can do is show that ACT UP warned that heterosexuals who believed they weren't at risk were wrong.
Even if you show me to be wrong (not holding my breath), that would only mean ACT UP was partially wrong on an issue. That still would remain a long way from making them a group that membership in should preclude service in government.
tell me how you feel about any administration trying to silence the voice of opposition? that doesn't bother you that your gov't is telling you that opposing opinion out there is the enemy of the country? all politics aside, when an administration singles out a news organization in an attempt to silence them - that is reason for concern. it's called freedom of speech - and the freedom of the press is critical in holding all gov't accountable.
o Letter to Peter Carr (19 August 1785)
* Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.
o Letter to Richard Price (8 January 1789)
-Thomas Jefferson
It's terrible when a government uses force to try to silence opposition. It's not so bad when a government simply points out that its opposition is making ridiculous allegations.
How in the world is anyone's freedom of speech threatened by the Obama administration? I should point out that the previous administration pushed for a domestic wiretapping program, and people were arrested for merely wearing anti-Bush t-shirts to an appearance by President Bush. Now, you see, those are examples of threats to Americans' freedom of speech.
What exactly has the Obama administration done "to silence" its opposition? Publicize its opposition's position? Give its opposition greater ratings? Refuse to grant as many interviews to a network that employs a man who called the president a racist? None of these things threaten the freedom of speech in the slightest.
Ever notice when Hannity tries to emphasize some portion of some news story should be believed because it's from a mainstream source and "not WorldNetDaily?" I've actually heard him say that, yet we see here he's quick to legitimize WND whenever it suits him.