About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox Nation, Big Government advance smear that Jennings is "linked to shocking sex talk"

December 07, 2009 3:27 pm ET — 26 Comments

Fox Nation and Big Government are trumpeting the latest smear on Department of Education official Kevin Jennings: that Jennings is, in the words of Fox Nation, "linked to shocking teen sex talk," referring to a recorded exchange that occurred during a "Queer Sex and Sexuality" workshop during a 2000 conference sponsored by Jennings' organization, the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). In fact, Jennings reportedly criticized "some of the" workshop's "content" when the recordings were first released in 2000, and the people involved in conducting the controversial discussion -- none of whom were GLSEN employees -- were either terminated or resigned.

Fox Nation, Big Government attempt to link Kevin Jennings to "shocking sex talk" at GLSEN conference

Fox Nation: "Safe School Czar Linked To Shocking Teen Sex Talk." In a December 7 post titled "Safe School Czar Linked to Shocking Teen Sex Talk," Fox Nation linked to and quoted a December 5 Gateway Pundit post stating that in 2000, GLSEN held a conference that "made it clear that the organization was not so much about tolerance as it was about teaching children about sex."

Screen capture of Fox Nation headline

Big Government posts "a shocking report on Obama's deviant Safe School Czar Kevin Jennings." On December 7, Big Government posted an item that reprinted some of the December 5 Gateway Pundit article, which Big Government called "a shocking report on Obama's deviant Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings." The Big Government post included an audio clip from a workshop during the 2000 GLSEN conference in which participants discussed sexual behavior. The Big Government item claimed that "this is not about supporting or not supporting gays or gay rights. This post is about the radical agenda of groups like GLSEN and activists like Kevin Jennings."

In fact, Jennings criticized the content of the workshop, and the workshop's organizers were fired or resigned

Boston Herald: GLSEN, Jennings "agreed" that seminar leaders "crossed a line." On May 18, 2000, the Boston Herald reported that GLSEN "agreed yesterday that three workshop leaders crossed a line with raunchy content directed at students as young as 14 years old." In the article, Jennings, who was the executive director of GLSEN at the time, was quoted saying, "We need to make our expectations and guidelines to outside facilitators much more clear because we are surprised and troubled by some of the accounts we've heard." From the Herald:

"Like the Parents Rights Coalition and the Department of Education, GLSEN is also troubled by some of the content that came up during this workshop," said Kevin Jennings, national executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.

He said people who run workshops in the future will get clearer guidelines, though Jennings said the network's annual conference at Tufts University should not be judged on the 30-student seminar "What They Didn't Tell You About Queer Sex and Sexuality in Health Class."

"We need to make our expectations and guidelines to outside facilitators much more clear," said Jennings. "Because we are surprised and troubled by some of the accounts we've heard." [Boston Herald, 5/18/2000, accessed via Nexis]

Boston Globe: Jennings expressed "concerns" about workshop discussion. In a May 18, 2000, Boston Globe article (accessed via Nexis), Jennings criticized the contents of the tape, saying that "from what I've heard, I have concerns as well," and that sexual educational programs "need to be delivered in an age appropriate and sensitive manner." He also claimed that his organization was being unfairly criticized by the Parents Rights Coalition, which had attended the workshop and taped it. According to Jennings: "[T]he people who have the tape know what our mission is, they know that our work is about preventing harassment and they know that session was not the totality of what was offered at a conference with over 50 sessions. Our mission is being misrepresented."

The seminar's organizers were fired or resigned as a result. According to a May 20, 2000, Boston Herald article, of the three state Department of Education employees or contractors who led the seminar, one was fired, one resigned, and one had his contract canceled, as a result of the discussion. From the Boston Herald: "One presenter at the workshop was fired and a second resigned. In explaining his actions yesterday, [then-Massachusetts state education czar David P.] Driscoll said the sessions 'went too far' with explicit discussions about sexual techniques. Driscoll said he had canceled the contract of a third presenter at the March workshop, which included frank talk about how to use a condom and how to perform oral sex."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by dexteritas0071418 (December 07, 2009 3:33 pm ET)
         
      Why are mainstream newspapers so afraid to go after stuff like this? They could run a series on MMfA's research alone.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by southerngal (December 07, 2009 4:22 pm ET)
        1 1
        I am not sure the mainstream media needs to delve into or sink to the depths of Fox Nation or some Andrew Breitbart internet rag. They are better left in their own squalor.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by benjr (December 07, 2009 5:22 pm ET)
             
          I agree. Breitbart and Fox will not issue retractions or apologies, so what's the point? The people who believe this sh!t won't be swayed by the mainstream media, because of the "liberal bias".
          Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (December 08, 2009 12:31 am ET)
             
          Of course they need to be doing that.

          Our nation deserves better than the toxic poisoning of our national debate. Until these skunks are called out for what they are and the damage that refuting their obnoxious distortions are doing, our whole country suffers. The offensiveness won't stop getting credibility it doesn't deserve until that happens on a large scale,
          Report Abuse
    • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (December 07, 2009 4:44 pm ET)
      3  
      What took Breitbart (and Beck/Hannity)so long? I stumbled upon this story while researching a "Jennings was a member of Nambla" smear months ago. I found out the same details as MMfA is posting. I even listened to some of the audio posted online. The worst stuff on the tapes were from answers given (in truly unecessarily graphic detail) in response to direct questions from an underage student who shouldn't have been there to begin with.

      It was a huge local controversy at the time and was dubbed "fistgate" by one local newspaper publisher
      .
      This is another BigGov.com cherry-picked molotov cocktail. More wingnut head will explode and the their blogs will carry on one more "guilt by association" crusade of hysterical homophobia and hate.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (December 07, 2009 5:00 pm ET)
        1 1
        They probably knew about it but are rationing out all the little "scandals" to keep the base motivated over an extended period. Kinda like when you try to acheive multiple orgasms by gentlty massaging the...

        ;) j/k
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Lizinbklyn (December 07, 2009 5:08 pm ET)
         
      "On or about 9/21/04 defendant, Bill O'Reilly, telephoned plaintiff, Andrea Mackris, and once again without invitation or provocation or solicitation, launched into yet another disgusting, lewd and disturbing monologue concerning his sexual fantasies with her until he climaxed."

      [BARF]
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (December 07, 2009 5:19 pm ET)
           
        You could use a falafel to clean up the barf......

        :-)
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 07, 2009 6:48 pm ET)
          1  
          Maybe Foxnation can follow up by exposing the guy responsible for this filth.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 07, 2009 7:03 pm ET)
            2  
            LMAO ! I just found some more audio clips of BilldO reading his own book.

            I mean, audio sound bites.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by worrierking (December 07, 2009 7:06 pm ET)
                 
              I was just going to post the same link. My favorite which would be great to take out of context is"

              "I wish I were a lesbian".

              Or

              "Get those pants off". (I think he was giving that order to Beck.)
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 07, 2009 7:31 pm ET)
                   
                I like the one about the girls greedily sucking on the crack pipe, and the guy with the yellow teeth. BO really paints a word picture.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by worrierking (December 07, 2009 7:53 pm ET)
                  1  
                  His style reminds me of Fitzgerald or Faulkner.

                  (Not F. Scoot & William, I meant Marty Fitzgerald and Toothless Joe Faulkner, two local inebriates.)
                  Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (December 07, 2009 11:41 pm ET)
        2
      -- because we are surprised and troubled by some of the accounts we've heard -- Jennings

      No shoot Sherlock...what do you think homosexuals do when they get together for a little recreation...bake cookies?

      Not only were the words expressed in the seminar disgusting...the visual aspects are even worse...especially when you put a face with the behavior.


      Report Abuse
      • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (December 08, 2009 8:40 am ET)
        3  
        wesley, you really are a weasel aren't you"

        "No shoot Sherlock...what do you think homosexuals do when they get together for a little recreation...bake cookies?"

        The workshop instructor on the heavily-edited tape makes no mention of homosexual sex. She could have been addressing heterosexual fellatio, in response to a direct question from a young girl in her audience. But there is no way to know that, is there?
        The narrator/editor sees to all that.

        "Not only were the words expressed in the seminar disgusting..."

        And the same words can be heard on "Talk Sex with Sue Johanson", a live phone-in program airing on Oxygen TV. Or on Howard Stern's radio show.
        Oh yeah, you go git'em wes. Hang'em high!

        " ...the visual aspects are even worse...especially when you put a face with the behavior."

        Oh really. Disgusting visual? What if it was not Jennings' face they used but instead used.... well I don't know.....how about Pamela Anderson? Mmmmm, Pam and fellatio? Would that float your boat?

        This particular smear meets every requirement standard for classic "propaganda" and YOU loudly, proudly embrace it. Wanna brag about what a "free thinker" you are?

        BTW, did you know the guy who recorded and narrated that audio tape paid 30 bucks to attend that workshop? How many "children" do you think forked over their 30 bucks to get in?

        You are a shameless, hate-mongering bigot, wesley, and you wear it like a badge. So sad.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (December 08, 2009 11:49 am ET)
         
      From what I've been able to find, this seminar is little more than something that "looks bad." What is so wrong with people get straitforward accurate answers to reasonable and respectufully posed questions? Why are these poeple so insitant that there are just some thing swe are not meant to know? 14 year olds that don't already know, at least academically, 90% of what they'll ever learn in their entire lives about sex? Yeah, right! How sheltered are these people?

      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      There is no such thing as "bad knowledge." Why are the so proud of their ignorance?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Midnight Kevin (December 08, 2009 12:39 pm ET)
           
        Obviously, those in attendance were there for a reason. The reporter was there because he opposed the "homosexual agenda", and would not have been satisfied no matter what the conference was about.

        Out of all those who were there, how many actually complained about the content?
        ----------------------------------
        The Midnight Review
        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (December 08, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
             
          Parent Groups (read: Christian Fundies) seem to think that educating childeren about sexuality prior them being premitted (by the church, family, socitey, etc...) to actually have sex (1) somehow victimizes them or hamrs them in some way and (2) thinks it will cause them to have sex. (IOW - if you don't teach teenagers about the less orthodox topics of sexuality, they won't have sex AT ALL.) These people are completely and utterly absurd, and I cannot fathom thier frame of mind in the slightest. (And yes, I have children.)

          This is why I hate religion: Religion hates knowledge.

          -------------------------------------------------------------------
          Same mental disease when it comes to evolution.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Midnight Kevin (December 08, 2009 5:02 pm ET)
               
            I was reading an article that equated this conference to child abuse. Absurd...
            Report Abuse
    • Author by Midnight Kevin (December 08, 2009 12:36 pm ET)
         
      What is interesting is that the author of the Big Government piece, Jim Hoft, cites his own work from Gateway Pundit, as well as Founding Bloggers, which in turn references his two articles for Pundit and Government...
      ------------------------------------------
      The Midnight Review
      Report Abuse
    • Author by gumshoe4096 (December 08, 2009 5:54 pm ET)
         
      Big Government? The headline to this post is schizophrenic. The existence of all those "Czars" is prima facie evidence of Big Government. It's nothing less than a stinking end-run around the Constitution. If we had any intellectual honesty, we'd be demanding abolition of all the Czars appointed by O. Jennings should go, scandal or no; he's simply not needed. Czars belong in Imperial Russia, not the U.S. of A. Arguing about a smear is merely quibbling over inconsequential details.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by tman418 (December 08, 2009 10:13 pm ET)
           
        These czars did not start with Obama. I am sure you expressed the exact same amount of outrage over Bush's czars.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (December 09, 2009 9:32 am ET)
           
        The existence of all those "Czars" is prima facie evidence of Big Government. It's nothing less than a stinking end-run around the Constitution

        Using words like prima facie may show sime intelligence, but your understanding of "czar" belies that notion and just shows your ignorance. It is a "nickname" to indicate an area of concentration of responsibility, expertise, or administrative focus upon a particular task. Nothing more. The word has no more meaning or legal authority than pundit, or maven, "mogul" or point man.

        No matter what Fox, or Beck, or BigGovernment says to get you riled up against the President, this is the one true definition:

        In the United States the title "czar" is a slang term for certain high-level civil servants, such as the "drug czar" for the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, "terrorism czar" for a Presidential advisor on terrorism policy, "cybersecurity czar" for the highest-ranking Department of Homeland Security official on computer security and information security policy, and "war czar" to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. More specifically, a czar refers to a sub-cabinet level advisor within the executive branch of the U.S. government


        I defy you to find any evidence that a cabinet "czar" represents an official governmnent position of sweeping authority that is an invention outside the constitutional authority of the executive branch.
        Go ahead and try. It is a "nickname".

        Now, having shown you the official English language definition of the word "czar" as used in United States vernacular, I expect never to see you make this argument again. To do so again will graduate you from "ignorant" to "stupid".
        Report Abuse
        • Author by gumshoe4096 (December 09, 2009 3:24 pm ET)
             
          Thanks, you've made my point. Still quibbling over inconsequential details.
          Report Abuse