Dear Obama Administration Folks
Tweet
Seriously, quit apologizing for b.s. The only people who get their jollies off on this sort of thing are right-wing nutters who fantasize about military coups and worse. The opposition is not legitimate, quit legitimizing it.
63 Responses to “Dear Obama Administration Folks”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
The serious people in the opposition are not in the leadership, and the people in the leadership are not serious.
“Sedition” was casually tossed around when dirty hippies had the gall to oppose the They They Tried to Kill My Daddy War in the form of peaceful protest.
Now that the bar has been set, Leavenworth would be a good place for learning the slow. Send the wingnuts with their coup fantasies down to break rocks into smaller rocks where they then break the samller rocks into tiny rocks. They might discover a better attitude towards the new President.
And while they lose a few pounds during the Kansas winter, they can mull over the fact that democratic voters are breed in a rather smart fashion while wingnuts will only shed their mortal coil even faster if they get their way in opposing heathcare reforms. That will make the sixteen hour days fly by.
Oh, for Pete’s sake!
A closeted gay high school student confided in a teacher. The wingers are upset the teacher didn’t immediately rat the kid out to his parents and/or the police?
So this nut aided and abetted child molestation and Obama picked him for a Czar…seems about right for the Milli Vanilli President.
So this nut aided and abetted child molestation
Only in a world where up is down.
Amen. Democrats persist in the “Come, let us reason together” mindset while the Cons chant, “Liberal is enemy. Kill, kill.” Dems have been been apologizing and explaining as long as I can remember, the 60s at least. Time to wake up already, Rip, and smell the gunpowder!
I agree that he has nobody to blame but himself for that. Regardless of specific “training” shortcomings that he mentions. The fact that a 15 year old was having unprotected sex with men at bus stations was a serious issue. I wouldn’t call “ratting” the kid out. I would be willing to have someone pissed at me for the rest of their life if my actions prolong their life. As a teacher he had a responsibility to act. I think that the fact that he admits to it being wrong and not making excuses is noteworthy, however. Most people in politics always have a way of saying a point is being “politicized.”
william: So this nut aided and abetted child molestation and Obama picked him for a Czar
Sounds like an opinion in search of an outlet.
The fact that a 15 year old was having unprotected sex with men at bus stations was a serious issue.
Of course it was a serious issue. And that’s precisely the issue the teacher addressed.
Conservatives (like william, see above) would like to turn this positive, productive, confidential counseling into a sex crime.
Quaker, if an adult has sex with a 15 year old of any gender or sexual orientation wouldn’t that be considered a crime? I admit that I am not sure if the kid lied about his age or not.
Dkelsmith: As a teacher he had a responsibility to act.
So what should the penalty be, 20 years later, for the young, 24 year old who handled the situation as best he was able at the time? (And apparently in a manner beneficial to the 15 year old.)
Any things you did 20 years ago that you would have done differently given 20 years more experience and two decades of hindsight?
You know what? If the teacher had been taken into confidence by the older man, then I would agree. He would have an obligation to report. But that’s not what happened.
He was approached by a troubled student. He gave the student good advice.
I think that the fact that he admits to it being wrong and not making excuses is noteworthy
And that’s what OW, in his original post, and I, in my comments, think is pointless. The people making a fuss about this are not in the least interested in the young student or the advice he was given. They, like william (see above) have scoured the written record to find a way to take another scalp.
Sean,
I don’t remember recommending a penalty…
I suppose I need you to point out what I am wrong about in my initial comment.
Dkelsmith: Quaker, if an adult has sex with a 15 year old of any gender or sexual orientation wouldn’t that be considered a crime?
Of course it is. But what’s the best way to handle it?
A 15 year old shoplifts. It’s a crime. Does that mean the best thing to do is throw the book at them? I’m not advocating there be no penalty by any means. But some consideration for a more nuanced view to consider what really ends up with the best result for the child.
Dkelsmith: Sean, I don’t remember recommending a penalty…
I suppose I need you to point out what I am wrong about in my initial comment
Whoa. Dial it back.
I didn’t say you had. And I wasn’t pointing out you were wrong. Don’t be so quick to claim you were attacked. If anything I was asking for you to clarify your view.
You clearly believed he should have done something different than he had and, for the most part, I don’t think anyone here has disagreed that there may have been better ways to handle the situation.
But the thing Oliver pointed out which started this thread is that he’s being held responsible now for not having done better when he was much younger. So I’m asking, what, if any, penalty should he pay now? If none, then were is the current issue? And if there is some, then what should it be?
I completely agree, Quaker, however I am not suggesting throwing a book at the child because he is having unprotected sex with random men in a bus station. I am suggesting that we ensure that his reckless behavior stops. Yes, condoms protect from STD’s to a certain degree, but the kid was in danger on so many more levels. Namely from being at the mercy of adult males that could have robbed, seriously injured, or killed him.
Sean has a point. Take the gay sex out of the equation for just a second, just for argument’s sake.
A young student confides in a teacher that some older boys beat him up and took his jacket. Is the teacher “aiding and abetting robbery” if he abides by the student’s wishes and doesn’t report it to the police?
A student admits to a teacher that he attended a party where illegal drugs were used. Is the teacher “aiding and abetting drug trafficking” if he advises the student not to buy drugs from strangers and not to drive while intoxicated?
The student in question here was gay and at an age where he was simultaneously discovering his sexuality and hiding it from his family and peers. His situation led him to choose to engage in potentially dangerous behavior.
Was a crime committed? Yes, by the older man. But the teacher wasn’t advising the older man, he was advising the student. He advised the student appropriately and it’s extremely cynical to hold this interaction against the teacher today.
Sean,
All I can tell you is that as a parent of three kids I would want to know that my kids were engaging in reckless behavior. Had the kid contracted a horrible disease, or been found with his throat cut I would have had serious issue if I knew an adult in a position of authority knew about this, talked with my kid and didn’t inform me or the police. Would you feel any different as a parent?
But yeah, OK. If the teacher forgot to tell the kid, “Oh, and stay the hell out of bus station bathrooms,” then he should have done that.
He was approached by a troubled student. He gave the student good advice.
Works for me. Next.
if an adult has sex with a 15 year old of any gender or sexual orientation wouldn’t that be considered a crime?
So the adult in question has a responsibility to turn himself in.
Had the kid contracted a horrible disease, or been found with his throat cut I would have had serious issue if I knew an adult in a position of authority knew about this, talked with my kid and didn’t inform me or the police.
Of course, we don’t know anything about the kid’s parents in this story. Had the parents subjected the kid to punishment, enrollment in a “recovery” program, or simply kicked him into the street because the teacher revealed his secret, that would be a serious issue as well.
If none, then were is the current issue?
The issue is in the right wing poutrage.
Quaker,
Gay sex is not an issue to me. Gay sex is not criminal…an adult having sex with a child is criminal. The fact that a minor is involved with an adult is scary. The fact of the matter is, I would want to know if my child was having sex with adults whether it was in a bus station, a tree house, or a frat house.
I didn’t mean to get the point across that he should be penalized now. However, I will say again I am glad he acknowledges it and says he is sorry for it. I don’t think he should NOT do it just because conservatives are railing about it.
Quaker,
No disagreement on your last post, but speaking from my personal standpoint I would want to know.
I don’t think he should NOT do it just because conservatives are railing about it.
The only reason it’s an issue is BECAUSE conservatives are railing about it, and no apology of any sort is going to satisfy them.
Gay sex is not an issue to me.
Yeah, I know. But it’s one of those issues that changes how people react to the situation. (Take for instance the whole recent ACORN/hidden camera uproar. Would anyone care if the two imposters hadn’t been proposing a sex business with underage hookers? I doubt it.)
There was a crime, but the student was not the criminal. The student confided in a teacher and the teacher had to weigh the kid’s right to privacy versus his safety. High school teachers face that dilemma all the dang time.
My point is this: The conservative railing is not about the kid, not about the sex, and not about the older man. It’s about winning.
Glenn Beck abandoned his first wife and special needs child but it’s okay because he’s straight
Yeah, no need to report statuatory rape to the authorities. Just wear a condom kid and stay out of bus stops.
Yeah, no need to report statuatory rape to the authorities.
If you don’t know who the criminal is, you can only turn in the victim.
Dkelsmith: Would you feel any different as a parent?
I imagine I’d feel a lot of things, and several conflicting. Anger that the other adult didn’t inform me or the police. Glad that the child had found someone to talk to. Anger/sadness that it wasn’t me. Regret that there was something in our relationship that kept them from coming to me. Envious of the teacher and therefore more likely to be critical of their actions.
Whatever the mix, I wouldn’t consider it a state of mind that’s conducive towards determining whether the teacher’s actions were what was best for the child or not. My own resentment of their position in my kid’s life would color my view of the teacher.
And in this case in particular, while a dispassionate outsider with no direct involvement, I don’t know enough to really say. In the article linked to (and I’ve not looked further for more info) I don’t see any mention of what the child’s homelife was like, what advice was given beyond “use a condom”. That the child went from “my life is worthless” to “having a smile on his face for the next two years” suggests something more was discussed.
So, would I like to know my hypothetical kids were engaging in reckless behavior? Sure. But that doesn’t really have much relevance in this situation with this kid.
Dkelsmith: I don’t think he should NOT do it just because conservatives are railing about it.
Agreed.
Should conservatives be railing about it?
wiliam: Yeah, no need to report statuatory rape to the authorities. Just wear a condom kid and stay out of bus stops.
william, do you know anything about what transpired between Jennings and “Brewster” other than what was described in the article? Do you know that was the only advice given? And that it was given with a “Just wear a condom kid” attitude, suggesting the picture of a teacher who isn’t really engaged with the student and eager to just get rid of them? (“Yeah, whatever, kid. Here’s a condom, go away. I’m busy.”)
I don’t. But I suspect there was more given there was another teacher who though well enough of Jennings to think he could be a help to Brewster. I suspect there’s more given Brewster went from “my life is worthless” to always having a smile on his face.
So you really don’t have much to base your dismissive view on. Perhaps your opinion was formed long before the article was written?
Sean,
To answer your question. Conservatives are railing about it I am sure because it casts a liberal in a bad light. Is this going to affect how he performs his present job duties. No. I say no especially since he acknowledges he should have handled it differently.
I understand and respect your response and agree that the hypothetical that you and I discussed may not be relevant here. But as a parent I just know how I would feel.
I know I am not the world’s best parent. But I do try as hard as I can, but inevitably we all make mistakes. I have a 15 year old, an 11 year old, and a 7 year old. Sometimes I am too harsh, sometimes I am too lenient, and unfortunately I am sometimes just away too much. But I realize that even if I was perfect in my child rearing abilities my kids would still keep some secrets from me.
I would just hope that if someone else knew something that was this dangerous for my kids to be involved in I would hope they would tell me. But, I do understand he did what he thought was helpful. I hope that this story is still a happy ending for “Brewster”.
Oliver, how is this “b.s.?” You actually think Jennings did nothing wrong by not reporting the incident that “Brewster” described to him to the authorities and/or his parents?
The only reason it’s an issue is BECAUSE conservatives are railing about it, and no apology of any sort is going to satisfy them.
Oh well. Obama should take better care in determining who he wants to appoint to these positions.
And you’re 100% wrong about this Quaker (as is Oliver by calling this “BS.”). This wasn’t a school fight or a kid witnessing somebody using drugs and it also doesn’t matter if the kid is gay. He did NOT give the kid good advice. He should have advised the student that he was the victim of a crime not that he should just make sure he wears a rubber. Give me a break.
And you’re 100% wrong about this Quaker
Where do you buy your keyboards, Jay. Do they give you a volume discount? You must’ve worn out a number of them given how often you type that.
So are you among those who insist that Mr. Jennings should have broken confidence and involved the police?
Oh well. Obama should take better care in determining who he wants to appoint to these positions.
Yeah, if he’d just appoint conservatives, we could avoid all this fuss.
Jay: Obama should take better care in determining who he wants to appoint to these positions.
No, conservatives should grow up and stop objecting to everything done by a Democrat just becuase.
The standard should not be “Are conservatives going to object?” because if that is used then nobody would ever get appointed.
The standard should not be “Did you ever do anything in your youth that you would do differently now?” because nobody would qualify.
The standard should be, as it is, “Are qualified to be competent at this job?”
Jay: He did NOT give the kid good advice. He should have advised the student that he was the victim of a crime not that he should just make sure he wears a rubber.
Same question I posed to william: Do you know anything about what transpired between Jennings and “Brewster” other than what was described in the article? Do you know that was the only advice given?
You’re making a lot of assumptions to back up the opinion you want to have, rather than basing it on what actually happened (which we know very little about).
He did NOT give the kid good advice.
The kid went from thinking his life wasn’t worth living to happily finishing high school.
You might argue he could have done more, but I don’t think you can say he harmed the kid.
The issue of the boundaries of confidentiality in counseling is a hotly debated one. That Jennings decided to protect the child’s privacy over a felt need to report the situation to the authorities, or the parents, is no surprise.
However, how does a record of such a judgment affect his ability to run a Safe and Drug Free Schools program? Can too great a concern for student privacy lead to safe or drug free schools? I think not.
He should be thoroughly questioned on his attitude about boundaries, and about his views on how to maintain the balance between ensuring trust through confidentiality, and protecting the communities’ interest.
He should be thoroughly questioned on his attitude about boundaries, and about his views on how to maintain the balance between ensuring trust through confidentiality,
Fair enough. At the same time, hollering that he “aided and abetted pedophilia” isn’t relevant, helpful, or even true. Offering apologies for a decision made 20 years ago in hopes of satisfying the right wing scalp hunters is foolish.
Frank DiSalle: Can too great a concern for student privacy lead to safe or drug free schools? I think not.
I don’t see it as necessarily a blockage to the goal of keeping kids off drugs. On the contrary, I can easily see circumstances where protecting teh student’s personal privacy would be far more likely to keep them off, or get them off, drugs. Having someone non-judgemental they can confide in, for example, can provide the support they need to not need drugs.
He should be thoroughly questioned on his attitude about boundaries, and about his views on how to maintain the balance between ensuring trust through confidentiality, and protecting the communities’ interest.
This I can agree with. It should not come from the angle of
“You did it wrong when you were younger, have you seen the error of your ways?”. But given what his job now is it is reasonable and appropriate to assess his views on the issues that are currently relevant.
It is only a detail: “Too much concern” for a young client’s privacy can lead him to believe he is shielded from serious consequences .
see Tarasoff vs State Board of Regents of California.
In case , a college student revealed to an on-campus counselor that he wanted to kill a girl who had slighted him. The counselor contacted Campus Security, but not the girl or her parents. When the Security guard came to check on her , she was not on campus, and that ended that.
When she DID return to campus, he DID kill her.
The parents sued the State University system, contending that the school was obligated to contacted the students or the parents or both
Now it turns out the guy is a NAMBLA supporter:
“Lori Roman of Regular Folks United points to statements by Jennings a decade or more ago when he praised Harry Hay of the North American Association for Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which promotes the legalization of sexual abuse of young boys by older men.”
“Roman provides damning details and links here. She also notes that Jennings wrote the forward “to a book called Queering Elementary Education. And another fellow you may have heard of wrote one of the endorsements on the book jacket—Bill Ayers.” Ayers, of course, is the Weather Underground bomber from the 1960s who is just an “acquaintance” of Obama.”
Now it turns out the guy is a NAMBLA supporter
Do questions swirl?
Absolutely shameless, william. Here’s what Jennings had to say about Harry Hay:
Where’s the part where he advocates for NAMBLA, willie?
I’m hearing now that “Brewster” was 16 (the legal age of consent in Massachusetts at the time of the conversation between him and Jennings). Can anyone confirm whether this is true or not?
Now it turns out the guy is a NAMBLA supporter
Have all the backgroun investigators resigned since Pres Obama was elected?
It seems like no one is able to confirm or deny anything about his appointments. That is just poor management, whether or not it is poor politics, I can’t say.
Frank DiSalle: see Tarasoff vs State Board of Regents of California.
I’d see a fundamental difference between the case where the counseled student says “I want to kill someone else” and the one where they’re saying “I don’t care about my own life.”
And, without having read the particulars of the case and not being familiar with the outcome of the suit, I’d think the clear error was not continuing to check on/contact the girl. Should the counselor also have contacted parents? I dunno. It really comes down to the particular situaion in these cases and one never has benefit of hindsight at the time that such decisions have to be made?
Best outcome if you warn the girl’s parents (and prevent an attack)? Best outcome if you don’t but continue to counsel the boy who (it would turn out) really wasn’t going to attach the girl and was largely venting hurt. Contact the girl’s parents in the latter situation and the boy ends up having pain prolonged because he’s now got a reputation as being violent that isn’t really deserved?
It’s difficult to say what course is best. Folks make the best decisions they can and shouldn’t be majorly criticized for them unless there was gross errors of common sense.
Frank DiSalle: Now it turns out the guy is a NAMBLA supporter
Posted over 14 hours after Quaker in a Basement actually looked up what Jennings had written and asked the reasonable question: “Where’s the part where he advocates for NAMBLA?”
william’s “There’s this guy who says Jennings supports NAMBLA” vs QiaB’s “Here’s what Jennings actually said and it doesn’t say that”. And you go with william’s inuendo?
Sean : In was quoting someone else – hence the italics …
My comment referred to the concept which the Obama administration seems to be having a problem with : You should investigate potential appointees before you bring their names up, and turn the press loose on them to dig up the dirt .
Sean : in re: Tarasoff – You are merely saying that what Jennings did was controversial. I am saying the same thing.
Frank DiSalle: Sean : In was quoting someone else – hence the italics …
Yes. Standard format here. I am familiar with it, Frank
NOT in italics was “Have all the backgroun investigators resigned since Pres Obama was elected?” which, based on views expressed before, your accepting that the NAMBLA accusation was true. And as QiaB’s post showed, there didn’t seem to be any there there.
So, a contention that Obama’s staff isn’t appropriately vetting doesn’t follow. You can’t investigate to verify someone doesn’t have dirt that opponents will make up.
“which, based on views expressed before, I took as your accepting that the NAMBLA accusation was true. ”
Fixed.
National Association of Marlon Brando Look Alikes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartman_Joins_NAMBLA
Quaker,
Harry Hay – “In 1983, at a New York University forum, sponsored by an on-campus gay organization, he remarked “[I]f the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world.”[49] In 1986 Hay was confronted by police when he attempted to march in the Los Angeles pride parade, from which NAMBLA had been banned, with a sign reading “NAMBLA walks with me.”
Jennings is inspired by Hay (who was a NAMBLA supporter).
william,
link?
Here’s a couple Sean:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Hay
And a more complete takedown here (including Hay at NAMBLA conferences) –
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=927
Harry Hay seems to have been a dispicable character that supported NAMBLA in a big way. Jennings needs to denounce Hay asap or resign.
From what I read at your links and several additional places I’ve now sought out, I wouldn’t describe Hay as a “despicable” character. He was in many respects an early civil rights leader. His support for NAMBLA is troubling, his advocacy for homosexuals and their lifestyles gone too far. But it doesn’t negate the work he did.
And Jennings’ comments that he drew inspiration from him make it clear that it was Hay’s fighting against the status quo, his belief that the world can change that were the source of that inspiration.
NOT his support of NAMBLA. As one of your own links notes:
Kennedy inspired many, but was a womanizer. Jefferson is widely admired, and deservedly so, for his achievements and beliefs, but he owned slaves and to some was a rapist. Lindburgh, Ford, King, Edison. All inspirational, all with attitudes and/or who did things that were not. Should anyone who has ever praised their accomplishments be condemned for doing so?
Should anyone who has ever praised their accomplishments be condemned for doing so?
Only if it serves to oppose the Obama administration.
/end wingnut douchebag
Harry Hay seems to have been a dispicable character that supported NAMBLA in a big way. Jennings needs to denounce Hay asap or resign.
Harry Hay is not serving in the Obama administration.. He’s dead. Why does Jennings need to denounce him? Please explain your reasoning.
In 1986 Hay was confronted by police when he attempted to march in the Los Angeles pride parade, from which NAMBLA had been banned, with a sign reading “NAMBLA walks with me.”
Right. He opposed kicking the NAMBLA people out of the Gay Activist club. We knew that. Anything else?
First of all, anyone in a position of authority in an educational institution is required to report a crime. A teacher is not generally considered an institutional authority unless he or she is a club advisor, coach, or official counselor. In this case, it appears the student approached Jennings as a sympathetic teacher, not in any official capacity. So he was not, by law, required to report a crime even if one had been committed.
Second, if the boy was 16 at the time, it is not even clear that a crime was committed since he had reached the age of consent in his home state of Massachusetts.