Ana Marie Cox on Fox News' "offensive" Jennings attacks: "They're persecuting someone because he's gay"
October 11, 2009 12:10 pm ET
From the October 11 edition of CNN's Reliable Sources:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Don't Lie, Don't Smear & Don't Mis-inform See.
Why anyone still refers to Fox as News i will never understand?
They have a strangle hold on those poor uneducated souls in the blogosphere & The HeartLand.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
Let's face it folks... this truly is the underlying reason for this right-wing attack on Mr. Jennings.
They all collectively know that Mr. Jennings is innocent of every single charge they are spewing... yet they keep doing just that.
Every last one of these right-wing lunatics who jump on the 'take down president Obama at every turn' bandwagon are nothing more than lying, scheming, sacks of liquid crap!!
From a Hannity supporter:
"How dare this socialist, communist leftie infer that Hannity is after Jennings because he is gay. Sean is only after him because he is a homosexual. You libs always take Sean out of context".
Signed, Billy Bob Redstate.
I recently watched a film, For the Bible Tells Me So, which was pretty interesting.The primary subject is the abuse of the Good Book for political purposes, specifically the Anti-Gay Agenda, but it's a good documentary about the creation and demonization of "The Other" in general.
The film is pretty even in tone, but not so PC that it shies from clips of the KKK and Hitler rallies juxtaposed against the God Hates F49s protestors or the hate-filled sermons of the wingnut holey men.
The " God said it , even if the Bible doesn't say it, that settles it" approach to issues is a really simple way to stop peoples thinking before it starts. The rationalization used to discriminate against gay people is just as easy using the Bible as the rest of the hysterical haters' insisting that their need to get rid of everybody in, or loosely connected to, the Obama administration is based entirely on policy differences.
Gays, commies, black people, poor people,libruls, community organizers... all sinners. The Real Americans love them just as Jesus does, they just want them to give up their "lifestyle".
What kind of vacuum do you have to live in to believe crap like that?
I think they'd like to get rid of everyone who doesn't cling to their guns and to Jesus.
I would never want a minimum knowledge of civics test given to prove ones worth to be able to have the right to vote... but certainly a guy like this makes one begin to reconsider that position??
The dog whistle always is, "blackie is coming to get you", "gays are coming to get you", or "illegal immigrants are coming to get you".
Cons, they won't have to got get anyone, they'll already be there.
Thanx Mon Colonel..I like her already.
I haven't returned so I wont say it is the same as a year ago, but I can't see it changing much.
Do you apply this same standard to Rush, Hannity, Beck, etc.? Because they've said hateful, nasty, bigoted, homophobic things repeatedly over the years, as documented here.
I still think Mr. Pickens would be HORRIBLY offended by your parody of his name.
Karl Rove is approaching 60, is currently unmarried and has only had a very short, sham of a marriage. He fawned over George Bush as if he loved him. We don't even have to get into his childhood and gay stepdad. He would be an extremely easy target! And maybe if he was forced out of the closet, he would finally shut up!
Why isn't he in prison?
LESS POWERFUL THAN A LOCOMOTIVE!
ABLE TO ENTER TALL BUILDING THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR!
DA-DUH-DA-DAAAAAAAH!
IT'S CAPTAIN OBVIOUS TO THE RESUCE!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------
And yet another evil, although not all that secret or well hidden, plot is foiled!
And I said, “What were you doing out late on a school night.” And he said, “Well, I was in Boston…” Boston was about 45 minutes from Concord. So I said, “What were you doing in Boston on a school night Brewster?” He got very quiet, and he finally looked at me and said, “Well 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. I was a closeted gay teacher, 24 years old, didn’t know what to say. I knew I should say something quickly so I finally said, My best friend had just died of AIDS the week before. I looked at Brewster and said, “You know, I hope you knew to use a condom.” He said to me something I will never forget, He said “Why should I, my life isn’t worth saving anyway.”
1.According to Jenning's own words, he though the student was 15, which would indicate illegal activity took place. When he sayd "I hope you used a condom" that would indicate, again in his own words, that he thought sexual activity between an adult and minor took place.
2.Again, in his own words, he acknowledges that the student expressed suicidal thoughts, or at least extreme depression. He did nothing in response to this but recommend condoms.
3.Dealing with the facts at hand as they were described by Mr. Jennings in 1988, do you believe he acted appropriately, or legally?
I am aware that the student now says he was 16 and he may have been, but Jennings thought otherwise at the time if his own words were to be believed.
Why would he advise condom use if he thought no sexual activity was or would be taking place?
Do you think that his acceptance of this scenario was wise, even if technically legal? Would you be comfortable with this approach being taken with your own relatives?
Does it demonstrate the kind of judgement you are looking for in a "safe schools czar"?
2) You cannot support this conclusion using only a cropped quote. The thought was expressed at the end of the paragraph. You aren't even including all the info, nor did Jennings necessarily. The fact is you have no idea what Jennings did or did not do to council or advise this young man AFTER his suicidal sentiment was made. It was not included, because that wasn't the point of telling the story. You biggots just twist everything out of context proportion, and think you've got a "gotcha" moment. Well, you might, but only to the mindless sheep and fellow biggots.
3) Legally? Dealing with FACTS, yes. And you have no facts which say otherwise. What a stupid question. Appropriately? The man addmitted he was thinking quickly and had been taken off-guard. What he said might look awkward (at worst) in hindsight, but only because most of us have progressed in the last twenty years and no longer think as you still do. And condoms do save lives, afterall. In the context of the time, with AIDS being a death senteance and biggots like you being the REASON that some many young homosexuals were suicidal in the first place, I can't fault someone for being taken of guard and saying something awkward in that situation. What he said is perfectly reasonable, in context.
The answers to the rest of your questions are:
Irrelevant.
Why the hell not?
Yes.
Yes.
Let me ask you something: What is your problem here? Younger person dateing older person? Not the best situation, possibly getting into the creep factor, but not illegal, and it happens in every state in the union and every country in the world and has since the begginning of time and always will. Methinks this has more to do with the fact that the young man was gay. And, if that's the case, it's people like YOU that make these young people suicidal in the first place.
It people like you that we don't need in the school system, or teaching our childeren.