Obama's Safe School Czar Kevin Jennings is Keynote Speaker at 2001 GLSEN Conference which Gave High School Students' "Fisting Kits"

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/08/fistgate-ii-high-school-students-given-fisting-kits-at-kevin-jennings-2001-glsen-conference/

In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money. During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During another workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?” The unbelievable audio clip is posted here. Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings is the founder of GLSEN. He was paid $273,573.96 as its executive director in 2007. Jennings was the keynote speaker at the 2000 GLSEN conference.

This is Obama's "Safe School" czar! What company our President keeps...

Fairness Doctrine of the Internet: Net Neutrality

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=509810

Not much was said when $7.2 billion was included in the stimulus bill "to accelerate broadband deployment in unserved and underserved areas and to strategic institutions that are likely to create jobs or provide significant public benefits." The administration has big plans for the Internet — like controlling it.

They noted that after only a decade, "roughly two-thirds of Americans connect through high-speed communications that are available to 95% of households."

"Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn't value the Internet for its public interest benefits," Lloyd wrote. "Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits, they must control what content you see and how you get it." Lloyd feels government should be the voice controlling what you see and hear.

The irony here is that it has been the Internet, talk radio and cable news that have provided access to unheard and suppressed voices. News and commentary no longer have to get past the gatekeepers at CBS, ABC, NBC, the Washington Post and the New York Times. And judging from ratings and circulation, they do not deserve to be called mainstream anymore. It is they who are the fringe media.

Bloggers and talk show callers now have a voice. Conservatives have competed in the marketplace of ideas and won. It's not their fault no one wanted to listen to Air America or that Web sites such as FreeRepublic.com and HotAir.com constantly pull back the curtain on the wizards of this administration.

Net neutrality is not designed to liberate, but to suppress. It's the Fairness Doctrine of the Internet that, like diversity in talk radio and the war on Fox News, is designed to marginalize and silence those who disagree with those in power.

Mark Lloyd on Net Neutrality

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/21/7210

Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn't value the Internet for its public interest benefits. Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits, they must control what content you see and how you get it. Their plans could have dire consequences for those whose voices are often marginalized by our nation's media system.

So does this mean the government will then control what content you have access to?

Obama's Manufacturing Czar Ron Bloom

"We know that the free market is a joke."
"We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun."

Congressman Wants all 'Czars' to Testify

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/57849-congressman-wants-all-czars-to-testify

Good, it's called checks and balances.

Van Jones: A Radical, Anti-War Record Producer as Well?

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=8166
Jones at 3:45

Environmental Racism?

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2008/10/qa-van-jones

Well, the only reason that we have the unsustainable accounting that we have right now is because incinerators, dumping grounds, and sacrifice zones were put where poor people live.

The civil rights movement took several decades. The women's rights movement took several decades. Other environmental movements are taking several decades.

You may have noticed there's this jackass in the White House that's not letting anything happen, whether you're talking about health care or getting out of the war or fixing the energy crisis or solving global warming or getting the economy to work. So right now nothing's happening.

You've got to put a price on carbon; that's got to be a top priority for the new administration.

That's going to be called "green-collar work" or "green work"—we're going to fight over the definition.

FCC Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd: Forget the Fairness Doctrine

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/07/lloyd_fairness.html

"In our report, we call for ownership rules that we think will create greater local diversity of programming, news, and commentary. And we call for more localism by putting teeth into the licensing rules. But we do not call for a return to the Fairness Doctrine."

"Despite what we thought was fairly stark evidence of conservative bias, despite clear proposals to address that bias, Rush Limbaugh and other distortionists insisted that we were calling for a “return” of the Fairness Doctrine. But as we wrote, 'simply reinstating the Fairness Doctrine will do little to address the gap between conservative and progressive talk unless the underlying elements of the public trustee doctrine are enforced, in particular, the requirements of local accountability and the reasonable airing of important matters.' ”

"But the image of eager federal bureaucrats peering over the shoulders of all of America’s radio talk show hosts with a stopwatch in hand is as absurd as it is impractical."

"We want to create more ownership opportunities and more speech focused on local interests. We want either clear rules that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to the public for the use of its property."

"All of these public policy objectives are there for Congress and the FCC to act upon within current law. There is no need to return to the Fairness Doctrine."

Recommendations from "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf

• National radio ownership by any one entity should not exceed 5 percent of the total number of AM and FM broadcast stations.
• In terms of local ownership, no one entity should control more than 10 percent of the total commercial radio stations in a given market
• All radio broadcast licensees should be required to use a standardized form to provide information on how the station serves the public interest in a variety of areas.
• Provide a license to radio broadcasters for a term no longer than three years.
• Require radio broadcast licensees to regularly show that they are operating on behalf of the public interest and provide public documentation and viewing of how they are meeting these obligations.
• Demand that the radio broadcast licensee announce when its license is about to expire and demonstrate how the public can participate in the processto determine whether the license should be extended. In addition, the FCC should be required to maintain a website to conduct on-line discussions and facilitate interaction with public about licensee conduct.
• If commercial radio broadcasters are unwilling to abide by these regulatory standards or the FCC is unable to effectivelyregulate in the public interest, a spectrum use fee should be levied on owners to directly support local, regional, and national public broadcasting.

Recommendations from Mark Llyod's Prologue to a Farce: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/print/52435
Prologue to a Farce on Google Books

(Page 277) "Broadcasters should pay for the great privilege of a federally protected license to operate a business by using the publicly owned spectrum."

(Page 278) “Federal and regional broadcast operations and local stations should be funded at levels commensurate with or above those spending levels at which commercial operations are funded,” Lloyd wrote. “This funding should come from license fees charged to commercial broadcasters. Funding should not come from congressional appropriations. Sponsorship should be prohibited at all public broadcasters.”

Carol Browner: U.S. Energy Czar

http://www.therightperspective.org/2009/01/10/obama-energy-czar-socialist-group-memeber/

"Carol Browner has been exposed as being a member of Socialist International, a highly influential group that advocates the implementation of global government."

Cass Sunstein: U.S. Regulatory Czar

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96301

"Advocated a "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet that would require opposing opinions be linked and also has suggested angry e-mails should be prevented from being sent by technology that would require a 24-hour cooling off period."

"Sunstein first proposed the notion of imposing mandatory "electronic sidewalks" for the Net. These "sidewalks" would display links to opposing viewpoints."

"We propose a Civility Check that can accurately tell whether the e-mail you're about to send is angry and caution you, 'warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. do you really and truly want to send it?'" they wrote. "(Software already exists to detect foul language. What we are proposing is more subtle, because it is easy to send a really awful e-mail message that does not contain any four-letter words.) A stronger version, which people could choose or which might be the default, would say, 'warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. this will not be sent unless you ask to resend in 24 hours.' With the stronger version, you might be able to bypass the delay with some work (by inputting, say, your Social Security number and your grandfather’s birth date, or maybe by solving some irritating math problem!)."

In a 2007 speech at Harvard he called for banning hunting in the U.S.
In his book "Radicals in Robes," he wrote: "[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms."

In his 2004 book, "Animal Rights," he wrote: "Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives …"

In "Animal Rights: A Very Short Primer," he wrote "[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, in scientific experiments, and in agriculture."

Van Jones: U.S. Green Czar

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=94771

"Jones was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. That organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area."

"Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested. 'I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist.'"