Homosexuality And The New World Order - The Casualties Of Selfishness - Time For "Safe And Drug Free Schools" Czar To Resign – Fraud Obama Had To Rely On His Community Organizing Group To Supply His Health Care Press Conference Participants 


From: rvte61@comcast.net
To: rvte61@comcast.net
Subject: RE: Homosexuality and the New World Order
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:01:35 -0400


Catholic Family News



CFN Interview with Randy Engel on

“Homosexuality and the New World Order”




Introduction – Have you ever wondered how the Homosexual Movement has come to be such a powerful force in American life today? How the movement appears to be able to bend government to its will? How the movement attracts millions upon millions of dollars from Corporate America? These questions, among others, have puzzled me for a long time, so I decided to ask Catholic journalist Randy Engel, author of The Rite of Sodomy (www.newengelpublishing.com) and an authority on homosexuality in the Church and in Society, from whence comes all this power and money and influence that the Homosexual Movement seems to enjoys not only in the United States but abroad as well. jv

John VennariFor years, I have been unable to understand how and why the Homosexual Movement in the United States wields such great power and influence? Can you enlighten me and our readers on this question?

Randy  Engel – There is no doubt that the Homosexual Movement, is currently at the vanguard of organized sexual deviancy and that it has tremendous clout and resources of all kinds, far beyond what its small numbers would logically dictate.

From a historical perspective, we know that the advancement of homosexuality is part and parcel of the modern Sexual Liberation Movement, started in the late 1920s and culminating in the formation of the World League for Sex Reform in 1928. The main theme of the League was clearly eugenic – “race betterment through selective breeding,” but its platform also included the repeal of anti-sodomy laws and the legitimization of sodomy as an alternative form of sexual expression. In addition, the WLSR also promoted and lobbied for promoted contraception, sterilization, abortion, population control, sex instruction for the young, divorce and “open” marriages, pornography, suicide, euthanasia, artificial reproduction, and government operated and medically supervised brothels.

Pope Pius XI responded promptly with his great encyclical Casti Connubii (On Chaste Wedlock) in December 1930, thereby successfully defending the fort of Christian morality for another generation.

As for the Homosexual Movement in the United States, up until the late 1960s, it remained largely an underground leftist affair organized by such men as Marxist Henry Hay. It was a loosely organized, fringe network congregating in major port cities such as San Francisco and New York and was, in the public eye, mainly associated with avant garde occupations and sexual libertines. Its political clout, financial resources, and influence on American sexual mores were very limited.

JV – And then came Stonewall?

RE – Yes, and then came the Stonewall Inn riots of June 1969 which, we are told, became the “flash point” of the Homosexual Liberation Movement worldwide. Seemingly overnight, “gay” leaders spontaneously organized themselves into a well-oiled political machine; they staged press conferences in major cities which were covered by the world media, millions of dollars flowed into the movement’s heretofore empty coffers, and leading public figures decried the injustices allegedly suffered by homosexuals. What had been traditionally viewed as a vice to be suppressed by government became a virtue and a civil right to be protected and advanced by the State.

JV – I take it you don’t buy this official version of Stonewall?

RE – Not for one moment. Events of this magnitude take careful planning and coordination and a great deal of money. They do not occur by spontaneous combustion. The Homosexual Revolution, like any revolution worth its salt, started at the top, with the wealthy and powerful, and not with a group of disgruntled clientele of transvestites, homosexuals, and young male hustlers who frequented the small Greenwich Village bar and who were later joined by sympathetic residents in a violent melee with local police.

JV – Do you have any evidence to back up your claim? 

RE – Yes.  I have, for example, the statement of Dr. Richard Day, a former Medical Director of Planned Parenthood-World Population and a Rockefeller protégée, who, just months before Stonewall publicly stated that “homosexuals will be given permission to be homosexual.”

JV – Permission from whom?

RE – From the elite of theNew World System.”

JV – I think we need to back up for a moment. Can you explain the date and context of Day’s statement?

RE – Dr. Day gave his historic speech describing the “New World System” to the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society on March 20, 1969. Titled, “Family Planning: Infant Mortality, Gene Frequency, Abortion and Other Considerations,” Day’s speech described in broad strokes, the New World System which he said was already in place and functioning.  In his lengthy discussion of population control, he stated that in the future there would be “sex without reproduction” (aka contraception, sterilization, abortion) and “reproduction without sex” (in vitro fertilization, artificial insemination). Day’s comment on homosexuality followed on the heels of his prediction that “Abortion will no longer be a crime,” – that it would be accepted as normal and be paid for by taxes for those who could not pay for their own abortions. This was four years before Roe vs. Wade.

JV – Can you cite another example?

RE– On March 11, 1969, just nine days before Day made his statement on homosexuals being given permission to act out, Frederick S. Jaffe, Vice President of Planned Parenthood-World Population sent a memorandum titled “Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the U.S.” to Bernard Berelson, President of John D. Rockefeller III’s Population Council. Listed under the section on “Social Constraints” is “Encourage increased homosexuality.”

It is a matter of public record, of course, that the Rockefeller family and its many “charitable” fronts like the aforementioned Population Council and Planned Parenthood  have been promoting all kinds of sexual deviancy for decades including sodomy. The reader may recall that it was the philanthropoids of the Rockefeller Foundation that initially funded the pro-homosexual and pro-pedophile research of sexual deviant, Alfred C. Kinsey, at the University of Indiana from 1941 to 1949 to the tune of $ 414,000.

JV – So what you are saying is that the source of the Homosexual Movement’s power and influence was not generated from within the movement itself, but from without – from the powerful foundations and other entities that rule from behind the scenes?

RE – Exactly.

When discussing these powerful U.S.-based philanthropic foundations, technically referred to as “privately organized public institutions” there are a few things one must keep in mind.

First, there is nothing “charitable” about these groups. They were, from the beginning, created by Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller to be agents of social change and control, and they have used their funds effectively to support a wide range of anti-life and anti-family initiatives including “Gay Liberation.”

With their great prestige and virtually unlimited and unrestricted financial resources, these foundations can go where others fear to tread and pave the way for public acceptance of all forms of sexual deviancy, until the time is ripe for the NWO elite to take over and the particular deviancy in question is institutionalized as official public policy, and the financial burden shifted to the shoulders of the American taxpayer. They did it with eugenics. They did it with birth control including abortion. And now they are doing it with homosexuality.

JV – Didn’t a group of billionaire insiders meet secretly late this spring to discuss increasing their philanthropic output?

RE – You’re probably referring to the May 5, 2009 meeting held at Rockefeller University which was called by Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and David Rockefeller, Jr. Among those in attendance were Oprah Winfrey, Ted Turner and George Soros and other anti-life servants of the NWO. Not surprisingly, an increased commitment to population control was at the top of the list. This means that American had better prepare themselves for a new wave of “population bomb” propaganda, as well as an increase in “gay” and pro-abortion advocacy.

JV – What other groups besides these large foundations are supporting the Gay Liberation Movement today?

RE – One of the largest sources of support for the Homosexual Movement and Gay Agenda is  Corporate America Coke-Cola, Pepsi, Ford (Globe), General Motors,  American Express, Best Buy, Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae, Mellon Financial, Shell, Dell, Avon, Estee Lauder, Coors, General Electric, General Mills, Kraft, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Hyatt, State farm, Avis, Starbucks, Subway, Gameboy, Ikea, JC Penney, Sears, Sam’s Club, Target, Wal-Mart (Pride), Weight Watchers, IBM, Intell, AT&T, and on and on.

I suspect, although I cannot prove, that virtually all major U.S. business corporations have an agreement with the NWO elite that requires them to “donate” a portion of their profits to advance the various pet “charities” of the New World Order. Pro-life groups are not on the list. 

The Federal government, of course, has done its part to advance the Homosexual agenda. Among the Federal Agencies and programs that have supported the Homosexual Movement are the Center for Disease Control, CETA (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act), the National Institutes of Health, Legal Services Corporation, National Park Service, National Public Radio (funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting), to name but a few. The Internal Revenue Service has awarded the 501 (c) (3) tax deductible status to homosexual organizations that “foster an understanding and tolerance of homosexuals.”

When you add the power of the liberal mass media that has always backed the Homosexual Movement, you’re looking at one powerful propaganda machine.

JV – Did the AIDS crisis hinder or help the Homosexual Movement?

RE – In terms of finances, government-sponsored AIDS programs proved to be the goose that laid the golden egg, and millions of dollars of “health” funds has made their way into homosexual political/activist organizations. AIDS has the added “benefit” of helping to reduce the “surplus population,” in keeping with the New World Order’s relentless  campaign against the proliferation of people. Unfortunately, the useful idiots that dominate the “gay” leadership have yet to figure that out, or if they have, they are silent so as not to loose their salaries, or possibly their lives. 

JV – How about financial aid and support from churches?

RE – That question would require a book to answer, but yes, almost all liberal mainline churches, synagogues, and religious orders contribute financially and in other ways to promote and sustain the Homosexual Movement. That would include the American Catholic Church especially the bishops’ bureaucracy, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Finally, I would like to mention the role that Organized Crime, as a functionary of the NWO, plays in supporting the Homosexual Movement. There is a symbiotic relationship between the two since criminal syndicates own many homosexual-frequented establishments such as “gay” bars and baths. Organized Crime also supplies drugs, pornography and young male prostitutes which are staples of the homosexual anti-culture. 

JV – I can understand why Organized Crime would have a vested interest in promoting and funding the Homosexual Movement. I can also understand, given the large amount of disposable income that many homosexual have, why the movement would attract some support from Corporate America. But I don’t quite understand what the elite of the New World Order has to gain by promoting homosexuality?

RE – Again, John, I’d need a book to answer that question thoroughly, but let me give you a simple response by referring back once again to Dr. Richard Day’s speech on the New World System.

According to Day, the sine quo non of the New World Order is population control. While we pro-lifers generally associate population control with contraception, abortion, sterilization and the like, this is a very limited view of the meaning of the term. Day makes it very clear that for the Puppet Masters of the NWO, population control has a much broader meaning. It means total control over every aspect of human life – education, economics and finances, religion, entertainment, transportation, medicine, the arts, national defense, politics, medicine, science and technology, sports, law enforcement, agriculture and farming, and ultimately, who shall live and who shall die.

JV – So population control is, in fact, people control?

RE – Correct.  

JV – Alright then, how does homosexuality fit into the NWO scheme?

RE – Well, first let me state that there have always been two natural enemies of totalitarianism of any stripe – the family and religion. The advancement of homosexuality and other forms of deviant sexual behavior, as we have seen from the current battle over “gay marriage,” is designed to undermine both marriage and family, as well as the natural law and traditional morality. The goal of the NWO is to create a generation of polymorphous perverts – narcissistic, isolated and rootless individuals who, being enslaved by their own unnatural passions, will not present any serious opposition to their new slave masters.  

JV – Once this goal is achieved, will homosexuals continue to play a special role in the NWO?

RE – No. This is highly unlikely. As Dr. Day made quite clear, the NWO prides itself on stability and loyalty to the New Order and homosexuals are notoriously unstable and unreliable. So, having served their purpose, when the time comes, they will be systematically eliminated as enemies of the state.

JV – Randy, you have painted a rather bleak scenario of life under the New World Order and the role of the Gay Liberation Movement in helping to bring it about. Do you foresee any viable opposition coming from the Catholic Church with regard to stemming the Homosexual Movement’s advance and that of the NWO?

RE – As I document in my latest book, The Rite of Sodomy (www.newengelpublishing.com), thus far, the Church has been unwilling or unable to stem the tide of homosexuality both within its own ranks and in society at large. Resistance to so-called “gay marriage” and other abominations has come from individual traditional Catholics, from Evangelicals, and other concerned citizens.

As for leading an organized opposition to the NWO, as Day stated in 1969, “You think the churches will oppose us. I tell you they will help us.” And he did not make any exception for the post-Conciliar Catholic Church.

JV – Recently, I read for the first time, the complete transcript of “The New Order of Barbarians,” which contains the recollections of Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, a Pittsburgh pro-life pediatrician who was in attendance at Day’s infamous lecture in March 1979, as well as Dr. Dunegan’s interview with you on the NWO.  The accuracy of his predictions chilled me to the bone. Is that transcript available to CFN readers on the internet?

RE – Yes, the U.S. Coalition for Life has just posted the official transcript of Dr. Dunegan’s report on the Day talk, free of charge, on its Research Library webpage at http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=89&action=inline. An audio boxed set of the text (CD or audio cassette) is also available from the USCL, Box 315, Export, PA 15632 for $24.95, postage included. I guarantee your life will never be the same after you hear “The New Order of Barbarians.” Mine certainly wasn’t.

JV – Are you discouraged by the fact that virtually every prediction made by Dr. Day in 1969 concerning the NWO has come to past?  

RE – I would be lying if I said that the anti-Christian agenda of the NWO does not concern me. It should concern every Catholic, indeed every human being on this planet.

But I also know that God is still in charge of the world. As we read in The Imitation of Christ by Thomas à Kempis, “… For man proposes, but God disposes; neither is the way of man in his own hands.”

I do not know what the future holds for us on this earth, but I firmly believe that as a member of the Church Militant, if we put our faith in Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother, humanity’s solitary boast, we shall not be disappointed and the final victory will be ours. Alto quien vive!!

JV – Which means?

RE – Loosely translated it means “Anyone on the battlefield who is still alive, stand up and fight!!”



  1. For ordering information and reviews on The Rite of Sodomy see the new website at www.newengelpublishing.com.
  2. The text of the “New Order of Barbarians” is available at http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=89&action=inline.



August 2009  


Contact Randy Engel at rvte61@comcast.net


Subscription information for CFN is available at









Posted: Monday October 5, 2009 at 1:16 pm EST by Judie Brown


Over the past 40 or so years, a desensitization of conscience has occurred. This tragic turn of events is often not recognized in those places of influence where public policies are forged. And younger individuals don’t realize that they are part of a growing trend in murderous solutions to otherwise pesky human problems. 

44 years ago, it became the law of the land. Based on the fancy footwork and political agenda of members of the United States Supreme Court, chemical pollution of the human body — the practice of birth control — became equated   with a right to privacy. Establishing the stepping stones from contraception for married couples to contraception for the unmarried to abortion on demand wasn’t as clear at the time. Now it is painfully obvious.

The case that started it all was Griswold v. Connecticut. As professors Robert P. George and David L. Tubbs explained,

…the Supreme Court soon transformed the “right to privacy” (the reference to marriage quickly disappeared) into a powerful tool for making public policy. In Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972), the Court changed a right of spouses — justified in Griswold precisely by reference to the importance of marriage — into a right of unmarried adults to buy and use contraceptives. Then, in a move that plunged the United States into a “culture war,” the Court ruled in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton (1973) that this generalized “right to privacy” also encompassed a woman’s virtually unrestricted right to have an abortion.

The aftermath is obvious. Contraceptives became popular to entire generations of Americans. These chemicals and devices were easily marketed to the vulnerable and the ignorant under the guise of a mythical right to do whatever one wished sexually as long as some sort of “protection” was being used. Respect for self and loved ones went out the window in favor of one-night stands, illicit affairs and worse. “It’s all about me” became the slogan of choice.

The result was that a so-called unplanned pregnancy became synonymous with a health problem that required a quick fix. A couple, upon learning they had conceived a baby, were (and are) horrified. Sometimes the mother wants the baby and the father does not. Sometimes it’s the other way around. And sometimes it’s the grandparents who don’t want the baby to be born. Regardless of the situation, the preborn child, who should be welcomed and accepted into the human family, is rejected and must be eliminated. 

In other words, the unquestionable respect due every human person, simply and only because the individual is a human being, slowly became nothing more than an arcane concept destined for the trash heap of the “with it” culture.

Lest we forget, the main players in the Griswold case were the never-to-be-trusted Planned Parenthood ideologues. Appellant Estelle Griswold was Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. She was joined by appellant C. Lee Buxton, M.D., a licensed physician and a professor at Yale Medical School who also served as medical director for the Planned Parenthood center in New Haven. The case began when Griswold and Buxton were arrested and found guilty of providing “illegal contraception.” It is my undocumented suspicion that the entire series of events was orchestrated by Planned Parenthood’s public policy masters of deceit, and perhaps even a Supreme Court clerk or two. That’s a personal theory, but it sure makes a lot of sense to me today.

Prior to that time, I am told, there were condom vending machines in gas stations, and that sort of thing; but with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the birth control pill, coupled with the Supreme Court’s supercilious discovery of a mythical right to privacy in matters of human sexuality, a new era emerged. Americans became convinced that abstinence and purity were passé while fornication and adultery were in vogue. 

It didn’t take long after Griswold for all of the dominos to fall into place. By January of 1973, the Court’s backroom goals were achieved in spades. Abortion became nothing more than a simple “decision between a woman and her doctor.” What has happened during the years following Roe and Doe is not only tragic, but destructive to the fabric that holds a civilized society together. From that push in 1965, faith in God and His laws slowly became antiquated. In place of faith in a Supreme Being, we witnessed an escalating faith in man himself as the god of his personal world, regardless of the costs to others who might cross his self-centered path.

Sound harsh? Perhaps these recent news stories will put things into perspective:

In Los Angeles this past month, Antonia Gomez was accused of fatally slashing the throats of her two daughters. Though the woman has plead not guilty to the charges, it is of interest that she cut herself after allegedly killing her 11- and 17-year-old daughters.

In Thousand Oaks, California, a father killed his two sons and took his own life by taking an overdose of drugs.

In North Carolina, a 15-year-old pregnant teen was fatally shot. Her baby, 32 weeks of age, was delivered alive and later died. The perpetrator of this double homicide has not been identified, though a “person of interest” is under investigation.

In Arlington, Tennessee, a man is facing a double murder charge after shooting his pregnant girlfriend, whose baby was due at any time. It is alleged that the couple had argued over an abortion and the father of the child intended to kill his baby and his baby’s mother. 

The escalating violence in this country, particularly that of parents against their children, both born and preborn, should not be overlooked, even though examining it carefully might cause some discomfort. Perhaps the status quo really isn’t all that humane after all. Perhaps we, as a people, are becoming barbaric. 

So let's begin to examine the relationship between a declining respect for the value of the human person and the increasing incidents of such horrific crimes. It could prove to be useful as we strive to raise public awareness of the actual humanity of this person whose identity has been relegated to a simple “reproductive health” issue. 

To me, the bottom line is obvious. For as surely as contraception and abortion devalue human beings, by placing self-interest ahead of self-giving, so too does this very same attitude spill over into other areas of life, whether we wish to admit it or not.

One example of this is the work of the Elliot Institute. Dr. David C. Reardon studied the psychological effects of abortion, and he noted a relationship between abortion and violent behavior later in the woman’s life.   

Another example was proffered by Jill Stanek, who addressed the violent killings on the Virginia Tech campus in Blacksburg, Virginia, a couple of years ago and made the insightful comment:

The practice of abortion — typically (and understandably) highest in cities and counties occupied by big state universities — argues powerfully to every participant that the taking of a tiny human life is just fine so long as it's accomplished quietly, antiseptically, and within the law...

Some might suggest that her correlation is a far stretch, but I would argue otherwise. The reason is this: It is difficult to step back and objectively examine what the culture of death and its terminology has done to the national psyche. We have been hearing phrases such as “it’s all about me,” “it’s my right to choose” and “reproductive rights” for such a long time that most Americans have stopped thinking about what such terms mean, including whether or not they affect our attitudes toward human dignity. 

The phrases sound good and life goes on. But it really doesn’t; not for those children whose parents have killed them, not for those expectant young mothers whose boyfriends or husbands have killed them and not for those millions of preborn children who are indeed silently, antiseptically murdered. 

We live in a culture that is increasingly fixated on instant solutions for every problem. Killing is clearly among the most popular options, though few would admit it in the vast majority of cases — those deaths that are caused by chemical, medical or surgical abortion. But the stain of their blood remains nonetheless. With each death, we as a people are dehumanizing each other just a little bit more.

It seems almost surreal that so many could be so blind to the casualties of selfishness.

Judie Brown





Amid Vatican investigations, cardinal 'affirms' members of Leadership Conference of Women Religious

Catholic World News
October 05, 2009

Amid two Vatican investigations of American women religious-- an apostolic visitation of active women’s religious communities, and a Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith investigation into the orthodoxy of the annual conferences of Leadership Conference of Women Religious-- Cardinal Seán O’Malley of Boston has sent a “letter of affirmation” to the members of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious on behalf of the US bishops’ committee on clergy, consecrated life and vocations.

After praising Women & Spirit (a museum exhibit devoted to the contributions of women religious to American life), the cardinal adds:

Allow me also, both personally and on behalf of Committee on Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations, to thank you for having responded to the call to religious life. The Church is grateful for all that your communities have done, and continue to do, to advance the mission of the Church, especially in the areas of health care, education, social services and pastoral ministry, as are highlighted in the exhibit.

I share with you the recognition that recent years have been a challenging time for religious communities. Our founders endured many challenges and obstacles with a zeal that inspired their prayer and work. The Church needs your gifts of perseverance, commitment and fidelity, and your unique charism, as guided by the Holy Spirit. Please know that your ministry is greatly valued. Together let us go forward with the work of building up the Kingdom of God.


See the following link, the title of which, speaks for itself. 


Reverend Mother Libertine - Enough With Apostates Masquerading As Catholic







----- Forwarded Message ----
From: AFA Action Alert <contact@afa.net>

Sent: Monday, October 5, 2009 6:48:10 PM
Subject: Time for "Safe and Drug Free Schools" Czar to resign



Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire e-mail list of family and friends.
Time for "Safe and Drug Free Schools" Czar to resign

Contact Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and your members of Congress today!
October 6, 2009

Kevin Jennings is an open homosexual who is now serving the Department of Education as President Obama's "Safe and Drug Free Schools" czar.
Jennings is the founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which pushes so-called "anti-bullying" policies which even GLSEN admits are really about promoting "affirmation" of homosexual behavior in the school system.
Jennings is intolerant of the "religious right," 90% of whom enroll their children in public schools, and said in a 2000 speech "I'm trying not to say '[F---] 'em'...I don't care what they think. Drop dead!"
He wants homosexual indoctrination of students at all levels, having written the forward to a book entitled Queering Elementary Education, and saying in 2004, "Ex-gay messages have no place in our nation's public schools...There is no ‘other side' when you're talking about lesbian, gay and bisexual students."
By his own admission he failed his legal duty to report what he believed to be a case of statutory rape when a young student approached him for counsel after the boy had been preyed on by an older adult in a local bus station bathroom. Jennings' main piece of advice: "I hope you know how to use a condom."
He writes in his 2006 memoir without any remorse of frequently getting "drunk and stoned" when he was a teenager.
Kevin Jennings is not qualified under any ethical standard to be entrusted with the safety of our nation's public school children.


Take Action!

Send an E-mail to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan urging him to call for Jennings' resignation and ask your Congressmen to also press Duncan for his resignation.
It is very important that you forward this alert to your friends and family members.


Thank you for caring enough to get involved. If you feel our efforts are worthy of support, would you consider making a small tax-deductible contribution to help us continue?




Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association






Dear Secretary Duncan, Senators Specter, Casey, and Representative Thompson:




Kevin Jennings is not qualified under any ethical standard to be entrusted with the safety of our nation's public school children. Therefore I urge Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to immediately call for Jennings's resignation. I also call on my members of Congress to urge the Secretary of Education to ask for Mr. Jennings' resignation.

Jennings is the founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which pushes so-called "anti-bullying" policies which even GLSEN admits are really about promoting "affirmation" of homosexual behavior in the school system.

Jennings is intolerant of the "religious right," 90% of whom enroll their children in public schools, and said in a 2000 speech "I'm trying not to say '[F---] 'em'...I don't care what they think. Drop dead!"

He wants homosexual indoctrination of students at all levels, having written the forward to a book entitled "Queering Elementary Education," and saying in 2004, "Ex-gay messages have no place in our nation's public schools...There is no 'other side' when you're talking about lesbian, gay and bisexual students."

By his own admission he failed his legal duty to report what he believed to be a case of statutory rape when a young student approached him for counsel after the boy had been preyed on by an older adult in a local bus station bathroom. Jennings' main piece of advice: "I hope you know how to use a condom."

He writes in his 2006 memoir without any remorse of frequently getting "drunk and stoned" when he was a teenager.

Jennings is on record praising the founder of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), Harry Hay. How's that for safe schools as Jennings publicly stated that he was inspired by one of the biggest promoters of pedophilia in the country in Hay!

Jennings extreme positions in regard to homosexual advocacy fly in the face of what is supposed to be the primary goal of the state in promoting the common good which is trashed by promoting proven changeable aberrant lifestyles which have been shown to be physically, psychologically, socially, and economically ruinous, let alone the religious connotations important to people of faith and right reason who genuinely care about their children which Jennings evinces nothing of.

It is time for the "Safe and Drug Free Schools" Czar to resign. It's also time to ask the question of just how people like Jennings are showing up in the Obama administration without being properly vetted!



Gary L. Morella








Subject: Today is National Call Congress Day!
From: eagle@eagleforum.org
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 05:07:24 -0400

Maybe you can't walk the halls of the Capitol. But our message can.

Maybe you can't walk the halls of the Capitol. But our message can.


Today is National Call Congress Day!

Join with Americans Nationwide and Light Up the Capitol Switchboard Today!



October 6, 2009



Please take a few moments today to telephone Congress about the issues most important to you!  Of course, we urge you to continue to let your representative and Senators know that you remain strongly opposed to the left's efforts to overhaul one-sixth of the U.S. economy through any of their so-called health care reform proposals.


health care


Yesterday, President Obama held a press conference at the White House with a backdrop of doctors supportive of his government-run health care plan.  After about 5 minutes of research, we found that Doctors for America, the group to which the doctors belong, was formerly known as the campaign group Doctors for Obama (note how this site instructs you to visit drsforamerica.org), a group that falls under the umbrella of Obama's ongoing community organizing and legislative agenda campaign group, "Organizing for America."  Obama's hosting of this activist group at the White House is a testament to the true lack of support for his health care proposal within the medical profession--Obama had to rely on his community organizing group to supply his health care press conference participants! 




Even if you have already called your Represenatative and both of your Senators to voice your opposition to ObamaCare, please call AGAIN.  Please also urge at least two friends, family members, patients, or small business owners to do the same.


Only with your continued action and dedication can we win this battle to defeat a government takeover of health care.  Let's pull together as a nation and melt the Capitol Switchboard today!



Further Reading:


Health Care Overhaul Is Drawing Close to Floor Debate  NYTimes


Privately, Barack Obama Backs Public Option  Chicago Tribune