A New Low… Charles Johnson Now Supporting Child Porn in Classrooms & Fisting Kits at School Functions

Sick.  Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs reached a new low yesterday.
Johnson attacked this blog for reporting again on Barack Obama’s safe schools czar. According to Charles, if you point out anything about Barack Obama’s “Safe” Schools Czar Kevin Jennings’ sordid record of promoting explicit, outrageously age-inappropriate sexual filth in the classroom you are a “homophobe.” He must have started reading the Soros-linked Media Matters since he flipped.

For the record, Obama’s “safe” schools czar has been pushing porn books into our children’s classrooms for nearly twenty years. His GLSEN organization’s recommended books include stories of first graders having orgies in the bathroom and teenagers being raped. The children’s books he promoted have pictures of men having sex while boy scouts watch. GLSEN’s recommended reading for teens also includes pamphlets promoting leather bars and public sex in parks. His organization that he founded in the ’90’s and led until 2008 still pushes these books and several other child porn books on 7th through 12th grade students. The safe schools czar organization GLSEN held conferences where they lectured on fisting to children and handed out fisting packs to children.

According to Charles Johnson if you disagree with this radical sexual agenda for young teens you are a homophobe. He must have missed my links to Gay Patriot who also denounced Jennings’ radical agenda. Are they homophobes too?
Shame on you Charles Johnson.

Yesterday, I reported here that a Bulgarian website had enough courage to report on the Jenning’s scandal, one of the most underreported stories of 2009. This infuriated Charles Johnson who labeled the Bulgarian website a conspiracy website for its previous reporting. Like many leftists Charles believes that by labeling websites (even when the facts don’t back him up) you neuter their arguments. Of course, this is not true. Leftists like Charles believe if you can’t win an argument then smear the source instead.

More importantly, Charles Johnson refused to denounce Kevin Jennings’ radical agenda. Apparently, Johnson approves of lecturing students on fisting, asking them about “spitting or swallowing“, handing out leather bar guides to teens, and pushing filthy books about first graders having orgies at school, etc.
Shame on you, Charles Johnson.

UPDATE: Charles Johnson is now threatening me for posting this about his defense of Kevin Jennings and Jennings’ agenda. Until Charles denounces this agenda this post stands. And, I advise Johnson to quit slandering and threatening this blog and this website.

UPDATE 2: Tom Stelane adds:

I just commented on LGF, asking Charles or anyone else there to go a little more in-depth in disagreeing with GP other than by asserting that ‘you’re bad’ – you know, like maybe dealing with the actual facts surrounding Jennings instead of making sweeping general assertions. I was polite and stayed on topic even though the LGFers couldn’t refrain from getting in digs at me. I only asked, did Jennings do or not do these things in question? I did not violate his comment policy but Charles promptly deleted my comments, banned me, and commented that I am a ‘moron.’

Court adjourned.

UPDATE 3: Brian added this:

Hey Jim,

I’m not sure how much you know about the law, but as an attorney, I can tell you that Charles has about as good a chance of suing you as I do of dating Pamela Anderson.

There is a Supreme Court precedent, NY-Times v. Sullivan that establishes that for public figures (which Charles would be considered) something called an “actual malice” standard has to be met; Charles would have to prove that, not only was your blog false, malicious, and damaging to him, but that YOU WERE PERSONALLY AWARE that it was completely false, malicious, and damaging to him.

Whether defending Kevin Jennings means supporting what that pervert did is a matter open to interpretation. There is no way in HELL that a public figure could sue someone over that posting. Absolutely zero percent chance. Charles would have to prove that you were personally aware that your headline was false and malicious; even if objectively your headline/posting was false, if you could show that you had ANY REASON to believe that it was true, then he has no grounds.

There are HUGE First Amendment concerns that happen when a public figure sues for libel, although I have no doubt that doofus who deletes dissenting accounts from his blog understands that.

UPDATE 4: Even RS McCain tweeted on the latest Johnsonoia.

UPDATE 5: Jihad Watch has more on the libel king.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning