There are two facets to this debate, in my view. The first is rather obvious--are czars legal/appropriate/necessary?

The second is raised by a certain Kevin Jennings. All I really know about him is that he is openly homosexual and has allegedly supported NAMBLA in the past (I cannot confirm this), and he is Obama's "school safety czar".

Also, this video struck me as something between disturbing and hilarious. He seems to insinuate that gay people are idiots and thus they need special schools. Why...how...what...huh?

Basically, if he IS a NAMBLA supporter, should he be in charge of school safety programs? Should he be if he is gay?

I'm bringing in a lot of points, I know, but it's just some subjects for debate. As is my custom I will post my views after others have posted theirs.

Cheers

Well if he's an open supporter of pedophiles quite simply no he shouldn't, whether he's gay or not. I realise he's probably not the type to molest boys otherwise an alarm would have been set off. However he's not the kind of person that I'de feel comfortable around and that kind of defeats the purpose of school safety doesn't it?


If he's not then i can't really form an opinion because i don't even know what a czar is and when i google it i get all this political crap that puts me to sleep after the 3rd word.

He's the Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools at the Office of the U.S. Department of Education. Most of his responsibility is to participate in discussions over policies put in place by the U.S. Department of Education and other agency. The only stuff his Office does directly is provide funds for drug and violence prevention activities and "administer the Department's programs relating to character and civics education."
source:Wikipedia

I think in the video he is saying that homosexual students shouldn't attend regular public schools because of the rampant homophobia that is prevalent in such institutions.

Since you can't prove the NAMBLA allegations i wont respond....his homosexuality, according to FOX news(morning people), means that homosexuals students can relate to him and vice versa


on the more broader topic of "Czar's" as a whole...they are legal, they are appropriate, and they are necessary. Everyone needs advisers and assistants. that is basically what these people are, and in the case of Jennings, he has a boss that went through the whole process of confirmation by the Senate so they basically agreed to his appointment already. i assume the others are the same but i haven't looked into them. if you'd like i will though just name a "Czar"

Well, I personally didn't think the whole NAMBLA thing was true, so I didn't really care to touch on it unless someone could confirm it. The real problem I have with these czars is they just add to the morass of bureaucracy that already exists in the US, coming from the president who made the claim that he wasn't going to expand the government. That's already proving to be a pile of crap, though that is more likely a subject of another debate.

The real constitutional issue I see with the czars is they're further infringing on the rights granted in the 10th Amendment by continuing to expand the government's control in the various departments in which they are employed.

This might be slightly off topic, but:



I'm pretty sure that the whole point of the Commie revolution was to overthrow those Czars.

On topic: "they're further infringing on the rights granted in the 10th Amendment by continuing to expand the government's control in the various departments in which they are employed" - but co-ordination within the states is actually a decent thing, no? I mean, if the US are supposed to be a national entity, why shouldn't it have a uniform base?

It is, but they're building new points for the federal government to have control. That's the problem, continually expanding the government's power.

Instating a few advisers is hardly "continually expanding."

Really? Since when was adding departments not expanding the government? That doesn't make much sense at all.