Showing posts with label SafeLibrariesReviewed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SafeLibrariesReviewed. Show all posts

Monday, June 30, 2025

Sam Shoemate: Unmasking Marxism in Our Public Libraries, Featuring Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries

JUNE 18, 2025 · 1 HR 2 MIN
Unmasking Marxism in Our Public Libraries
Our Country Our Choice

SUMMARY:

On this episode of Our Country Our Voice, Dan Kleinman discuss the alarming infiltration of Marxist ideology in the American education system, particularly through public libraries.  Dan shares his personal experience that led him to investigate the inappropriate content in children's books and the role of the American Library Association (ALA) in promoting such materials.  He highlights the funding mechanisms of the ALA, the legal tactics used to silence dissent, and the need for grassroots movements to reclaim control over educational content.  The discussion highlights the ideological justifications used by proponents of this agenda and emphasizes the importance of community action in combating these influences. In this conversation, Sam and Dan of SafeLibraries discuss the alarming rise of radical ideologies infiltrating libraries and educational institutions.  They explore how these ideologies are being pushed through policies from organizations like the American Library Association, leading to the indoctrination of children.  The discussion emphasizes the need for community resistance, parental involvement, and grassroots activism to reclaim libraries and protect children from inappropriate content. They also address the historical context of Marxism in society and the importance of empowering parents to challenge these ideologies.

TRANSCRIPT:

Welcome to Our Country Our Voice. One of the greatest threats to our nation, which I believe is the greatest threat to our nation, is the proliferation of Marxism, both in our education system and throughout our institutions, those being the federal government or the military, which I've talked about extensively. You've heard me bring this up in the past. But we need to talk about how this takes hold at the grassroots level. And somebody has been doing a lot of research and pushing back on this over the last however many years, specifically in the public library system. I'm going to bring on a man named Dan Kleinman who has been investigating and exposing the proliferation of Marxist propaganda in our children's books in the public library system. So Dan, welcome to the show.

Thank you very much, Sam.

Tell me about yourself and tell me how you got started doing this.

Well, you know, I'm just like every other father, frankly. And I got started doing this because I sent my kid to a public school. And on the fourth day of kindergarten, she brought a book home for me to read to her. "Hey, daddy, would you read this to me?" And I was like, this is it. I've reached the top. I have a beautiful wife, a house in the country, and I got to read a public school book to my kid. You know, that's it. That's the American dream. 

Sure, yeah.

And I began to read the book to her. And it was completely inappropriate. I mean, like, she went on a date, skinny dipping with three guys at the same time. Ooh la la, she said in a lusty voice. So, 

Wow.

You know, it's a kindergarten, she's not going to pick it up. I changed the words around anyway to get away from those kinds of things. But I brought it in to the principal and I said, hey, what's going on here? And she took four days to review it. She said, this book is twice as bad as what you reported to me as. And so I'm going to remove it from the school. And I'm like, okay, well, why did you give it to my kid? Well, one, our librarian is a member of the American Library Association. And she was using a list of approved books from the American Library Association for kindergartners. And two...

A list of approved books? This was on an approved list?

The ALA puts out lists. 

Wow.

And number two, it had to do with multiculturalism because it was about Puerto Ricans, which I could care less about, but the American Library Association does, because that's part of the issue. So right then, that's when I went to my public library that, on the same day, and I found that there was a website called Fun Sites for Kids and Teens. What was on Fun Sites for Kids and Teens? Was Go Ask Alice from Columbia University, where you could learn, for example, this is going to be fun for kids, how to hang yourself to have a better orgasm.

What?

This is how David Carradine, the actor, died from, you know, Grasshopper from 

Right 

Kung Fu. And also, I found a library director who admitted to me that somebody died in this, a 15-year-old boy died this very way, the day after coming to the library and seeing that very website, because the ALA recommended it. It's written on my, she's written to me and I've published this. So these are serious problems.

I can't even wrap my head around what you just said. The ALA approved a book on teaching kids how to hang themselves for the purpose of achieving their goals.

No, that wasn't a book. That was a website.

A website. Okay. Okay. Even still, this was on their approved list of stuff to go to and check out.

Right.

Wow.  Wow. 

By the way, they have an approved list and Common Sense Media was on that list because it's a great site for looking at book reviews. But one of the book reviews was about the inappropriateness of s[.]xuality in the books. And then when the American Library Association, when a certain group, I forget which one, within ALA learned that, they had the Common Sense Media website removed from that list. So Columbia's Go Ask Alice is on it. Common Sense Media was off it because Common Sense Media provided parents with information about the potential for s[.]xual inappropriateness in books. That got removed. This is the kind of organization we're dealing with. They're not providing you with information. They're providing you with what they want you to know.

This is very subversive. What you're describing is we will continue to do this until we get caught, and then we will change tactics. And they're doing this over and over. They know what this stuff is. They know what they're pushing. And they are just, they are continuing it until they get caught, and it reaches a level of public knowledge that they have to deal with it.

And they are librarians at the American Library Association. It's been around for a hundred years or something like that. And people have a high regard for librarians and think they're like pink fluffy bunnies who had never hurt a fly. When in reality, about 60 years ago, they changed their mission. No longer would they protect children from inappropriate material. Now they would push it on it, mislead the parents as to it, and ensure kids get as much of this is possible. This is the very reason why you and I are talking today right now. It's because of all this stuff going on in school libraries.

Talk about that. What happened 60 years ago? What took place?

60 years ago the American Library Association decided to change the Library Bill of Rights, which sounds great, and gave people the rights to– you know, actually ALA used to be a racist organization. They'd keep blacks out of libraries and wouldn't let them borrow books and all sorts of things. And eventually, they wrote a Library Bill of Rights to make sure people had access to libraries. 

Right.

But in the 60s, thanks to the input of a guy named– 60s radical named Edgar Friedenberg, they decided to add the word "age" to the Library Bill of Rights. So, suddenly, it was age discrimination to keep children from seeing anything whatsoever. And now, public libraries have this Library Bill of Rights with the word "age" in there and this is why inappropriate material is being given to children despite laws against obscenity like in New Jersey or Supreme Court cases like Board of Education v. Pico because the librarians basically bully their way into these positions and say, hey, we know what we're doing and everybody assumes that they do and lets them get away with this stuff and this is why we're having this conversation because kids are getting inappropriate stuff because the American Library Association 60 years ago added the word "age" in there because of their new age views of things. 

Yeah, wow.

They're not our friends anymore. They're now working to keep us in the dark, us parents in the dark, and to go after the children. And it's in many different forms, which I hopefully will get into in this discussion.

Yeah, absolutely. Who's funding the ALA? I know the answer. I've got another answer, but I'm just going to ask you. Who's funding the ALA?

I believe most– a lot of the funds at least comes from dues and from conferences that you attend which you think that they'd be all about free speech and no censorship, but it's like $500 to attend a conference. Unless you're a member, then it's like $400 and they sell some books. But they also get– for certain projects, they will get big donations like Jay Z and Robert Kraft of the Patriot Eagles– Patriot– New England Patriots gave a million dollars to the American Library Association with the express purpose of helping to sue– to file lawsuits for school librarians, to file lawsuits against parents, to silence the ones who are speaking out like I am and indeed I'm being sued, but there are others like me and it just keeps proliferating because they keep getting away with it. So they get money from that too.

What are you being sued for?

I'm being sued for defamation. The American Library Association at a meeting that the American Library Association warned people I might show up at, so let them know because then they'll change the language, yhey trained librarians on how to file suits against parents who complain for defamation because it runs them up of a lot of time and a lot of money. There's nothing there. There's no there there, but it just shuts people up. This is literally lawfare, SLAPP suits, and I got that from a FOIA response from some other people who had a battle with a library in Illinois, home of the American Library Association, where people are taking notes and the notes say we got to file defamation suits against parents that will run them up to $500,000 in costs. This is a plan. This is part of a plan of there's a many points that go into this pushing of this agenda. And that, that's one of them is filing lawsuits against parents and other groups.

How do you how do you combat this? I mean, when they're when they're funded the way they are, how do you as a concerned parent, is there any avenue, any recourse to fight back against this lawfare?

Um, the answer is no. And actually, that's what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to get this to the, you know, while this organization, the ALA, has huge funding to sue parents, parents don't have any wherewithal to fight back except from out of their own pockets. I would like to get large funding from Elon Musk or Mike Bloomberg or somebody like that to pay lawyers directly, not us. I'm not looking for a Lexis 

Sure.

or a Tesla. I just want it to go to the lawyers so that we can defend ourselves against these SLAPP suits and maybe do more. If we had the right amount of money maybe we can bring like a RICO charge against American Library Association for all these cases going on across the United States where they don't have a lot of control, but they get local people to become their little people to bring these lawsuits. So effectively, they can sue anywhere in the United States, and all standing rules are set aside for the American Library Association.

Um, I am... I wanted to talk to you today, but I wasn't planning on hearing all of this, and I'm in shock. 

I could go on. 

It takes a bit to shock me these days with what I've experienced, but I'm truly in shock with what I'm hearing. Who is empowering? Beyond the money, how is the ALA getting the access to make the changes and do the things they're doing? How have they established this kind of footprint to have this kind of power?

Well, they have established, like, underground connection things. How do I put this? They have funded and created local groups in hundreds of communities nationwide. They provide the means that librarians can communicate with each other so that parents don't know. And specifically, even if they file open government requests for information, the American Library Association guides librarians on how to prevent people from getting information under those FOIA Acts, Freedom of Information Act things, by using things like Signal to communicate with each other, and it won't become public, supposedly. It's become so prevalent that librarians are even writing this into their books that they're providing to people that are and to provide, to tell them on how to combat people like me, frankly. So one of the things you do is you communicate with each other. So for example, there was some legislation in Louisiana that in part started because of me and what I disclosed about the librarians down there. And the legislation got 44,000 emails opposing this particular legislation. Well, where did that come from? It came from the American Library Association platforms, community organizing platforms that you can sign up for if you're in the local community. They'll send you some money to get you like initially started. They'll set you up with a fundraising site. They'll set you up with a site to send emails to senators and representatives and so on and so forth. And so little people like us are crushed by this giant machine that can send out 44,000 emails to bully or pressure legislators into passing this or that law. That's another thing the lawyers, the librarians are doing, getting laws passed that make it harder for parents to, well, actually makes them lose their rights, lose their First Amendment.

How do people, how do they actually get this funding? So you're talking about the ALA provides funding so people can have their sites built or whatever in building. Is there some kind of litmus test that they have to pass first so that they can prove that they're ideologically on their side or what is that? What is the process for this? What does this look like?

You contact the Office for Intellectual Freedom, which is a subdivision of the ALA, or there's another subgroup called EveryLibrary. They, EveryLibrary, set itself up to look like it's separate, but it's actually the same people doing the same thing. So you just contact them, and they have bragged about how they can set this thing up within hours and get you going. 

And how do the...

I have published the transcripts of these, the leader of Every Library Association, of EveryLibrary, and the president then, Emily Drabinski of ALA, providing a talk to the members about how they can stand this stuff up real fast and start helping people immediately. And they're doing it in hundreds of places.

How, how are they interconnecting these, these platforms? How are they talking where they're able to establish such a large response? 44,000 emails is no joke. That is an enormous volume of communication. So how are they actually, how is this banding together? I'm not understanding the logistics behind this.

Well, not only is it, not only is it like secret messages, but you can actually watch it on Twitter, and now they're not on Twitter, or X, they're now on, on BlueSky. 

Of course, of course.

And you can, you can not only write to themselves, but they write to their partner groups like the AFT, their partners with the AFT, the American Federation of Teachers, and the ACLU, and so on and so forth. So I have been to a number of meetings where parents show up, and they are completely outdone by hundreds of people that are showing up with the same professionally done signs, Free People Read Freely, which is a registered trademark of American Library Association. So there's hundreds of people showing up that got out there because out in the open and public online, they're crowdfunding and crowdsourcing, and the crowds come out. One meeting was so bad, for example, in Glen Ridge, New Jersey, that the parents who filed the complaint didn't even show up to the meeting because they were so intimidated. And I was the only person who spoke in favor of those parents, and I was then attacked by the ACLU of New Jersey as why would I ever speak up in favor of these parents? I mean, it's just crazy what goes on. Hundreds of people show up, and very few parents from the actual schools or public libraries are there, and they just get bullied out of existence. There's nothing that parents have in the opposite direction.

What is, I always ask why, and obviously I understand the purpose of Marxist ideology and propaganda. But for the average person who isn't trying to overthrow the United States through subversive ideology, what is the mechanism that they're using to, I guess, justify themselves? To say that what they're doing by teaching kids about this filth is the moral right. What is this?

Well, I would say, remember, it's not filth that they're teaching. They are s[.]xualizing the kids, but they're not s[.]xualizing them to s[.]xualize them. They're s[.]xualizing them because that is one way to inculcate a kind of like a Marxism and a hate for your country, your God and your family. That's like an angle to where the ultimate goal is. And it seems like it's Marxism. Now, when I say that, everybody's eyes go, Marxism. Okay. We have the American Library Association president, Emily Drabinski, who said when she became president, she said, "I am so proud that a Marxist lesbian became president of the American Library Association."

Wow. I saw that. Yeah.

"And I can't wait to wield power for what we want. I love you, mom." Okay, that's the kind of thing she does. Then she went to a socialism conference. This was uncovered by Karlyn Borysenko. And she says at the Socialism Conference in Chicago, she says, we need your help. And she's talking to real people, like really in jail for the things that they used to do in the 70s. She says, we need your help to turn libraries into sites for socialism training. That's what it is. It's not, it's not sites for s[.]xualization training. They're really after the political goal of getting children while they're young and making them into, indoctrinating them into their little view of things. The next president, she was Marxist, the next president is Marxist, the next president after her is not only Marxist but "non-binary." So the present elect of ALA right now is a "non-binary" Marxist. 

Wow.

So you can guarantee that children are going to be getting this stuff, whether you want them to have it or not.

No, you know, I understand why they're doing it. I understand why the leaders of this are doing it. And I fully understand their modus operandi, if you will. 

Ya.

But how are they convincing the PTA mom who thinks that she's doing the right thing by getting this stuff to their kids? How are they convincing them that this is the right thing to do?

Yeah, by doing what Marxists do, and that is lie. Take a grain of truth and turn it into something that makes sense. For example, it makes sense that children have a First Amendment right to anything that they want to read. I mean, it just sounds right. It makes sense that parents should not tell other parents what to read in schools. Right? I shouldn't tell other parents what to read in school. All this kind of stuff makes sense. It makes sense that there's the Miller case that says you have to, you know, something has to be read "as a whole" in order to be considered obscenity. And if you're just looking at excerpts, then you're not reading them "as a whole." It all makes sense. None of that is true. It's very deceptive though, because it sounds true. None of that is true. That's how they do it.

You know, what triggered in my head when you said that was, you know, Satan in the Garden of Eden telling Eve who, you know, who are you not to know? Why should you not know these things? And did God really say that? Because he just doesn't want you to know good from evil, like he does, and all these things, and this deception, this ability to convince her that, no, this is a good thing, and he just doesn't want you to have what he has. That's what's reminding me of, what I'm reminded of when you say that, you know, telling a parent, you're right, it sounds good when you say kids should have First Amendment rights. And then you're like, why does a six-year-old have a First Amendment right? You don't have a First Amendment right. You don't even have, you have no rights in your home. You do as you're told, you're six years old, you know? Like, I want you to explore and discover yourself, but within very limited constraints. Like, I am raising you and I am teaching you, you don't have First Amendment rights. So I fully get that.

That's how it's done.

That's, yeah. What, I don't even know how to approach this question because I'm so floored by what I've heard here. 

Right.

What is, what do we do? How do we combat this as? I will offer the first one, I will say, first of all, just like I do with anything else, people need to know that this exists. People need to know that this is happening. And if I'm shocked by something, I am pretty certain that most people, most people don't know that this is going on to this extent. So first is education, but then how do we actually push back against this and stop what is taking place?

Yeah, I was going to say the first is education. So there you go. The second is, the way to push back is, in my opinion, is that you need to change the library boards, right? Let's say you have a town that's conservative, but you have only ten Marxists in the town. Those ten Marxists will get on the library board and control that board. That's how this stuff happens. That's, ALA even writes about it, talks about "sneakily" pushing this kind of drag queen story hour into small, rural, red communities, for example. They talk about this. And so what really needs to happen is the boards need to come back to control of not necessarily conservative, not anything, just people who don't want to have inappropriate material pushed on children. It's as simple as that. I think there's people come from both the GOP and the Democrats when it comes to that. 

So, sure.

So those are the people you need on the board. Once you get them in the majority, then you have to go into the policies and remove all the policies that the ALA created and got into these schools, not directly, but indirectly because they train the librarians who come back and write this stuff from the sample policies right into your local school policy. So suddenly, if you want to challenge a book, it's going to take a five-month process of getting together a committee and parents will have input. They tell you parents have input. Parents have zero input. This is another lie they tell you, by the way. The parents will have input and everybody makes a decision. No, that's not true. That's what the ALA makes up. The ALA from Chicago, Illinois. It's the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Board of Education v. Pico that said if the book is educationally unsuitable or pervasively vulgar, it can be removed immediately. So a superintendent can and has remove books immediately. Even librarians have removed books immediately. They just don't make it public because they know when it's inappropriate, it shouldn't be, some of them know when a book is inappropriate, it shouldn't be in there and they take it out and they move it into another library. There's no big review process or anything like that. An eight-year-old girl in an Arizona school was reading a book about squirting sperm, not making it up, and the parent brought this to the principal's attention and the principal removed it that day. And the head of the Arizona Library Association said, "you can't do that. It's a violation of her… It's a censorship, a violation of her First Amendment rights, and there's a process that you need to go through." Well, anyway, she… That's it. This is what happens.

Yep. That process and that bureaucracy is something I'm very familiar with. I'll tell you a quick story really quick, and you can weigh in on this. Very, very similar to what you're describing. 

Right.

There was an individual on Fort Leavenworth who brought a book, a very filthy book that I exposed publicly, teaching kids how to masturbate and all kinds of stuff, and how to avoid being caught by their parents. And I mean, just the graphicness of this book, it was technically in the preteen section. The preteen for this library on Leavenworth was, I believe, 12 to 17, or maybe it was 12 to 15. Either way, it was right next to the children's reading section. And this person brought this book to, first of all, to the chaplain, brought it forward to the chaplain, and then the chaplain brought it to the commanding general of Leavenworth. And this happened, I want to say, two, two and a half years ago. Well, initially, they were all about getting it removed. They both readily agreed, this is disgusting, this should not be in the library. 

Right.

However, what happened after that was, this individual waited, I think it was a month, month and a half or so, it was a long time, and then got a response back from the chaplain saying, there's a process to have this removed, we're not going to be involved in this anymore, we're removing ourselves from this process. And she was flabbergasted, she was like, how, what do you mean? You were so gung-ho, you were on my side about getting this removed. And the entire conversation had been shut down, all the way from this chaplain to the commanding general, a three-star general of Fort Leavenworth, because for whatever reason, we don't know what took place behind the scenes, but when this person dug into it, and there's a whole process for submitting books that should be removed, but then the person who approves this is basically a dictator in charge where they decide overall what is and what isn't. And as we dug into it a bit more, we found that it was a network of very influential people that were working with one of these organizations. I couldn't even remember the name of this point, but they dictate the reading materials for all the DODEA libraries and in school systems. And so a three-star general, though he was opposed to it, not only did not have the power to remove this book from the library, but he stopped talking about it immediately, like silenced him. He was, he was, boom, done. I, not my problem anymore, I'm not going to address this. 

Right. 

What is your thought on that? And that's in the military.

This is how the American Library Association operates. There are a lot of librarians who are not like this, but they stay silent and they don't do anything, because if they do, sometimes they lose their jobs. One librarian, for example, came out after eight years and finally admitted how she was bullied out of her job because they kept showing p[.]rn on the computers. And the library director said, well, if you don't like it, don't let the door hit you on the way out. So she finally just left the job and wouldn't talk about it, just like you said, until eight years later, when another issue came up of more child p[.]rn in the library, because it never goes away, it just comes back. And so then she talked about it. That's how frightened these people are of these people who run this kind of stuff. So as I was saying before, what you need to do is you need to get the right people in place, get that policy that creates these dumb policies that came from the American Library Association, get it out of there. Suddenly, then you can remove a whole pile of things. You can remove, for example, hundreds of trans books that have to do with boys that look like girls and they're breast chopped off and everything else going on. It doesn't have to be a one-off thing. It could just be get them all out of there. Why? Because they're educationally unsuitable. And that's what the Court says. You don't have to, you know, the stuff with the one-off reviews, it takes forever, nothing ever gets done. Even the librarians laugh about it. They say, oh, you know, even if they remove this book, so what? I got 10 more like this on the shelf and the publishers are pushing out 100 more every day. 

Geez.

So go ahead. Let them remove it.

I mean, the coordination behind this is incredible.

It's a massive coordination. Just massive. But it's not just coordination behind this. It's like an all-on-field effort. For example, they're passing legislation to ensure that children get this stuff in schools, despite laws like obscenity. In New Jersey, there's 2C:34-3, and it's for obscenity for children under 18. And it doesn't use the Miller Test "as a whole" standard. It just says if it has this, that, or the other thing, it's inappropriate for children, and it's a crime. And the librarian, actually, a book was, the superintendent wanted it removed from the library. But the librarian went to the American Library Association, got some advice and said, you can't do that, and that started years of battles in that community to where to this day, New Jersey has passed a law that requires people to ignore the obscenity statute and ignore the Pico case, and all books will now be accepted in schools. So you got to change the policy, then you can clean out entire swaths of the libraries. And just in case you think I'm being funny by saying that, I want you to know the librarians are cleaning out entire swaths of what's in the library. 

Oh I'm sure.

They call it "decolonization." Or they oppose Christian books or something like that. They have other words for it. But they're doing the same thing. It's why when you go into a library, it's like completely slanted to one side and not the other because the librarians have been "decolonizing" the library and getting rid of dead white men, as an American Library Association website put it.

You know, you saying this is actually a, is perfect for this. This podcast is Our Country Our Voice, but it's a, you know, it's under our organization, which is Our Country Our Choice. And this is what we promote all across America. And this is what we're trying to build right now. We're we're very, very small at the moment. We are trying to build that movement where people understand that change is going to happen at the grassroots level. This is not going to be a federalized process. We are not going to overtake the federal government or anything else. It involves people in their local communities being aware of what's happening on their city councils, their town boards, but in the education system. But this is this is one that I really hadn't factored. The public libraries were not on my, were not on my radar. The ALA was not on my radar. 

That why they are so effective.

I had all of these other boards and councils. What's that? 

That's why they're so effective.

Oh, yeah. I mean, you're, like you said, who's going to suspect a librarian? You're not even thinking about it. They checked your books out. How big of a threat could they be? But if they're all coordinated and they're all controlling what people see in the library, not just books, but websites and in any other medium 

Right.

that could push this stuff to a child, then they have an enormous amount of power. And if they're able to mobilize like this, which is literally what we're trying to create as an organization, the ability for people to do the same in their communities and mobilize and talk about these like-minded things and take back their country, then the amount of power that a librarian has is incredible. You know, this is literally the army of the Marxist movement in action. 

Yeah.

And I'm just, I'm floored.

By the way, some of these school librarians, speaking of an army of Marxists, some of these school librarians are calling for the murder or the killing of Donald Trump as President, of Elon Musk, of all Jews. 

They're violent. They are violent people. Whether they do anything about it or not, they are actively espousing this stuff. Not just on hidden accounts, not anonymous accounts. They're doing it on their public accounts without any fear because they are this emboldened.

Right, and when I publish reports about them doing it, including showing their tweets or posts with, you know, "kill," you know, DT on it, maybe I shouldn't say his name. 

Yeah, right, right.

Then they say I'm harassing him and I'm going to gather evidence to bring another lawsuit against him. This was what they did. And all the library friends join in. They don't care that he's threatening the President of the United States, or Elon Musk. They don't think, "I'm going to stay away from that guy." No. Instead, they're like, "yes, Dan is the worst. Well, I don't know what he's so obsessed about with you threatening the president. You know, aren't there more important things in his life? Does he live in his mother's basement?" You know, all that kind of stuff just keeps coming up.

Right. Of course. Of course. This is the same, the same talking points over and over and over. And the ends justify the means because this is this is warfare. Like, make no mistake about it. We are at war with this ideology and these people who want to radicalize and completely overtake our nation. And they've been very successful at it for a very long time. And I think I think over the last four or five years, a lot of people got red pilled, if you want to call it that. But woke up after the COVID stuff and started seeing a lot of these things around them and saying, we, wow, what's been going on in our country? We have to respond to this.

And since they got woke up, the librarians have realized that they've been caught. So their response is not to pull back, their response is to double down. So, for example, when the Department of Education stopped the book ban hoax, which ALA was part of, by the way, but get to that later, the American Library Association and the School Library Journal started publishing how you can double down on DEI in your school despite what the Department of Education has done. How you can sneak this stuff on children without the Department of Education knowing. How you can make sure kids are continuing to learn things that we know that nobody wants them to learn except for us, because we know what's best for these children, right? They complain that parents think that parents know what's best. It's them who think that it's the parents who know, like that one who is suing me. I have to be careful what I say, because I'm still in the middle of a lawsuit.

Sure.

But basically, I revealed something that she said on a broadcast, in which she bragged about the "not modern" parents knowing that she was putting books in front of the kids that would teach them things that she knew the parents would not want them to know, like about s[.]xual harassment, for example, or whatever it may be. And she thought she was funny talking to another school librarian about it, and they were laughing it up. Well, I heard that, and I published it, and I provided a transcript, and I got sued for doing that. So it's basically, that's so they come out and they say this stuff when they, in fact, if I could give people a piece of advice on how to investigate this stuff, it would be to just listen to all the broadcasts from these various librarians. They say things because they think nobody's listening. They say things that is like hard evidence of the agenda that's going on and how things are getting done. I've been at this for 25 years. This is halfway why I know this stuff, because I've been listening to a hundred of these broadcasts. They say this things.

Yeah. Now, what you're describing is the same thing they did in the Department of Defense where Trump came out with his executive order to get rid of DEI, critical race theory and all this subversive propaganda. What did they do? Not only did the lawyers and the JAG Corps push back against this stuff very publicly, but they started doing malicious compliance where they were only obeying by the letter of the law, but making the administration look bad. 

Right.

And then they archived a lot of this stuff. So they were very open about it. They didn't delete it. They didn't remove it. They archived it. And you had a three-star admiral that came out and said, we will wait them out. And she was relieved for it. But they're very open about this. 

Right.

They are, this isn't just a social idea for them that they're trying to improve society. No, they are trying to radically take over the entire establishment with Marxist ideology and therefore, ultimately, communism.

Right. I've even seen them openly saying, you know, let's fool people. I mean, I know they do this multiple times. So when a story comes out, a lot of times the librarians will fake things to make it look really bad. Like if DeSantis says you can't give DEI books to kids third grade and below, they'll empty out the shelves in the library, then take a picture of empty shelves and say, look what happened. 

Bingo.

They'll have a law that wants to get passed on Internet filtering. The head of the Illinois Library Association sent out a message to all librarians using their public resources to tell them to purposely turn up all their filters to the highest setting so that nobody could get access to anything. Leave slips of paper and pens so that people could write to the governor right there. That bill that passed both houses got vetoed by the governor after he got a huge number of these kinds of things 

Wow.

because they faked it. They do this kind of fake stuff all the time. They even write it publicly sometimes to play these kinds of games on people, to use your public resources. You're in a public job. You can hide things. You can make things look bad, make it harder for people to get access. Then they complain and then suddenly you're back to where you were before. It's just what they do. These are not honest people in the slightest.

No. You know what? To be honest, if I was leading any kind of combative effort to subvert the population or anything else, I would do the same thing. I wouldn't be honest because these people are my enemies. So I don't blame them for not being honest, but what I do encourage people to understand is that this is real and you are being lied to, and you need to look past what you see on the surface, the black and white, such as these emptied out shelves and, oh, this is a result of the scientists telling us that we couldn't have these reading materials. So now you don't get any reading materials and understand that this is a ploy to manipulate.

Almost every time.

Yes, it is absurd when you look into it, but it works. The propaganda works. 

Yep.

The psychological operation of it works on the masses when you put this stuff out on social media. And it's, you know, they have an army that we've allowed to infiltrate over decades and decades and decades of doing this.

Yes.

And it's just really taken off in the last 10 years as far as how aggressive it's become. 

Right.

But the structure and the base was already in place to allow this. 

Right. 

So, I have some questions that people asked last night, and I want to run these by you. So, Crystal said, ask him about the ALA policies, how the ALA policies have infiltrated school libraries to the detriment of all. I think we covered a bit of it, but outside of just public libraries and everything else, maybe there's something you could expound on with that question. I think, like I said, it's been covered, but maybe you have another thought.

It has been covered. A lot of these policies come from the American Library Association. They're trained at the meetings, and then they go back and they write them up and suggest them to their policy people, and it becomes the law. For example, a lot of people didn't like, a lot of librarians didn't like that people were filing materials reconsideration complaints, which is from the ALA, but too many of them were being filed, so they began to make new rules. They just make it up. You have to be a school parent. You couldn't even be a grandparent in the case of one school. Yet you have to be living in the community. You have to be limited to only one challenge per year. So they start putting all these restraints on your First Amendment and your state constitutional rights, because there's two constitutions involved. And they don't care. And suddenly that gets trained at the American Library Association. And suddenly it's in all the, not all the policies, but it's in the policies that have adopted this kind of stuff. This training at the American Library Association is so egregious that some kind of a training that I brought up was used in a banned books hearing. And Mike Lee spoke about it on on Capitol Hill during a "banned books" hearing. And he played this clip. And let me tell you what's in this training that librarians are getting. They're saying before this stuff becomes legislation, so they know it's going to become legislation, but they want to fool people. We need to get the people to think that these are not inappropriate books for children. And then she corrects herself. It's not s[.]xually inappropriate. She actually changes it to that. But "reframes" them as diversity and inclusion and things like that. 

Yes.

This is what training librarians. This is what they're doing. This is why books like Gender Queer are not being removed from as many schools as they could be, because people have been convinced to believe that, well, first of all, as a whole, it's a good book, which has nothing to do. It's the Miller case. It doesn't apply to school libraries. And it has ideas in it that are good ideas. No, it doesn't. It's just you just took the idea that these are pervasively vulgar, and you change them into, it's diversity, she's half gay, cut off her breasts, whatever it is. That's not an excuse, but that's the American Library Association's excuse. And it's working. So, there's...

Yeah, I guess if you're a fence walker, and you don't have any kind of standard, which is something that they've tried to do for decades, is break down your moral boundaries for what you will tolerate and what you won't tolerate, then that stuff looks clean and wholesome. You know, like, oh, diversity is good. Equity is good, until you dig into what that actually means behind the framework.

Well, for librarians, okay, like, I'm Dan Kleinman, and I tweeted today or posted today on my account I call SexHarassed on X, which is named after the librarians who get harassed, and the ALA doesn't care and says it's "dubious." Anyway, this librarian told librarians today how to get rid of Christian books from their libraries and don't let Christian people come in and use their public library books for public library readings.

That's insane. 

It's insane.

I mean, that's just illegal. That's full-blown illegal.

They don't care. They run the thing using your public taxpayer monies. 

That's crazy.

They get away with it. That was uncovered years ago by me, the American Library Association trained people initially how to do that. The thing I wrote about today is somebody who keeps writing about it every year to tell librarians exactly what to do and even telling them to spend public money, like "go get your lawyer and make sure your policy is good on your public library meetings room." That's nice. She's telling people to expend public money to advance an American Library Association goal to keep Christians out of libraries.

All right. Um. I'm. This. This is crazy. Let me ask you this one. Greg asked, does he feel we are facing Marxism that has been implemented here since the Soviet Union days, or is this mainly pushed by China currently?

Yeah. I think it's the Soviet Union days because it was 60 years ago that they added the word "age" to the Library Bill of Rights based on their, you know, what I said before.

Yeah. And I agree with you. This has been going on way too long. This is not a CCP operation. I'm sure that they are more than willing to support it in its efforts to divide and destroy our nation internally. But this is by no means an origination.

Yeah. I don't see anything CCP connected here a lot. I see other problems, but not that.

Yeah. Fair enough. We already covered who funds the ALA, and you talked about that. Now, you said that it was like donations and these dinners and everything else, but is there any, are there taxpayer dollars that are funneling and supporting ALA directly?

Well, I'm going to guess yes, because I'm actually not a financial expert. So they are a 401c3 organization. 501c3. See, I can't even say it right. 501c3 organization. So I'm assuming they get tax benefits by claiming they are. Meantime, the president, Emily Drabinski, was just talking about how people should downvote or not rank Mario Cuomo. It sounds to me like she's violating FEC and IRS rules, but they don't care because they're librarians.

They don't care. Hey you're right, who's going to stop the librarian? Yeah, that's crazy. We talked about this earlier, and I don't know if you even know the answer to this, but the question is how do they get to dictate what goes in DOD and other libraries and effectively no one else will say it. I know how you covered this. We talked about bureaucracy, but do you actually know the method that DODEA has for selecting books?

It's the librarians.

Okay.

It's through them that this kind of stuff happens. 

Okay.  Fair enough.  And then ...

Because nobody says, look, while I'm out flying caps over whatever, Washington, DC., I want the librarian to teach my kid in the army-based library about how to put on a dress when he is five years old, and he can get his penis cut off or wear tucking underwear. Nobody wants that. That's coming from somewhere. It's the American Library Association.

Um, yeah. Um. Lakelady asked, are there examples of public libraries that have been taken back by their communities?

Yes.

And how can people win against the radical library associations?

Gillette, Wyoming, was taken back. Why? They got the right board in place and then, the board that doesn't want to s[.]xualize children, and they threw out all the American Library Association policy and they changed it. Now, people can go in the library, everybody can go. You see, before it was just the people who didn't mind the indoctrination and the flags and the books and the whole thing that goes on with if you don't follow this, you're out. Now, everybody can go and feel welcome. People don't have to be afraid that their kid is going to read Gender Queer about rubbing off or, whatever, in the library. And that resulted in the library director refusing to follow the new policy. And the library said, look, you got to follow the new policy. This is the policy, we're the library board, we're the one who set the policy under the law. People have to look at the law that creates these libraries and don't just listen to your librarian, but look at the law. And what did that law give them the power to do? And it gives them the power to tell the library director what to do. The library director refused, they fired her. 

That's what I was waiting for.

So she went out and got the American Library Association, and now she's suing that library. But they're not moving. 

Good.

They're not budging. And there are other libraries that are also ending their funding for ALA, stop sending their people to ALA conferences. There are state library associations doing it. There are state library commissions that are dropping out of ALA, largely because they realize that having Marxist leaders is something you don't want to really be paying for. You know, you don't even need an MLIS. You don't need a degree even to be a librarian. I was a volunteer librarian for two years. You kind of learn it on the job from other people. It's not terribly difficult. And it's not even a profession, right? What's a profession? A lawyer, a doctor, somebody else that passes a test and they can get kicked out if they, you know. Well, that's not librarians.

I'll refrain from from any insults because I have a few off the top of my head, but that's I'm trying to be professional here, but I agree.

I'm not insulting them.

You can tell them yourself.

They're just trying to make like they're the professionals. They're the trained professionals and we should leave all the decision making to them. I've had multiple school superintendents say we can't leave the decision making to them. They got all the school like Booklist as an ALA thing. All these other groups that rate books, they only look at the ratings that come from books that say things like, "oh, this trans book about the girl chopping her boobs off is a great coming of age book. It's really wonderful. Your child needs to read it." That's the only kind of reviews that they have. The American Library Association has put together a review site that provides information on these books that just is about the awards they get, how wonderful they are, doesn't give any excerpts of what's in the books so parents could make up their own mind. That's part of the tricking that goes on.

Of course. Yeah. It's the same thing with, you know, turning on the Disney Channel, for instance. You think your kid's going to get some Mickey Mouse and instead they're getting indoctrinated. If you're not paying attention, you're using it as a babysitter. Well, they're probably hearing something if it was made in the last five years that you don't want them to hear. So yeah, same exact concept. This guy asked how to overcome and eradicate the philosophy. The communist influence has been the greatest impediment to a free and civil society in this country since the early 1900s. That's obviously a pretty big question. You want to take a stab at it, how to overcome the philosophy?

I'm an expert on libraries, not on Marxism, believe it or not.

Fair enough. Yeah, I don't think I could answer that one. With the time, we have allotted either. Okay, so this was Crystal again, and she's quoting the LibsOfTikTok post. The LibsOfTikTok post said, Garrett Jones, assistant principal for an elementary school in a lot... I'm not going to try to pronounce that. School says he thinks it's appropriate for eight-year-old kids to be reading p[.]rnography and dirty magazines in school. And Crystal said, ask him what should happen to school administrators like this. Because our district decided a promotion to middle school principal was the correct response. And then she said, I'm the mom asking the question.

Well, I think that people like that should be dismissed permanently from their jobs and not allowed to hold any jobs with children again. But that's not the way it, you know, it depends on the community. That community is all for, you know, transing kids or whatever. They don't care. They're just gonna move to someone else.

Right. That's unfortunately a free society. And if you're comfortable with people destroying your kids, that's what you're gonna allow. And that's what you're gonna tolerate. But yeah, I'm of the same mind that you should not only be able to not have anything to do with kids anymore, but you should have a team of FBI agents scouring your hard drives because I'm concerned about what just came out of your mouth. You're comfortable with eight year olds reading p[.]rnography. Let's go ahead and take a look at that computer, bud. Yeah, we need to see what's going on in the background. So, yeah.

Oh, my God. Twenty five years of fighting this stuff. My computer is going to be interesting.  [laughs]

Yeah, don't don't say that. You might get a team that shows up just to just on those premises alone. 

Well, namely, legal stuff. 

No, I get it. Trust me, I get it. But yeah, there's it's insane. So prior prior to where I'm at now and something I'm still involved with very, very intensively, but I don't talk about it very much here is counter human trafficking, specifically, rescue of children. And I'll tell you, it's one of those things where when it comes to the kind of things you're exposed to, you really can't understand how bad it is until you experience it. And those are those are avenues where I personally, I can't I can't handle seeing that that material. There are people out there that that can, they are just wired differently and they can, you know, FBI forensic analysts that can see this stuff. I can't. So I can only imagine what you've been exposed to as far as 25 years of seeing this trash and having to fight it. It's it's got to be taxing on you mentally.

Yeah. I just thought of another way that you can get rid of this kind of stuff. You can do what like Florida is doing. Florida has just passed some kind of a law. And for example, in Escambia County, where the PEN America partner with ALA and the authors of And Tango Makes Three are suing a school teacher because she challenged books because she saw that they were inappropriate. Gosh forbid even a teacher challenge a book. 

Right, right.

They're suing down in Escambia County two cases. Well, anyway, that county just decided to remove a number of books, essentially hundreds, because there's a law that says if your book gets reviewed in one school and the school decides that it's inappropriate for whatever reason, then it's inappropriate. But other schools can consider that as well and remove it as well without having to take the time to review it as well. So if one school, for example, removes Gender Queer or All Boys Aren't Blue or the whole litany of this kind of stuff, then other schools can just add that to the list and out it goes from the library. You could literally remove hundreds of books this way. And that is happening in Florida schools right now. And the Florida librarians are lying like crazy about it. And they're crying like crazy. But there is, those children are going to get protected somewhat because the librarians are always going to sneak in on them. In fact, my organization, I have another organization called World Library Association. And we uncovered that when, in fact, the teacher from Escambia County uncovered that when librarians remove this stuff, as they're supposed to do, they remove it from the records in the system that the administrators and the parents can see. But not the children. Children have differing access from the parents, and they can still see this stuff in the system. 

Wow.

And they have access to electronic versions of the same things that are provided to them by these school librarians that want to make sure these kids continue to be indoctrinated. So it's like hidden from parents. They sneak this stuff on them. They sneak it on all the legislators and the parents logging into the databases. They don't see things. But the kids log in with their IDs, and suddenly you can see this stuff and the downloads for the electronic books and so on and so forth.

That's wild. I don't know how much more we can process. I think that's a pretty good place to stop. You have anything else you want to add?

You have to not be intimidated by school librarians. They like to act like they think they know what they're doing, and then they act like they do and get away with it. Don't let them get away with it. These books are inappropriate. They can be removed from schools immediately under the Pico case. The librarians tell you you can't because you can't remove them under the Miller case "as a whole" standard. But the Miller case doesn't apply to schools. Furthermore, when they make that lie that sounded great earlier that I mentioned that parents shouldn't control what other people's kids are reading, that's a lie. Parents are allowed to seek redress under the government, the state and constitution, for, you know, seek redress under the government. So they go to the government and they say, "I think this book is inappropriate." That's what the parents do. Parents don't remove those books from the library. Those bodies, those boards of education then make that decision and decide to remove it or not. It's not parents removing a damn thing. It's not a single parent short of stealing that has removed, which they should not do, that has removed a book from anywhere. But that's the lie that they tell you because it sounds pretty good. Also, I want to tell people, don't harass librarians. 

Sure.

I'm not in the harassing business. I'm in the reporting business, essentially, and pointing things out. There are people who do physically sometimes harass people. I'm not one of them.

Yeah, no. This harassment is not going to stop the problem. It is going to remove individuals. It is not going to remove the problem. The problem is ideological. It is rooted in a network that you cannot possibly overcome by yourself, just harassing an individual. So I fully agree with you. 

Right. If you have a school librarian pushing inappropriate stuff on your kids, it's really not her alone. It's a giant thing behind her. 

Yes.

Oh, and here's another major point, since we're about to say goodbye. I have decided to try another tactic, and now I'm spreading it out now. People can try this too. And that is to look at the school ethics laws. In my state of New Jersey, the school ethics laws require that school boards consider the opinions of the local people and specifically not special interest groups. That's a law. American Library Association is about the biggest special interest group from Chicago, Illinois, you'll ever see. And it's the one that drives a lot of this policy in schools. And the school boards are following the ALA policy, like in New Jersey, where we have that law on obscenity. They're not following the state law. Instead they're following the American Library Association's anything-goes law. Well, that means that they're following outside interest groups or special interest groups. 

Ya.

And I have brought an ethics complaint against those people. That complaint is still being settled. This is something that you all might want to consider doing and look into because they just can't have a school board who comes in there and says, "oh, look at this American Library Association, got these great policies. Let's force it on our kids." You can't do that. There's probably laws that prevent that. Like ethics laws. Look into it. See if you can do it that way, too.

No, that's great. Dan, how can people follow you and the work you're doing?

They can follow me on X, essentially. I'm at SexHarassed or at SafeLibraries or at WLibraryA. SexHarassed is the one that is like my personal account. So it's got the most followers and the most tweets. SafeLibraries is where I just try to retweet things relevant to things that I maybe publish or related to things, whatever.

And if folks are looking for you, you can follow those accounts from my account as well, because I've quoted and I've re-tweeted some of his posts recently.

And I appreciate you. Mainstream media does not report on parents like us, like you are going to now. Nobody hears about this stuff. There's another reason why they get away with this. Nobody wants to talk about it.

Sure.

I can get evidence from the police, from FOIA requests showing child p[.]rn arrests in libraries and things like that. And the media will not publish it. It's just...

Of course, they've corrupted the media, just like they've corrupted all the institutions. I mean, this is a framework that's been built over decades.

So I thank you. You are helping to educate the public right now.

No, I appreciate that. Dan, thanks for your input. Thanks for your insight. Hang on just a second while I close this out. But yeah, I can't thank you enough for the kind of eye-opening information you've dropped here. And I really hope a lot of people see this, because this is insane to me. So hang on just a second. 

Thanks. 

To close this out, I will say we have a responsibility. It's beyond just making sure that your kids are not looking at p[.]rn or not looking at things you don't want them to see anymore. There is an element in this country, a very radicalized and serious element that is trying to destroy not only your children by transing them or indoctrinating them with LGBTQ alphabet soup policies, but they are trying to overtake the institutions themselves and push communism and subversive Marxist ideology in every venue. To include the public libraries, you need to take this seriously. You need to get involved. This involves your response at the grassroots level and you, you and anybody who thinks like you coming together, taking over these institutions, taking over these boards and saying, we're not going to allow this in our communities anymore. Appreciate your time. This is Our Country Our Voice. Y'all take care.

# # # 30 # # # 

From Our Country Our Voice: Unmasking Marxism in Our Public Libraries, Jun 18, 2025
This material may be protected by copyright.

Transcription by and published on SafeLibraries with permission of Sam Shoemate aka Shoe @samosaur on X.

Chapters

00:00 The Threat of Marxism in Education
01:00 Investigating Marxist Propaganda in Libraries
03:01 The Role of the American Library Association
05:48 Funding and Legal Tactics of the ALA
08:49 The Power Dynamics in Library Systems
11:00 The Mechanisms of Ideological Justification
16:09 Strategies for Combatting Marxist Influence
20:58 Grassroots Movements and Community Action
32:21 The Rise of Radical Ideologies
39:39 Infiltration of Libraries and Education
46:44 Community Resistance and Reclaiming Libraries
50:40 Addressing Marxism in Society
56:02 Empowering Parents and Communities

Note: Certain words use [.] to stand in for letters that would otherwise cause publishing/blocking problems.

Watch the interview below.



Saturday, January 28, 2023

Details on Stopping Indoctrination in Schools and Libraries: Guide for Parents and Legislators on Obscenity, Drag Queen Story Hour, 1619 Project, Etc.

Stuart Baggish, Esq., spells out details on how to stop the indoctrination of children in schools and libraries, providing a guide for parents—and legislators—on what to do about obscenity, drag queen story hour, the 1619 Project, and more.  His guidance will surprise you, yet it's 100% on target.

Below is a transcript I made of The Tamara Scott Show recorded 1/19/2023.  There is so much good information here that will change the landscape of schools having carte blanche to indoctrinate children.  

With Mr. Baggish's help, those days will be coming to an end if you act on the guidance he provides and I endorse.  

Read on:

Tamara Scott:

Happy Thursday. It is 1/19/23, 19 days into the new year, 19 days into your new habits, into your resolutions. If you have been faithful to keep those up, hats off to you. Good job. .... All right, your children, the most precious possessions you have on this earth, the only possessions, your loved ones, are those possessions that you can have in heaven with you. And yet it seems there are those who are purposely trying to destroy their minds, destroy their innocence, their purity, confuse their hearts, and it's happening right under your noses in the classroom too often.

Today joining me is Stuart Baggish. I learned of Stuart on the Protect Child Health Coalition, Protect Child Health Coalition. If you've not been to that website, go to that website. There is a video. We'll play an excerpt from this video today, just a 30-second excerpt from this video. It is a 10-minute video. Do not watch it with your children. Do not watch it around your children. The language, it's not so much the language other than it's very graphic in language, but it's going to show you, and here's what you need to understand. While you may be embarrassed to watch this with your pastor or your husband or someone else, your children are being taught this in the elementary classroom. The things you're hearing in this video are being taught not just in the elementary classrooms in America, but across the globe. It is a global attempt to destroy our children.

We'll show you that little clip in just a minute. Let me read to you Stuart's bio. We are so honored to have Stuart join us today. Stuart is an attorney admitted in Texas, California, Florida. He's been practicing law for almost 33 years, including work in criminal prosecution, defense in First Amendment law, civil litigation and trials, education law and administrative enforcement law. His personal experience includes successful prosecution of an obscenity defendant who was convicted and became the only cartoonist in US history who was jailed for obscenity, which was upheld all the way to the US Supreme Court. That happened in 1994 and it is still the only time it has happened, which is what we're going to talk to Stuart about today because oftentimes we have legislators who are well intended, bring up legislation, but by using the term obscenity, Stuart can give us some help on that, which may actually harm their ability to have that law stand and to find standing in court cases should they need it. Let me give you just a little bit more. His professional experience includes, let me jump ahead.

The feature length documentary film entitled Boiled Angels: The Trial of Mike Diana, which was available on Amazon for only 2.99 or on Putlocker for free about the case is that which Mr. Baggish is depicted as the bad guy by the people currently trying to destroy American civil society. About 20 minutes of film consist of Mr. Baggish explaining why the material in question is not protected by the First Amendment. He also worked for the legal team at the Texas Education Agency General Counsel's Office, which handled the removal and replacement of the entire board of trustees at the El Paso Independent School District in 24 through 2016. And he led the prosecution in trial of a suspension and revocations of teaching licenses of superintendents and principals involved in a massive district-wide assessment cheating scheme, which was the biggest case in the history of the Texas Education Association. He is now in private practice and representing parents, students, teachers with claims against woke leftist school district. Stuart Baggish, I am so honored to have you on our show today. Thank you for joining us and all of our viewers at The Tamara Scott Show.

Stuart Baggish:

Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be here.

Tamara Scott:

Well, so I mentioned, I saw you on the Protect Child Health Coalition newsletter that I get and they're very, very speak very high of your work. Do you mind if we take that 30-second video snippet and watch it just real quick?

Stuart Baggish:

Oh, go right ahead. Go right ahead. Absolutely.

Tamara Scott:

All right. To the gentleman in the production crew, can you start at the 4:34 mark and we'll just go to 5:01. This is probably the safest bit of this video that I can show on TV here at Lindell.

Speaker 4:

Wars, inanimate objects, animals, minors, and non-consenting persons.

Speaker 5:

In the context of the sustainable development goals that determines the agenda for the next 15 years, the voice is very, very biased. It's just International Planned Parenthood Federation and their affiliates have a direct influence on the outcome documents, on what is established, what is negotiated at the UN.

Tamara Scott:

So I don't know if you could catch the first part of that, but they're teaching nine-year-olds and others, some of the curriculum goes to kindergarten, we're talking about comprehensive sex ed confusing children. Dr. Miriam Grossman says when you put sexual freedom, when that's your priority, you will not have sexual health. And we're seeing that and some of them call it mental abuse with what we're doing with children today in school. So we're going to talk about that, but we're going to talk with Stuart about how we can actually write laws to fix some of these things, to correct some of these issues we just showed you. This is global, like many of the other attacks on our liberties and our freedoms, this is coming from a global perspective. It's not just local, but I think the source and the correction is local many times. So Stuart, where would you like to start in the topics that we're going to discuss today? Do you want to start with obscenity first? The reason we don't use the term obscenity, this was new when you said that.

Stuart Baggish:

Yeah, I'd like to start with [inaudible 00:11:48].

Tamara Scott:

You were the first I'd ever heard say that.

Stuart Baggish:

The topic of obscenity. The first thing I want everybody to understand is that obscenity is an exception from First Amendment protection because it is not speech. When you satisfy the requirements of the standard laid out in the US Supreme Court case of Miller versus California, and it's a three part test, it's not speech, it is an assault on the senses that takes the form of words and images rather than speech. And so it's not protected. And the Miller standard of obscenity is first that it is patently offensive according to contemporary community standards, which means right here, right now it is patently offensive. The second element is it appeals primarily to a prurient interest in sex. Now, the word prurient is not something that people use in their everyday discussions. It means a shameful, lustful, or morbid interest in sex. So for short, it is something that makes you horny, but you're ashamed that it does.

And the third element is that the material taken as a whole has to lack any and all serious literary, artistic, political, and scientific value. In order to qualify as obscenity, you have to satisfy all three of those elements, and it is virtually impossible to meet that standard. The material in question has to be absolutely irredeemable. There is a genre out there of what's called stomp videos where women in stiletto heels stomp live baby chicks to death. That was determined to be obscene and that also was upheld, but very little short of that is prohibited as obscenity because obscenity is contraband. It's like cocaine. All people, whether they're adult or children, are prohibited from selling it, advertising it, and even shipping it. If you put it in the mail, you're violating federal law by doing so, and it doesn't matter whether you're a minor or an adult, the material is prohibited.

So when you use the term obscenity, it is a legal standard that is very hard to meet and it does not really apply when you're talking about what's being done in the schools to corrupt our children. What's happening with the material, even sexually explicit material, is that they will include a passage in the material, a quote from Benjamin Franklin or something to give it political value, and that means it's not obscene. It means that you're going to lose if you're going after it on the basis of obscenity because there's sexually inappropriate portions.

In order for it to be obscene, it has to be utterly bereft of redeeming value. And if there's just one aspect of it that it is redeeming, they're off the hook. So I'm cautioning everybody who is trying to get indecency out of the schools to avoid using the term obscenity because they are choosing a battlefield that the left wants to fight on because they know they can win on that battlefield. Instead, what has to be done is the folks who are trying to end the p0rnification of our schools need to address the material as being not obscenity, but sexually inappropriate for minors, as being educationally unsuitable for students, and that's a battleground where we can win.

Tamara Scott:

And oftentimes that sexually appropriate or age appropriate is one of the terms that schools will use that we find we have to be very, very careful about because we don't usually agree with them on age appropriate on this sensitive content. So real quickly, I want to hear how did you win the case then if it was a cartoon drawing, we have the book, It's Perfectly Normal, which is p0rnographic. It's written to 10-year-olds. That would be third grade students. It's in school libraries even here in Iowa. Folks found that it was in school libraries, some of us were talking about this over the last decade and a half, two decades. But I'm thrilled other people are catching on and some of the mama's groups that have risen after the Loudoun County wake-up call are now catching on and I'm thrilled for that. So It's Perfectly Normal book would be a great example of a cartoon drawing, but it is p0rnographic geared towards children. How did you win your lawsuit?

Stuart Baggish:

Well, the case that I was prosecuting was against material that was called Boiled Angels. It was back in 1993, 1994, and that was a self-published zine that was being published out of Largo, Florida, which is near Clearwater. And that material was obscene. There was nothing redeeming in the material. The books that are in the public schools now as violent, indecent as they are, they do not qualify as obscene. I'm familiar with the obscenity standard. And as vile as it is, they do not satisfy the obscenity standard. You've got a problem, if you're talking about it in terms of obscenity, you're going to lose. What needs to be done is to address it as being sexually inappropriate for minors, which is a standard for education because in Texas, the Texas Education Agency acts as the enforcement authority for the State Board for Educator Certification, which licenses all public school educators.

And to be a teacher or a principal or a superintendent in Texas of a public school district, you have to hold one of these licenses. It's like a bar license for an attorney or a CPA license for an accountant. It is the most important thing that these individuals have because it's their means of earning a living. And if you can go after their license, they will stop doing what they are doing. It is the jugular vein to go after in this fight. The stuff that is sexually indecent for children is stuff that violates the standards that apply to public school educators because they're prohibited in Texas from inappropriate communication with a student. And the examples given in the educator's code of ethics for things that qualify as inappropriate communication includes sexually explicit material. So if a teacher communicates sexually inappropriate material to a student, they're subject to discipline against their license. And once they lose their license, they're out of work that day. It doesn't matter what their contract with the school district says, because one of the requirements of the contract is that they maintain their teaching license in good standing.

Tamara Scott:

All right. So I've put an article on The Tamara Scott Show Facebook page for all of you. It's from Epoch Times. It's not a new article, but it talks about the fact that only in seven states, I think it might be eight now, that Tennessee has won this battle, but only eight, seven states at the time actually had a ban on p0rnography. Many of them, all the other states actually exempt p0rnography in the public schools. So this is part of the challenge we're dealing with.

And so Stuart, what you're telling us is in Texas you have a code of conduct. I don't know if we have a code, and I want to be careful about that. I have no issue with employers having it. We just had something in the Republican Party of Iowa and I had a real difficult time with that one because we're accountable to the voters, not to our peers who may be uncomfortable with our point of view. That's that doesn't classify for me. But in this working, when you take a job, there is a code of ethics is what you're calling it in Texas. So for all these states who have bans or exemption bans on p0rnography, is this one way that they could possibly get control of the indecent or sexually explicit material in the classroom or inappropriate material in the classroom?

Stuart Baggish:

Yes. The exception that you're talking about is an exception that exists under criminal law so that you're not subject to a criminal conviction for using obscene material for educational purposes. And what that is so that a college can use stuff that has been adjudicated obscene to teach abnormal psych students what obscenity is and not face a conviction for disseminating it. That's what it exists for. Now, public school teachers have latched onto that education exception and claimed that it means that they can disseminate obscenity to minors, but they can't because in Texas, the educators code of ethics governs the conduct of all certified educators at all times, even when they're on vacation, even when they're out of the country. And there's no statute of limitations for a violation of the educator's code of ethics. You have to abide by the prohibitions and standard 3.9 of the educator's code of ethics in Texas provides that the educator shall refrain from inappropriate communication with a student or minor.

And inappropriate communication includes under Roman number five, whether the communication was sexually explicit. So a sexually explicit communication to a student is a violation of standard 3.9 of the Texas Educator's Code of Ethics irrespective of what the criminal law provides. This doesn't mean the exception that people are talking about with respect to obscenity is an exception from criminal conviction. It means they aren't going to be jailed for it if they are using it in an educational setting. It does not mean that they are at liberty to do it for teaching purposes.

Any state that has an educator's code of ethics should model their educator's code of ethics off of what Texas has done. And if a state lacks an educator's code of ethics, they should as soon as possible enact an educator's code of ethics that is the exact duplicate of what Texas has. And it's at Title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code, which is education section 247.2, and the list of standards is very short. It's only three pages long. It's easy to read. It can be contained in a single pamphlet with room for commentary and it lays out in shall and shall not form what is and is not allowed. If you violate the educator's code of ethics, you're subject to a complaint and prosecution and discipline against your teaching license, which every single teacher, no matter what their principal or superintendent is telling them to do, they will refuse to do it if it means losing their license.

Tamara Scott:

And so yesterday we showed our viewers a clip from accuracy in the media out of Ohio teachers talking about how they were going to skirt a law, should it be passed on the banning of the teaching of CRT. We've had the discussion here in Iowa, our legislators were quite responsive last year, came down on the CRT and we had videos of teachers in Iowa saying that how they were going to ignore it and do it anyway. So if we had this code and what you're saying is by going to Title 19, section 247.2 of the Texas Teaching Code, they could take that language and they can create a teaching code here in Iowa or any other state that may not have one or if they have one, they could insert this language.

Stuart Baggish:

Yes, it's language from the Texas Administrative Code. I have to point that out because there is a Texas Education Code, but that's separate. That is the statutes. The Texas Administrative Code is the administrative law at the regulations that needs to be modeled in states that don't have that provision. But by modeling that, there is a standard in there also that says that an educator shall comply and it means comply at all times in all places with state, local and federal laws. And that means the state, local and federal education laws. And in the education code, the Texas education code section 28.0022, there is a prohibition against teaching the 1619 Project. There is a prohibition against teaching that one race is better than another. There's a prohibition against teaching that one sex is better than another. So there are all kinds of useful provisions for trying to level the playing field in this battle with the woke attack on public schools that people are utterly unaware of and people are not taking advantage of.

Tamara Scott:

So to all of our viewers out there, if you are a legislator or if you know of a legislator who would be interested in this, Stuart, do we have a way where we can help them connect with the code if they've got questions? Would we help usher some of these folks? In fact, I've got a group of legislators. Okay.

Stuart Baggish:

I would love to hear [inaudible 00:27:05].

Tamara Scott:

Let's see what we can do.

Stuart Baggish:

People who are interested, just give them my email address and I'd be happy to guide them through the process and share with them everything that I've got. And there's a lot of material that works to our advantage that people are just not taking advantage of.

Tamara Scott:

And let's be clear, he's on this to be educational for all of you. This is not an attorney-client privilege relationship for any of you, whether he reaches out or you reach out to him. This is an advisory role from this show. And today we'll take phone calls, we'll open the phone lines pretty soon, that 901-316-8404 number, 901-316-8404 number. We'll take your phone call shortly if you've got a question on some of these topics. Stuart, one, I just appreciate you tackling this issue. This seems to be pretty solid, we've battled it for years. People have put bills up, the bills wouldn't go. And let me save yours. I know he is sincere because I've already connected to him with a legislator today in another state, and so I know he's sincere and good to help when he can. So you're saying that they've used this now to stop the teaching of CRT or 1619 or some of these other indoctrination leftist woke programs.

We saw this folks, if you remember, it was not a good way to use it, but in Iowa, the Board of Medicine came after honest medical professionals who either had concerns about the protocol that was being forced or wanted to offer a different protocol they found to be effective or didn't care for the vaccines that were under experimental use and not fully tested in their mind. They were threatened. Many of them are still going through threats over their medical licenses. To me that is a bad use of this, but it's similar to what we're talking about. And now I know that Iowa's done it and other states have done it. There's no reason we don't put it to good use, use it for good in holding teachers accountable in the government run schools. They take their paycheck from your pocketbook, from your paycheck. And so holding them accountable is not a bad thing.

Stuart Baggish:

That's correct. One thing that we're seeing, which is a unique phenomenon, is we've got the problem of the school district's actually leading the attack on children, which is something that never in a thousand years would anybody have ever thought would happen. It was always presumed throughout the entirety of jurisprudence and public education was it ever considered that the schools would be the ones attempting to force indecency on children. All of the cases that go to the US Supreme Court that have to do with education and restrictions on the First Amendment as it applies to students approach the issue from whether the school can restrict speech by students, whether a school can prohibit a student from speaking at an assembly and delivering indecent material in that speech. And the Supreme Court said, "Yes, absolutely. The school district stands in the shoes of the parents and has a right to prohibit indecency from being disseminated to the captive student population."

But the US Supreme Court has never entertained the idea that it would be the school districts themselves forcing the indecency on kids. That is a new thing and nobody ever thought that we would be having to deal with it yet here we are today and that's exactly what's happening and it's shameful. So the one way to deal with this is to go around the school district and to go directly against the teachers who hold teaching licenses and hold them accountable to the standards of their profession because if it brings their license under threat, they'll stop doing it. They won't follow the instructions from above if it imperils their license.

Tamara Scott:

So you know that we'll hear complaint probably from the left that we're against teachers and that they'll be the ones punished when they may be forced to teach whatever curriculum it may be from the higher ups. How do you respond to that?

Stuart Baggish:

I'm not against teachers. I represent teachers and I represent Christian teachers who are fighting against this who want to resist calling John "Jane." And the simple answer to that is you're never wrong by using the actual name on the permanent student record for a child. If the parents have gone to the trouble of changing the name under which their child is enrolled as a student in the district, then that is something that you should use as the name you use to refer to a student. But if the student himself or herself is saying, "I'm no longer John, refer to me as Jane," the teacher is always on solid ground to say, "I'm going to refer to you by the name on your permanent student record." And that is one way to respond. And a lot of teachers have found that to be useful information. There are good, virtuous teachers out there, and I represent a lot of them. We're working to try to make-

Tamara Scott:

You're absolutely correct.

Stuart Baggish:

Yeah.

Tamara Scott:

We have teachers-

Stuart Baggish:

To return the educational project back where it belongs, which is to teach the useful and socially constructive educational principles, which should be the focus of public education, not wokeism, which is destructive.

Tamara Scott:

We have teachers and counselors asking for protection. They don't want to be forced or coerced into gender affirming is the term that the left uses to where a student may experience be experiencing confusion on their identity, their sexual identity. They don't want to be coerced into encouraging a student to take a treatment that will be life altering, that could have damage resulting whether it's bone density, whether it's brain development. When you take a hormone blocker, it doesn't just block the hormones, it blocks other parts of growth and development in your body. And we now have studies where kids are experiencing damage and results of this. And so we have counselors and teachers who don't want to be forced to do this and this would be a way, Stuart, then to help them, as you say, you would represent them as well if you have teachers who are trying... Because I know we've had counselors ask legislators to protect their licenses. They're at threat of losing their license if they don't come along with what they call the gender affirming treatment.

Stuart Baggish:

And if there is someone in a school district that is twisting a virtuous teacher's arm to try to force them to give in on this, there is a standard of the educator's code of ethics that prohibits doing that. So there would be a basis for a complaint against the principal or against the superintendent that is trying to strong-arm a virtuous teacher who is simply going by the name that is on the student's permanent school record as their enrolled name. If you take a strong position, you don't have to give way on it, and there's nothing that they can do lawfully, and they would subject themselves to discipline by trying to coerce you. So that is something that I recommend the virtuous teachers stand their ground. Give me a call, I can help you out.

Tamara Scott:

Great. And we have good news happening in several states. Several legislators at the state level are doing what they can to combat this effort, but we want to make sure that they get the information that Stuart is talking about. So it's a good law that will have standing that will make it all the way to the Supreme Court if it would be necessary. And we'll open the phone lines, guys. We'll go ahead and open the phone lines 901-316-8404. You're welcome to call in 901-316-8404 questions about something happening in your school district, things that you might try in your school district. Two questions for you, Stuart. You talk about the teacher's code of ethics. Is that a national association code of ethics or is that something specific to states?

Stuart Baggish:

No, it's specific to the state of Texas. It's a section of the Texas Administrative Code, and it is a regulation that was enacted by the State Board for Educator Certification. So it's a rule that all teaching license holders must abide by, and if they don't, they're violating the requirements for their licensure and they're subjecting themselves to discipline in Texas, yes. Education, public education is a state law matter. So it's something that, thank God, in Texas, we have very strong laws that help in that respect. Every other state ought to do likewise.

Tamara Scott:

All right. And then talk to us a little bit about finding similar statutes in other states to remove teachers, but also the language. Correcting the language in state legislative bills is we've talked today about not using obscenity but using sexually inappropriate. Are there other tips like that that you can give them in this area?

Stuart Baggish:

Yeah. The quickest thing that a state legislature could do is just to look at Title 19 or section 247.2 and enact that code under its state laws for public education. In Florida, they had to pass a law saying that teachers cannot discuss sexually inappropriate matters with students because Texas [sic, Florida] doesn't have a strong educator's code of ethics the way the state of Texas does. If the state of Florida would just enact an educator's code of ethics the way that Texas has, they would be in much better standing and they would have a lot of ways to keep educators from corrupting our students because if anyone hasn't noticed, there is a movement afoot where the teachers are leading the charge to corrupt the children of America.

Tamara Scott:

Absolutely. We've talked about it on the show, the video that I played for you, you can find at Protect Child Health Coalition, Protect Child Health Coalition. It's a 10-minute video and I highly recommend it because as Stuart is saying, this is not just happening in some schools, it's not just a few teachers, it is a well-organized movement. It is purposeful, intentional, and it is global. UNESCO is one of those that is leading the charge. This video talks about that. And then it talks about the things that they are telling your nine-year-old, your kindergartner, I think you will be stunned, and we're blessed and fortunate that we are not losing more kids than we already have to degenerative thought, to this experimentation, and to confusion. But if you are a Christian parent out there, pray, pray, pray, pray. But if you knew there was a predator waiting, you wouldn't pray and send them in the public restroom at the big box discount store or the fast food restaurant.

You wouldn't just pray and send them in anyway. You'd take action. And friends, parents, grandparents, legislators, it is time for us to take action. Our children have been under siege for decades. We know it. And people say that they're leaving them in the schools to be missionaries. That's not their role. That's your role. And they're actually the mission field. Not only are they the mission field, they're the battlefield and it is a battle for their mind. And it is high time that we take our children back and this is the year. We've had enough. We've seen it, the exposure, Loudoun County, you've seen where you've been called as parents domestic terrorists, if you cared about your kids and the exposure that they were having to endure in Loudoun County, the way parents were treated, it is time now. So let me tell you a couple organizations that was on the Protect Child Healthcare, that video is on Protect Child Healthcare.

That's one of them. This video itself, I believe is Stop CSE, Comprehensive Sex Ed, which I call compulsive sexual exploitation when I speak about it, compulsive sexual exploitation, in our schools. You also have a Child Protection League out of Minnesota, an excellent group that provides great information. They have a global reach as well. You have Child and Parent Rights, Vernadette Broyles and Attorney Mary McAlister, also doing great work. We've had them on the show. Terry Schilling from American Principles Project will help on legislation when we're combating those bills that protect children in their sports. We have a great senator out of Nebraska, Kathleen Kauth, who has a bill she's just offered called Sports and Spaces that you have to be the birth, and I say conceived at conception, not your sex at birth, conceived at conception because we now know people will leave birth certificates blank or they will manufacture whatever they wish on the certificate.

To me, it is the sex ordained, ordained at conception. And then we also have Concerned Women for America. We have a lot of great state directors around this nation right there in Missouri, just to the south of us. There's some good work going on as well in the state legislature with Jay Ashcroft will try and get to in just a minute that they found another inroad in combating what's happening to our children and we want to share that, but also the Concerned Women for America there. All right, Stuart, I'll certainly let you respond to anything I just said there and we have a caller we'll go to as soon as you're done.

Stuart Baggish:

Yeah, all of those individuals that you named are wonderful. One that I wanted to add to the list myself is a gentleman named Dan Kleinman of an organization called SafeLibraries and he is fighting a battle royale with the American Library Association, which is the institution that is pushing all of this nationally. And his group is excellent. He is an attorney himself. He is also in Texas and he's a friend of mine and he has been working to get the indecency out of libraries so that children aren't being corrupted. It's not a restriction on what adults can access. It's keeping it out of the hands of children. The problem that we're facing now is that they have chosen to go to war with our kids and we can't afford to give them the benefit of the doubt. There's a hard line there that we cannot give them even an inch on this.

Tamara Scott:

We can't afford it. Our children can't afford it. Mark from Nebraska, thank you for watching The Tamara Scott Show. Do you have a question or a comment for our guest?

Caller Mark:

Yes. The question is to fill out a complaint, is that only allowed by parents or can taxpayers in that same school district fill out the complaint form?

Stuart Baggish:

Any member of the public can file a written complaint the way it's done in Texas. I don't know how it's done in Nebraska, but in Texas, anyone so long as you do... It's not anonymous. You do have to sign and you do have to give your name and contact information because what you're doing is you're making an allegation against a teacher seeking to have administrative discipline taken against them, and they're entitled to have a hearing on it. So what you're doing is you're saying, "I'm here. I'm the complainant. I'm available to testify if need be at a hearing about why this is wrong and why this should not be tolerated and why this individual's license should be disciplined." So you can do that. Anyone can do it. You don't have to be a parent, you don't have to be a teacher or anyone else connected with the education system. Any citizen can do it.

Caller Mark:

Are there safeguards built into Texas law that prevent teachers who've had a complaint filed against them taking retaliation against a parent?

Stuart Baggish:

There is. There's a standard in the educator's code of ethics. Really, that was an excellent question. There is a standard in the educators code of ethics that prohibits retaliation for a complaint. And what that does is it has the effect, there are three levels of discipline. The first level is a reprimand. That's a bad mark against the teacher's license that is a part of their permanent record. So when they go apply for a job at a district, the district pulls up their license and sees, "Oh, this teacher has been disciplined before." And most of the time they'll decide not to hire them on that basis. That is the least severe sanction. The middle level of severity is a suspension where for a period of months or years, they're prohibited from teaching. The most severe sanction is revocation, and that's where you lose the ability to teach in the public school system if it's a permanent revocation for life. 

What a retaliation does is it makes it from whatever was the severity of the original complaint, it increases the severity of that complaint to the next level. So if you were complaining about a violation that ordinarily would be a reprimand case, suddenly it is now a suspension case and if it was previously a suspension case, suddenly it's now a revocation case. And if it was originally a revocation case, now it's a permanent revocation case. So it makes things worse. And most teachers who care about their teaching license will be scared of increasing the severity of the threat to their license. It's like if you were subject to an audit by the IRS, would you want the auditors at the IRS to suddenly start looking at you not simply to impose liability for unpaid taxes against you, but also imprisonment? I mean, nobody in their right mind would do that.

Tamara Scott:

All right. Thank you for the question. Thank you for watching The Tamara Scott Show, Mark. Anybody else? 901-316-8404, your questions or your comments, what's happening in your state. As I mentioned Senator Kauth in Nebraska, she has the Sports and Spaces bill. She also has Let Them Grow bill protecting students from the treatments that could be dangerous and harmful the rest of their life. We have a legislator in North Dakota working on a bill along these lines. We have legislators right here in Iowa working on it. And in Missouri, we've working on some education bills as well. Let me show you Logan Reagan, if you can go to that Facebook post from one of our friends in Missouri. This is talking about Jill Noble sent this to us, and Jill Noble is a former Concerned Women for America. She's a legislative liaison or what she did, but with she was with Concerned Women for America.

Now she's one of those parents making a difference. But she said, and gentlemen, if you can find that Facebook post, maybe show it to everyone, "Missouri children are being sexualized in our public schools, public libraries through sexual explicit books, drag queens story times and more. We've all seen this, right? We commend Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, Republican, for filing new administrative rules on Friday, October 14th, 2022 to protect our children. These proposed administrative rules were published in the Missouri Register on November 15th, 2022, have a 30-day comment period. Secretary Ashcroft welcomes and encourages your submissions. Your email for the comments today to secretary are prohibiting the funding of public libraries that fail to abide by the proposed rule, which in part prohibits age inappropriate presentations and materials of any kind in Missouri libraries, public libraries, and upholds the parents' right to choose what materials their children can access."

And then there's more about that, but you can find out about that if you go to Jill Noble's page, it's a public comment. Now that is from November 15th, 2022. If you want, we'll try and get it for you. But it just says the library will adopt a written, public accessible collection of development policy addressing how selections are made considering appropriateness of the age and maturity level of the minors. No event or presentation shall be held at the library without age appropriate designation affixed to any publication, website, advertisement for such event or presentation. No age appropriate materials in any form as defined in the library's collection. Development policy shall be knowingly displayed in the library in areas designated by the library containing materials predominantly for minors. No funds received shall be used to purchase or acquire materials in any form that appeal to the prurient.

I had not heard that term today till the state director from [inaudible 00:50:53] mentioned it in an email this morning. The period having or encouraging the excessive interest in sexual matters, interest of a minor. Libraries also would be required to honor a parent's decision as to what material their child had access to in the library. Parents would have the right to challenge a library's age appropriate designation for any material. The joint committee on amending the rules must approve. There's a proposed rules once approved, they'll become policy. Is this what you're talking about, Stuart, this administrative rules?

Stuart Baggish:

Yes, that's great. That would do go a long way in helping libraries that are paid for with tax dollars to be prohibited from hosting drag queen story hour. One thing that the libraries are concerned with is funding. They all have fundraisers to try and keep their doors open and their employees paid. And when the state says, okay, you're going to have to do that on your own where you're not going to receive any state funding or you're going to be subject to legal action by the attorney general's office for violating state law by using library facilities to host a drag queen story hour for children. That I think would go a long way towards putting the brakes on this kind of thing. That's a really good law. And that would be-

Tamara Scott:

And that's a Secretary of State.

Stuart Baggish:

Yeah. Yeah. And that's-

Tamara Scott:

That's a Secretary of State who put that forward. Hats off to Jay Ashcroft, who's a guest on this show. That's a great idea.

Stuart Baggish:

Yeah, it's a great idea and I hope it goes into effect in Missouri and I hope other states model that. That's the type of proactive governmental approach that we like to see because again, it keeps inappropriate material away from minors. They've got no business doing this with kids.

Tamara Scott:

And it puts parents back in the driver's seat of having control of, one, your tax dollars, but two, your children and what they see. Stuart Baggish, I want to thank you for coming on today. He's an attorney licensed in California, Florida, and Texas willing to help other states get good legislation. The verbiage is key that will stand when we bring forward some of these issues. If you want to give anything in the last 30 seconds, I'll give it to you. Stuart, thank you for joining me today.

Stuart Baggish:

Well, thank you for having me. I represent teachers, I represent parents, I represent some students even in lawsuits and administrative actions with school districts that are problematic. And I am available to represent folks in the audience who are having problems in the state of Texas. I am licensed in California and Florida as well. And if you're in a state that I'm not licensed in, I can probably help connect you with a lawyer in your state who can help you out. So if you're having problems, let me know and I'll do whatever I can to help you to fight back against this because it's gone too far.

Tamara Scott:

Thank you, Stuart Baggish. Thank you to our audience. Those of you who follow along, this is not a fluff and stuff show for entertainment. You get great information. We try to bring it to you, put it at your fingertips, and now you can take action. You are responsible for what you know, but what a great way for you to make a difference. Much of it can be done with phone calls right now or the internet, connecting with legislators, perhaps your Secretary of State. This is model. This is a model legislative, well, it's not legislative, it's administrative rule here from Jay Ashcroft out of Missouri. Hats off to them. And thanks to Jill Noble for making us aware of that today. As we tell you, Friday, we'll be back, Freedom Friday, talking with our J6, those who are being held hostage without trial, without due process, Pelosi's political prisoners. We'll be talking with some of their families and some more of those folks. Thank you for keeping them in your prayers. As we tell you, live boldly, love better, laugh bigger, be encouraged, and never be complacent.


NOTE ADDED 28 JANUARY 2023:

For additional help on legislative means to stop the indoctrination, see this from the author of the Children's Internet Protection Act, a federal law that requires Internet filtering in public libraries in certain circumstances:

Istook, Ernest. Ernest Istook Interview Transcript. Interview by Dawn Hawkins, April 17, 2012. https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1Ezx9mmFxNwu_6QSmbWbzUY_C-qo6SBaxG9C_BLRPvp8/edit.


SECOND NOTE ADDED 28 JANUARY 2023:

I'm already getting terrific reactions to the publication of this information.  @BChiaradio14 said:
Dan, thanks for sending this. Based on this, I am going to refine my complaint using the new standards Baggish mentions and that you and I discussed. I’m sending a video of my last school committee appearance, where I called for an independent audit of all of our school libraries, and on all teacher classroom libraries. I also called for a revamping of the teacher grant system, under which a lot of these inappropriate books enter the schools. I also called for new sources, other than the ALA, and New York Times, to be used as reco sources by library media specialists. I need some conservative sources. Do you know any? I need your advice on all three of these things. Thanks, Dan.
Robert Chiaradio Requests Independent Audit of Westerly, RI, Public School Libraries for Age Appropriate Content, 2023. https://rumble.com/v269gaw-bob-chiaradio-requests-independent-audit-of-westerly-ri-public-school.html.



Others recommended this terrific new book I'm going to order: