oliveu2cm
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
I posted this in the depths of a thread on PLEBA but it was an interesting article. Get ready to throw things....The Philadelphia Inquirer
July 1, 2002
Bush Backtracking on AIDS a Slap in the Face for Bono
By David Corn
So this is the thanks Bono gets?
Just weeks ago, the U2 front man was jetting through Africa with Treasury
Secretary Paul O'Neill and exploring the deep poverty of the
continent. Media in tow, the unlikely duo visited cities and villages, often
inspecting hospitals, orphanages and clinics where the tragic effects of the AIDS
pandemic could be witnessed.
By conducting high-visibility public appearances with O'Neill and George W.
Bush, the rock star has shared his hipness with the Bush squares. Not since a
decked-out Elvis Presley posed with President Richard Nixon has there been
such a lopsided transfer of cool in Washington.
To be fair, Bono has probably prompted the misers to open the purse more than
they otherwise would. But when Bush the other day announced a supposedly
"important new" anti-AIDS program for Africa, it was not only an insult to the
millions being killed overseas by this plague, it was a slap in the face to Bono.
At the White House, Bush said, "In Africa, the disease clouds the future of entire
nations...In the hardest hit countries of sub-Saharan Africa, as much as
one-third of the adult population is infected with HIV, and 10 percent or more of
the schoolteachers will die of AIDS within five years." He proposed "to make
$500 million available" to prevent transmission of HIV from mother to children.
Stopping inherited AIDS is one of the best bang-for-a-buck components of
an assault against AIDS. A single dose of medication given at birth
will work half the time. This is also one of the least controversial aspects of
AIDS prevention because it has nothing to do with sex or condoms. It focuses
on newborns, not adults. Consequently, it does not offend the religious right
and cultural conservatives.
So what's the catch? First, Bush was proposing funding that does not meet
the actual need. Second, he was taking credit for money already
approved by Congress. Finally, he was covering up the fact that his
administration had pressed Congress to lower spending for this activity. Bush
was spreading it thick in the Rose Garden.
The President expects his project to prevent nearly 150,000 infant infections
over the next five years. The problem is, there are about
800,000 children born with AIDS each year, according to the United Nations.
That means the Bush initiative is aiming at helping less than
4 percent of this population. Moreover, $200 million of this supposedly "new"
initiative was approved for use this year by Congress days before
Bush's announcement. What he added was $300 million for this type of AIDS
prevention in the following two years. Which averages out to $150
million a year -- a cut from the current level.
It gets worse. At the start of June, several Republicans -- notably, Sens. Bill
Frist and Jesse Helms -- were trying to raise overseas AIDS funding this year
by $500 million. But the White House leaned on Frist and Helms and got the pair
to slice that to $200 million.
When Bush hailed his initiative as one that would save lives, he could have as
easily said, "Thanks to me, this program will save fewer lives than it would have
had Frist and Helms gotten their way." As Sen. John Kerry, a Democrat who has
worked with Frist and Helms to increase global AIDS funding, griped, "Just as
we've achieved bipartisan momentum to make a real difference on the toll this
devastating disease is taking on Africa, the administration announces a retreat
and pretends it's a forward charge."
Bush boasts that his administration committed nearly $1 billion to global
HIV/AIDS assistance this year and has sent $500 million to the global fund to
fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. That sounds like a healthy contribution.
But relief and medical groups argue this is far from sufficient. U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan has been pressing the international community
to kick in $7 billion to $10 billion a year to the global anti-AIDS fund, with the
United States covering about one-fifth of that. Catholic Relief Services has
called for a $2 billion increase in U.S. funding for the effort against AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria, of which half would go to sub-Saharan Africa, where
anestimated 28 million people have AIDS.
Bush shows no signs of rising to the challenge.
Hours after making his disingenuous AIDS announcement, Bush attended a
black-tie Republican fundraising extravaganza that collected $30
million or so, with a major portion coming from pharmaceutical companies. In
fact, Robert Ingram, GlaxoSmithKline's chief operating officer, was the
numero-uno fund-raiser for the event. This drug
company not too long ago tried to prevent the South African government from
manufacturing lifesaving anti-AIDS drugs. This event was, sadly, a true
Washington moment.
That day, Bono issued a statement in response to Bush's "new" AIDS program.
"This crisis urgently demands an historic presidential AIDS initiative," the U2er
observed. "This isn't it but could be the
beginning of it."
Bono deserves credit for pushing the tightwads of Washington and the West to
acknowledge publicly the problems of global poverty and global AIDS. How long,
though, can this Irish musician sing a song of hope regarding Bush, O'Neill and
the rest, when he still hasn't found anything close to what he -- and those
African mothers -- are looking
for?
(David Corn is the Washington editor of the Nation.)
? 2002, Philadelphia Inquirer
July 1, 2002
Bush Backtracking on AIDS a Slap in the Face for Bono
By David Corn
So this is the thanks Bono gets?
Just weeks ago, the U2 front man was jetting through Africa with Treasury
Secretary Paul O'Neill and exploring the deep poverty of the
continent. Media in tow, the unlikely duo visited cities and villages, often
inspecting hospitals, orphanages and clinics where the tragic effects of the AIDS
pandemic could be witnessed.
By conducting high-visibility public appearances with O'Neill and George W.
Bush, the rock star has shared his hipness with the Bush squares. Not since a
decked-out Elvis Presley posed with President Richard Nixon has there been
such a lopsided transfer of cool in Washington.
To be fair, Bono has probably prompted the misers to open the purse more than
they otherwise would. But when Bush the other day announced a supposedly
"important new" anti-AIDS program for Africa, it was not only an insult to the
millions being killed overseas by this plague, it was a slap in the face to Bono.
At the White House, Bush said, "In Africa, the disease clouds the future of entire
nations...In the hardest hit countries of sub-Saharan Africa, as much as
one-third of the adult population is infected with HIV, and 10 percent or more of
the schoolteachers will die of AIDS within five years." He proposed "to make
$500 million available" to prevent transmission of HIV from mother to children.
Stopping inherited AIDS is one of the best bang-for-a-buck components of
an assault against AIDS. A single dose of medication given at birth
will work half the time. This is also one of the least controversial aspects of
AIDS prevention because it has nothing to do with sex or condoms. It focuses
on newborns, not adults. Consequently, it does not offend the religious right
and cultural conservatives.
So what's the catch? First, Bush was proposing funding that does not meet
the actual need. Second, he was taking credit for money already
approved by Congress. Finally, he was covering up the fact that his
administration had pressed Congress to lower spending for this activity. Bush
was spreading it thick in the Rose Garden.
The President expects his project to prevent nearly 150,000 infant infections
over the next five years. The problem is, there are about
800,000 children born with AIDS each year, according to the United Nations.
That means the Bush initiative is aiming at helping less than
4 percent of this population. Moreover, $200 million of this supposedly "new"
initiative was approved for use this year by Congress days before
Bush's announcement. What he added was $300 million for this type of AIDS
prevention in the following two years. Which averages out to $150
million a year -- a cut from the current level.
It gets worse. At the start of June, several Republicans -- notably, Sens. Bill
Frist and Jesse Helms -- were trying to raise overseas AIDS funding this year
by $500 million. But the White House leaned on Frist and Helms and got the pair
to slice that to $200 million.
When Bush hailed his initiative as one that would save lives, he could have as
easily said, "Thanks to me, this program will save fewer lives than it would have
had Frist and Helms gotten their way." As Sen. John Kerry, a Democrat who has
worked with Frist and Helms to increase global AIDS funding, griped, "Just as
we've achieved bipartisan momentum to make a real difference on the toll this
devastating disease is taking on Africa, the administration announces a retreat
and pretends it's a forward charge."
Bush boasts that his administration committed nearly $1 billion to global
HIV/AIDS assistance this year and has sent $500 million to the global fund to
fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. That sounds like a healthy contribution.
But relief and medical groups argue this is far from sufficient. U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan has been pressing the international community
to kick in $7 billion to $10 billion a year to the global anti-AIDS fund, with the
United States covering about one-fifth of that. Catholic Relief Services has
called for a $2 billion increase in U.S. funding for the effort against AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria, of which half would go to sub-Saharan Africa, where
anestimated 28 million people have AIDS.
Bush shows no signs of rising to the challenge.
Hours after making his disingenuous AIDS announcement, Bush attended a
black-tie Republican fundraising extravaganza that collected $30
million or so, with a major portion coming from pharmaceutical companies. In
fact, Robert Ingram, GlaxoSmithKline's chief operating officer, was the
numero-uno fund-raiser for the event. This drug
company not too long ago tried to prevent the South African government from
manufacturing lifesaving anti-AIDS drugs. This event was, sadly, a true
Washington moment.
That day, Bono issued a statement in response to Bush's "new" AIDS program.
"This crisis urgently demands an historic presidential AIDS initiative," the U2er
observed. "This isn't it but could be the
beginning of it."
Bono deserves credit for pushing the tightwads of Washington and the West to
acknowledge publicly the problems of global poverty and global AIDS. How long,
though, can this Irish musician sing a song of hope regarding Bush, O'Neill and
the rest, when he still hasn't found anything close to what he -- and those
African mothers -- are looking
for?
(David Corn is the Washington editor of the Nation.)
? 2002, Philadelphia Inquirer
It's awful and it's true.
Believe me Bush is not done w Debt Relief/Aids in Africa... Esp w Bono pestering him . I hope you guys (who bash Bush) sent some of your Bush 600.00 tax refund to an Aids Shelter or African Charity of your choice.
:idea:
