WashPost Bush and the Party of Hatred
Kathleen
[Add to Address Book]
To: smal...@washpost.com, Kathleen Dickson <kmdick...@yahoo.com>,
brigid callahan <oldehi...@hotmail.com>,
farragh...@hotmail.com, gf...@milforded.org,
jgara...@milforded.org, pba...@milforded.org,
pre...@milforded.org, rkr...@milforded.org, thecra...@yahoo.com,
essential...@character.org, SPECI...@CMS.HHS.GOV,
eps_u...@topica.email-publisher.com, gr...@ncld.org, sti...@nami.org,
in...@powertolearn.com
Cc: op...@imedia.ru, jdr...@nejm.org, kmdi...@comcast.net,
let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov, len...@courant.com,
motomani...@yahoo.com, con...@po.state.ct.us,
executiv...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com,
news...@nytimes.com, the-...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com,
for...@nytimes.com, me...@nytimes.com, nati...@nytimes.com,
spo...@nytimes.com, washi...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov,
brigidc...@optonline.net, tr...@hotmail.com, ubi...@courant.com,
spin...@yahoogrouyps.com, ma...@concentric.net, camp...@courant.com,
jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov, edi...@commondreams.org,
kur...@washpost.com, georg...@washpost.com, hor...@courant.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, cohen...@aol.com,
leonar...@po.state.ct.us, FalN...@aol.com,
brans...@comcast.net, vts...@comcast.net, mcne...@aol.com,
o...@po.state.ct.us, da...@davila-dilzer.com,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, attorney...@po.state.ct.us,
patrick....@jud.state.ct.us, thoma...@po.state.ct.us,
fr...@courant.com, cpoi...@courant.com, will...@senatedems.ct.gov,
l...@lewrockwell.com, kenneth...@po.state.ct.us,
inst...@thenation.com, james.p...@yale.edu,
Elizabet...@Verizon.net, Loftu...@cs.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, han...@senatedems.ct.gov,
ltgoverno...@po.state.ct.us, fra...@ucia.gov,
govern...@po.state.ct.us, Jim....@cga.ct.gov,
pch...@law.uconn.edu, mst...@law.uconn.edu, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Washington Post article on AIDS and the Bush Administration
Date: Monday, May 29, 2006 10:04:05 [View Source]
(Mallaby article below)
No one mentions the sexual abuse of females and female
children worldwide, and that would be because the
Republicans believe females are subhuman and have no
right to their reproductive activities. This would
have been an issue for those pseudoreligious Christian
Righties, but they can hardly talk about it, since
they're famous for their perversions, too, as is the
American Psychiatric Association.
Additionally HIV is congenitally conferred at 5 times
the rate in blacks, as it is in Caucasians and Asians,
and that is the published science (See The Fauci Files
on my website).
Republicans set the example on the underclass, and in
particular women, with their AEI agenda of "Custodial
Democracy," half of the intent of which is to keep
black people from procreating. AEI supports "The Bell
Curve," which tries to assert that the average IQ of a
black person is 85, and therefore, these people are
incompetent to managing their own lives.
Verify independently or use the links on my website.
Bush and the Republicans have done squat on AIDS
because they are the party of hatred. This week it's
those bad, bad, Mexicans who are *scary* because they
WANT *STUFF* FROM US.
Kindly wake up and smell the hatred, Mr. Mallaby.
BushCo is about preserving what's left of the earth
for the Half's and to HELL with the Have-nots. In
particular, it is Republican and BigBusiness policy to
BLAME THE VICTIM.
http://actionlyme.org/BOGEYMEN_CONTEST.htm
Sometimes I wonder what it takes to get a job as a
bonehead journalist. Political "facts" are not facts.
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://actionlyme.org
=======================
washingtonpost.com
NEWS | OPINIONS | SPORTS | ARTS & LIVING | Discussions
| Photos & Video | City Guide | CLASSIFIEDS | JOBS |
CARS | REAL ESTATE
ad_icon
Bush's Talk And Results On AIDS
By Sebastian Mallaby
Monday, May 29, 2006; A23
The Bush administration's critics should give credit
where it's due. And when it comes to the global AIDS
crisis, it is due -- big-time.
Five years ago, the U.S. government's total
contribution to fighting HIV-AIDS abroad stood at $840
million. The Bush team was rightly pilloried for trade
policies that impeded poor countries' efforts to buy
cheap generic AIDS drugs. But at the start of 2003,
the administration had a hallelujah moment. In that
year's State of the Union address, President Bush
promised $15 billion over five years to fight the
pandemic. It was the biggest commitment to a global
health challenge announced by any government, ever.
Naturally, there were skeptics. The administration's
envoys endured boos and yells at international AIDS
conferences; they will probably face more at this
week's United Nations AIDS summit. But three years
after Bush's $15 billion pledge, the skepticism has
proved mostly unfounded.
One doubt was that the administration wouldn't back
its rhetoric with money. Well, since the president's
pledge, spending on global AIDS programs has risen
steadily: to $2.3 billion in 2004, $2.7 billion in
2005 and to $3.3 billion this year. The
administration's budget for 2007 requests $4 billion
from Congress, more than quadruple the level in 2001.
So the Bush team is on target to exceed the $15
billion promise.
A second doubt was that the administration would waste
money by purchasing branded AIDS drugs. Generics are
not only cheaper than patented medicines; by combining
two or three drugs into a single pill, they also make
it simpler for patients to take their meds as they're
supposed to. But the Bush administration began by
refusing to buy pharmaceuticals that lacked approval
from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
effectively closing the door to non-branded AIDS
therapies.
Starting in 2004, the administration fixed this
problem. It directed the FDA to license generics for
use in U.S. global AIDS programs, even when those
generics could not be sold in the United States
because they infringed U.S. patents. The skeptics
continued to insist that obstacles lurked in the FDA's
complex rules. But generic after generic was soon
licensed, and in some countries around two-thirds of
U.S. spending on AIDS drugs now goes to non-branded
medicines. Given how often foreign aid is tied to
exports from donor countries, it's remarkable that the
Bush team stiffed Big Pharma in favor of
cost-effective help for AIDS patients.
A third doubt about the administration's AIDS promise
concerned sexual abstinence. When it agreed to back
Bush's AIDS initiative, Congress laid down that a
third of the prevention budget should be used to
advocate abstinence and faithfulness. The scientific
literature suggests that combining abstinence messages
with teaching about condoms can delay sexual debut and
save lives but that abstinence-only messages are
ineffective. So the congressional earmark, to which
the administration acquiesced, seemed like a classic
Republican mistake: a triumph of social-conservative
ideology over science.
This complaint is right -- but should not be
exaggerated. Most of the U.S. AIDS budget goes toward
treating people and caring for the dying and orphans.
Abstinence and faithfulness teaching consumes only 7
percent of the total, and an unknown fraction of that
is constructively combined with teaching about
condoms. The critics cite a few wacko preachers who
have received U.S. money even though they proclaim
that condoms don't work, and the Government
Accountability Office has described how the abstinence
earmark complicates the work of front-line AIDS
groups. But it's wrong to paint the entire Bush AIDS
program as a Christian-conservative plot when the
abstinence-only stuff is relatively limited.
The most serious criticisms of the Bush AIDS program
are that it involves too little collaboration with
local governments and fellow donors and that pouring
millions into AIDS sucks health workers away from
other vital diseases. But even these criticisms can go
too far. When the Bush program was set up, the
noncollaborative approach was a way to get results
quickly; now, by some accounts, collaboration is
improving. In the early stages, equally, pouring money
into AIDS programs was bound to siphon health workers
away from other things. But there's talk that the
administration may correct this problem, maybe by
launching a program to train community health workers
in poor countries.
It's not that the Bush program is perfect, and it's
not that the administration is the lone hero of the
AIDS crisis. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Malaria, which was set up just four
years ago, has channeled $5 billion toward those
diseases; the Bush team should acknowledge its
contribution less grudgingly, especially since the
United States provides 30 percent of the fund's
resources. Yet the bottom line is that the
administration has faced up to a killer that's taken
25 million lives in the 25 years since its discovery.
There's much more to be done -- 5 million more people
get infected every year. But if you want to denounce
rich countries for their negligence, the United States
is the wrong target.
smal...@washpost.com
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com