There's a superb debunking of virtually the entire State of the Union address here at LiberalOasis. Particularly good is the demystification of the noblest-sounding initiative in the speech, the promise to increase funding to combat HIV/AIDS overseas. Another skeptic, Nathan Newman, questions whether the Bush administration will really stretch the money as far as it can go by buying less expensive generic drugs; LiberalOasis cites a White House press release to suggest that that fear is quite justified. Bush implied that every dose of medicine bought with the fund would be at rock-bottom -- i.e., generic -- prices; that may very well not be the case.
I'd like to add that there are several reasons that this initiative made it to the State of the Union address. Some you've probably already figured out: Bush needed to put a little compassion in his conservatism; Bush wanted to appear sympathetic to people of color after the Trent Lott affair, the renomination of Charles Pickering, and the filing of a brief opposing the University of Michigan's admissions policy.
But there are two reasons beyond that.
One reason is the opening it gives the administration to talk about abstinence. One of Bush's guests for the speech was Peter Mugyenyi, a prominent AIDS fighter in Uganda. Uganda has significantly reduced HIV infections in recent years; it has a national program that urges abstinence, the limiting of partners, and the use of condoms. As noted in a January 21 story on NPR's Morning Edition (go here and scroll down for the audio link; the direct audio link is this), the Bush administration admires the program but stresses the abstinence aspect of it; in the future, expect to hear more talk of abstinence and Uganda.
Another reason is Bill Frist, Bush and Karl Rove's handpicked Senate leader. Frist has frequently traveled to Africa and visited AIDS wards there. Perhaps he has sincerely interested his friend the president in the plight of HIV-positive Africans. Nevertheless, a focus on AIDS in Africa makes Frist, and by extension the GOP and Bush, seem truly compassionate as mean budget choices are made and as bombs cause civilian casualties in Baghdad.
Compassion? Maybe. Calculation? Certainly.
No comments:
Post a Comment