Today is World AIDS Day, on which we reflect on the global epidemic that has taken so many millions of lives and ponder ways in which we can improve world health by combating the terrible illness. In honoring the day, however, some news outlets have neglected to note the tremendous contributions to the AIDS effort undertaken by our last president.
MSNBC noted on its website a recent U.N. report that found that new cases of the syndrome are "stabilizing." "There are now 4 million people on lifesaving AIDS drugs worldwide, a 10-fold increase in five years," the article noted, adding that those drugs have saved roughly 3 million lives, according to the report (h/t NB reader Tom M.).
Yet MSNBC makes no mention of President Bush or his tremendous efforts to combat the global AIDS epidemic. It's not as if his contribution to the fight is ambiguous. U.S. News reports that the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) is credited for saving roughly 2 million lives.
The Huffington Post takes it one step further in its report. Noting that President Obama received a D+ grade from a group of activists on his performance in the AIDS fight, HuffPo's Matthew Kavanagh asserts that Obama should "break from the Bush era by eliminating ideologically driven prevention programs that fail women and standing up to drug companies to drive down prices of AIDS treatment."
Even the group of activists Kavanagh cites, the Health Global Access Project, credits the "pre-existing broad bipartisan support established during the Bush Administration for increased U.S. investment to fight AIDS."
The organization lauds President Bush's accomplishments in the arena, noting that "With scale up from the last Bush administration budget, FY 2009, to be reported this week advocates expect the U.S. to approach 3 million people supported on treatment—a huge accomplishment."
Even given the tremendous success of President Bush's PEPFAR program, widely credited with providing access to life-saving treatments, MSNBC could not bring itself to even mention the former president's name. And the Huffington Post managed to turn Obama's short but sorry record on AIDS treatment into an attack on Bush.
Regardless of one's feelings about the former president, honoring World AIDS Day demands that we give credit where it is due. That any media outlet would report on the global AIDS situation without mentioning the significant contributions to the effort undertaken by President Bush does a disservice to him and all Americans that are working to end the epidemic.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Wasn't it Truman
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 12:44 ET by dervishwho said: "If you want gratitude in this business, buy a dog"?
So, you're saying the MSM is
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 12:54 ET by mattmSo, you're saying the MSM is the Democrat Party's lap dog? That makes sense.
That's not what I meant,
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 13:00 ET by dervishThat's not what I meant, but I like your interpretation better, so yeah, that's what I meant. :)
Why have a holiday for a disease?
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 12:49 ET by sevenWhy not global bi-polar day?
Aids can be prevented by eliminating premarital sex and sex outside of marriage.
a year ago today, i was in...
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 12:58 ET by OuttaMyWaythe World Aids Day Parade in Ethiopia. Not by planning, we were driving to the embassy to get our documents submitted, and they don't exactly block the streets, so taxi's, buses, UN Cars were all driving around the marching band going down the street in front of the university.
Or, more realistically, by
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 13:16 ET by ckc1227Or, more realistically, by simply wearing a condom.
Proof in their actions
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 12:56 ET by c5thenThat the majority of the mass media think it is their job to spin the news into a positive for liberals and a negative for conservatives rather than simply reporting the facts and the events.
Throw 'da bums out!!!
Before it's too late.
www.loyaltoliberty.com
Acknowledge Bush's Success
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 13:06 ET by jdlybrandHell; I can't believe they haven't blamed him for the original outbreak!
"What a revoltin' development this is!"
Chester Riley
Be patient
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 14:05 ET by mangThat's coming. In due time, my friend. In due time. Once they run out of ammo, they'll pull that dud out.
they blamed HIV and
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 14:12 ET by humanzeethey blamed HIV and cocaine/crack on Ronald Reagan. Don't you remember the 80's?
Well of course there would
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 14:03 ET by mangWell of course there would be no mention of Bush, silly. He is a racist and a homophobe. Kanye said so, so it must be true.
AIDS is not an epidemic in
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 14:09 ET by humanzeeAIDS is not an epidemic in the United States. It's a disease that affects homosexual men much more than anyone else. It's only an epidemic amongst the general population in Africa. In the US, it isn't as big of a problem as a slew of other diseases. The only reason it gets so much media attention is because it affects gays and liberals love gays. They've formed a social movement around the disease.
Even as a global "epidemic," if you could call it that, a lot more people still die of malaria, dysentery, influenza, etc, etc, etc.
Gays are a big "specialty" group for the political left, ahead of blacks and hispanics. They are considered an affluent group and one that is very loyal to left wing causes.
This is how a disease that really isn't that big of a threat to the general population if they practice certain behaviors has jumped to the top of "importance."
Since AIDS/HIV are a left wing "pandemic," Bush will never be praised for helping out.
World Aids Day and Bush and the big Red Bow on the WH
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 14:28 ET by Gary HallI keep waiting for someone in the MSM to come out fawning over the big Red Bow which hangs at the entrance to the White House (one might note the usual support out in front for President Bush - pic is from 2007), as being something 'special' that the Obama's are doing.
Yup - Bush started it.
Last week, the LA Times' Thomas Maugh, had a piece on A-21 titled, "New HIV infections are in decline, report finds," where we learn that (my bold):
That would be President Bush's PEPFAR program. And no, as expected, Bush was not mentioned in the article.
A year ago (Nov. 10, 2008) the San Jose Mercury News editorialized:
Can you believe that?
Of course none of that has any shade of truth in it. The President's program provided that 6.7% of the $billions in historic life saving new funding would go to abstinence related issues - a rather small percentage of the total.
Additionally, to set the record straight, President Bush's PEPFAR program, as of 2008, had distributed over 2 billion condoms in Africa.
That's where the rubber hits the road.
Of course, there's plenty of reasons why our national press has continued to ooh and aah every time they are with former President Bill Clinton over his more recent efforts in Africa -- shh.. while he was president he turned his back on Aids in Africa (millions died - millions more got infected), on genocide and civil war in Africa (Rwanda, DR Congo, Sierra Leone, the Ivory Coast, etc - millions - count em, millions died); I just can't figure them out. Someone should ask.
Fortunately a few on the left side of the isle saw through the mist in the MSM's eyes: Too little, too late - How many times is Bill Clinton going to apologize to Africa? by: David Corn, July, 2002.
It's all about walking the walk; not doing the talk.
Thank you for the post, Lachlan.
(;~/ gary
How could they?
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 16:31 ET by octaviojThey are in the same camp as president Chávez who think president Bush is the devil incarnate. So no praise for "satan".
Sec. Clinton applauding President Bush.. shh, the MSM might ..
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 17:47 ET by Gary HallSec. Clinton applauding President Bush.. shh, the MSM might .. find out.
The moment is at 7:20 into the video:
I had noticed a few years back that whenever former Pres, Bill Clinton was being interviewed (showered with fawning appreciation) by notable national journalists on issues of his post presidential role in 3rd world HIV/Aids related issues, they would often bait him with questions inviting him to attack then President Bush on Bush's efforts [historic efforts].
To Clinton's credit, he would try his best to set the record straight, and give credit where credit was due. Almost every single time, the reporter would immediately look quite uncomfortable - and would quickly change the subject.
Eventually, they stopped asking Clinton about Bush's efforts. And of course, the national media never did, and still does not have any interest in talking to President Bush about his successful efforts in saving millions of lives around the globe.
(;~/ gary