We supported PEPFAR and I am glad we did. America gives foreign aid and George Bush made it better here. If you read his chapter in Decision Points about AIDS and Africa, he does a lot of praising and highlighting of the work of successful private programs PEPFAR has invested in.
And contrary to what you said in your post, Derb, the Bush administration looked to support programs that encourage behavior change — and Bush got blasted for that from the public-health crowd back in the day. Heaven forbid we support programs that work if they might involved the scarlet-a word (the ABC model)! Those are programs that have been grand successes there — as Harvard’s Ted Green demonstrates again and again in his research. And those are the programs that deserve and need support.
And having spent time with the former president recently, I can assure you he does not plan to shut up and go away anytime soon. He’s using his presidential center as an institute to promote human rights – women’s rights and cyber dissidents in the Middle East and elsewhere, teacher (and principal) support and training here. Private support with a very public voice. It’s a call and duty and an opportunity to him.
Good for him.
You may have noticed we're broke, and have been for some time. The US taxpayer should not be the guarantor of every good idea worlwide. To do so is no more sensible than Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi's domestic policy. And you have to wonder, for all President Bush's good intentions(and the path to hell is so paved with them), how much of that aid found itself in small nonsequential bills in the suitcases of various African kleptocrats like Brother Karzai.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseKathryn and Jennifer Rubin share the same mind wave it appears. At least Kathryn hasn't called those with a differing perspective "paleoconservative" yet?
And who is more the humanitarian? The one who seeks to end the prevalence of AIDS or the one who seeks to treat its symptoms with powerful drugs?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThank you, well said.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDerb made it perfectly that he has no problem with private efforts. That dispenses with half of the objections. I also thought it was a long standing tradition of NR to be skeptical of moral adventuring with public funds, but I guess that does not apply if a Bush engages in these activities. Will Mr. Lowry be making a formal announcement? Clarity is always a virtue. Finally, Bush has very strongly indicated he will in fact shut up whenever there is a possibility that a comment he makes might be, in any way, considered ever so slightly critical of the democrat party, the master of America. So I really don't get where "conservative" Lopez is coming from.
A humorous aside: When the TARP fund was created and much of the funds dispersed to various failed enterprises, billions of dollars of loot still remained. One Republican Senator wrote a letter to Bush pleading with him to return that money to the taxpayers. Bush ignored him and cheerfully set up possibly the largest slush fund in history for the democrat party. Did anyone at NR complain? Perhaps someone did, but their voices are certainly muted now. May I suggest to the various member of GAS (George Admiration Society), that they seek moral perfection and guidance elsewhere.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe question here is not the efficacy of the programs. Maybe they work, maybe not. History has not been too kind to humanitarian programs in Africa. Therefore, it would be naive to assume this program will do much good.
I know, I know. This time it will be different.
Justifying these expenditures on the grounds that it reflects well on the former occupant of the White House is not a conservative argument. It is an emotional argument. Unless you share the same emotional impulses as K-lo or Bush, these appeals fall flat.
Governing is about choices. Bush chose to spend billions on Africa. Some of us think the better choice was not spending our money at all. Or, spending the money on fixing up Detroit or securing the borders or clamping down on illegal immigrants.
If one wants to argue that Africa is a high priority than Detroit, have at it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMeh, I'll side with the godless former limey on this one. It is no virtue to make like Santa Calus with other people's money.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"If one wants to argue that Africa is a high priority than Detroit, have at it."
I do argue that Africa is a higher priority than Detroit.
Detroit is a democracy. The corrupt and incompetent government of Detroit that has ruined the city was elected. The people of Detroit freely choice to destroy their city.
With very few exceptions, African countries are not democracies. Their counties were ruined by local despots. Africans did not have a choice in the matter.
I'd much rather my aid money goes to help individual poor Africans than Detroit citizens. However aid to Detroit or African governments is a waste.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe tone of the posting was especially acerbic, even for John Derbyshire. This is not the first time he's been at loggerheads with his NRO colleagues. If I remember correctly, he and John Podhoretz butted heads over immigration a few years back, and he has also tangled with Ramesh Ponnuru several times.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI agree with Derb. Despite the fact the GW is a good man, and for a young ex-president we won't see the bitter sniping of Carter or the (can't say bad word here) of Clinton, we can still call out a bad policy when we see it, and dumping money on Africa is a bad policy
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAll Repubics and many, way too many conservatives (Conservatives In Name Only CINO), were/are Bush collaborators. Have supported and defended virtually all Jorge Bush misdoings.
Some Bush apologists are smitten with Jorge, some females have teenage girl crash on swaggering dimwit in leather jacket.
Till NRO repudiates its Bush collaboration, they remain CINO publication for me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOnly Derb and Andy McCarthy consistenly produce stuff worth reading.
Occasionally Ponnuru and Hanson deserve a look.
Rest of them are so tainted or lightweight it is not even funny.