Good Samaritan-in-Chief (The MSM Ignores Bush's Work for Africa)

Frontpage Magazine ^ | April 4, 2008 | Paul Kengor

[SeekAndFind]

There’s a remarkable article in the current Time magazine by Bob Geldof, musician and activist, regarding a recent trip he made to Africa with President George W. Bush. Geldof, a liberal, disagrees with Bush on many things, especially Iraq. Geldof is also fair. He has observed what Bush has done in Africa, particularly on AIDS, and is enormously grateful for the president’s truly unprecedented actions. To cite just one example: in 2003, only 50,000 Africans were on HIV antiretroviral drugs; today, thanks to American relief, 1.3 million receive free medicine.

In an illuminating article, there are, however, two items Geldof left uncovered:

First, which Geldof acknowledges but doesn’t look to explain, is how Bush gets no credit for this remarkable gesture from liberals, who pride themselves on their compassion and sensitivity to race, to Africa, to the poor, to the downtrodden, to AIDS victims, to debt-ridden Third World nations, to genocide, to famine relief, and on and on. If a Democratic president had done what Bush has done for Africa, the New York Times would recommend a 100-foot bronze statue on the Mall. Instead, there is utter silence concerning this stunning, expensive act of human charity—one certainly beyond what American presidents would ever be expected to do. Liberal college professors and Hollywood types would be walking around with special little ribbons on their lapels representing the president’s Africa initiative.

Second, this example of human charity by Bush is actually a case of Christian charity, directly linked to his faith, and has been from the outset. Here’s how it developed:

In a shocker in his January 2003 State of the Union, Bush asked Congress for $15 billion for AIDS in Africa—not a small sum, especially during a time of recession and record budget deficits and with war approaching in Iraq on the heels of Afghanistan. It meant billions in taxpayer dollars for drugs, treatment, and prevention.

Bush followed by launching a sustained commitment. A few months later, on April 29, he issued a major statement in the East Room, in which he assembled the press, the secretary of state, and others, and urged Congress to “act quickly” on his “emergency plan.” He tried to enlist the world in this “great effort,” calling the AIDS “tragedy” the “responsibility of every nation.” He said it was a “dignity of life” issue. This “urgent work,” he said, was a “moral imperative” on which “time is not on our side.” “[T]his cause is rooted in the simplest of moral duties,” he lectured the press assembled. “When we see this kind of preventable suffering … we must act. When we see the wounded traveler on the road to Jericho, we will not, America will not, pass to the other side of the road.”

Just four weeks later, on May 27, he signed his $15 billion plan into law. Few things have happened so quickly in American politics—not even Marshall Plan aid occurred so fast.

When he signed the bill Bush challenged Europe to match the U.S. commitment without delay. The following week, at the Group of Eight summit for the world’s wealthiest nations, held in France, he pleaded for help in this “moral” obligation. In late June 2003, he continued the cause in a speech at the Washington Hilton. In July, he made a major trip to Africa, where he again spoke out on AIDS.

George W. Bush, devout Christian, in the role of Good Samaritan, was doing what no leader of any country had ever done for Africa.

I wrote on this in an op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle in September 2004. The opinion editor of the Chronicle was, like Bob Geldof, a fair liberal; he happily ran the piece, thinking it would enlighten his readership, especially the faith component—a bracing revelation to an angry left that insists Bush’s “born-again faith” makes him a narrow-minded troglodyte.

What was the response? I received hateful emails telling me that not only was Bush—and myself as well—a “moron,” but the entire Africa AIDS thing was a ruse, a sham, and the money wasn’t even being spent. Bush was a “liar,” and so was I. One emailer acted like a child with his hands over his ears screaming, “Liar, liar, pants on fire!” Facts made no difference whatsoever.

Likewise, there is denial or disinterest by liberals who dominate America culture and shape perception: Hollywood, academia, media. The left so detests this president that it will not give him credit for anything. He is a new kind of Frankenstein’s monster: half Torquemada and half Boris Karloff.

Bob Geldof asked Bush “why doesn’t America know about this?” Bush answered: “I tried to tell them. But the press weren’t much interested.” That’s exactly right—no exaggeration.

I’m not surprised by the lack of credit Bush has received on this from the right. Conservatives don’t like how this president spends money like a drunken sailor, and his actions toward Africa is viewed another such manifestation—a raft of do-gooder poppycock that isn’t the job of the federal government.

The big story is why the left isn’t thrilled, and then, beyond that, the deeper silence that refuses to acknowledge the link between this work of Bush benevolence and his Christian faith. For George W. Bush, this is simply a reward he will need to receive much later—much like the Good Samaritan.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Kengor, Ph.D. is author of God and George W. Bush. He is also a professor of political science at Grove City College and a visiting fellow with the Hoover Institution.

[Marysecretary]

He’s a good man. Too bad the liberals can’t recognize goodness. It’s foreign to them.

[Rembrandt]

“..there is denial or disinterest by liberals who dominate America culture and shape perception: Hollywood, academia, media. The left so detests this president that it will not give him credit for anything. He is a new kind of Frankenstein’s monster: half Torquemada and half Boris Karloff.”
—
The roots of this evolving template date back to the 1950’s when Richard Nixon so angered the Left when he prosecuted Alger Hiss, unfairly in the minds of Liberals but confirmed when Russian cable traffic was declassified in the mid ‘90’s.

As a result of Watergate, the Left enjoyed a waterswell of new hate for any and all Conservatives. When Reagan came along, the term “Teflon President” originated because they threw everything at him but nothing stuck.

GW is only their latest target and he will survive. The Lefty’s will never get over their hissy fits about the Bubba impeachment. The next person they “have always hated” will be the next Republican occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania, hopefully McCain even though he isn’t my first choice among Pubbies.

[Wpin]

That kind of ignorant and obscene language has no place here. The President has always espoused great Christian values as being an important part of his Presidency and we should all stand proud beside him in this African effort and Embryonic Stemcell research, No Child Left Behind, Liberation of Afghanastan and Iraq, Tax Cuts, and other truly Christian gestures that we voted FOR in the first and second place.

[investigateworld]

That's the way I see it too. "Christan Charity requires that it be his money. Just reaching into the taxpayers pockets don't cut it.

And he of all people can afford it. Laura is a great looking lady, and would look just as good in JC Penny-Nordstrum - she doesn't need Nieman-Marcus.

[Iron Munro]

"Christan Charity requires that it be his money. Just reaching into the taxpayers pockets don't cut it.

He gave away billion$ and billion$ until we bled amd when they didn't praise him for it he dug deeper into our pockets and gave billion$ more.

[backhoe]

My tagline was a true saying of my Father...

[MEpajamaMONSTER]

The Bible speaks of them as being reprobate, good is bad and bad is good. Their god Is a dark one the father of liars.

[TheDon]

Christan Charity requires that it be his money. Just reaching into the taxpayers pockets don't cut it.

Amen!

[mdmathis6]

Bush of course financed “his” charity with taxpayer money!

The American taxpayers should be lauded for the 15 billion dollars...not Bush!

[Marysecretary]

Yep, they call evil good and good evil, just as scripture told us they would. Another one that’s come true is ‘they know not God.’ You’re so right.

[Marysecretary]

I’d rather have him spend my money this way than on the garbage congress spends my money on.

[mdmathis6]

I’m not so much against it, just wanted to clarify who I think the real credit should go to. Besides, it is in our and the world’s best interest to control a vast pool of potential infection and eliminate the threats to the rest of us. Besides, even though our MSM may be reluctant to put credit where credit is due, there will be people in Africa who will remember.....

[Moonman62]

I’d like to see W retire to Africa (or Mexico) and reimburse the taxpayer for his charity.

[Marysecretary]

Yes, you’re right. They will remember, just as the old timers in France and England remember.... God Bless America and God Bless President Bush.