A man gets on his knees next to a car carrying U.S. President Barack Obama as he pulls away from Valois restaurant in Chicago, October 31, 2010. REUTERS/Larry Downing
The liberal news source "Democracy Now" reported: "It’s almost beyond the capacity of the mind to cope with that George Bush seemingly was more engaged in the battle against HIV than Barack Obama," according to Stephen Lewis, the former special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa and co-founder of AIDS-Free World.
CNN reported in July "That Republican president Bush was a bigger advocate on AIDS than "liberal" Obama may come as a surprise, but many people around the world are starting to notice the discrepancy."
The hecklers were concerned about Global Aids funding. And in order to quiet them down Obama responds with what the other side wants and plans to do, stating thate we are funding global AIDs relief and the other side is not. Bush was credited for huge contributions to fighting AIDS in Africa going back to 2003. The Washington Post noted that he had tripled funding by 2006. The AP lauded Bush's efforts in this regard. The British newspaper the Telegraph called him “an African hero. The BBC suggested Bush may have been the Africa's best friend. Scientific studies showed the Bush initiated program had reduced the mortality rate by 10%, amounting to hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide.
By contrast, there has recently been criticism of the Obama regime for flat-funding of the same programs. This is not to suggest that Obama doesn't care about the problem or even that cutting back on some funding might not be a good idea at some point. But Obama stated at this rally, that Republicans haven't been engaged on the issue or that they are the ones who should be protested for lack of attention to it, is not in accordance with the facts.
Posts
