President Bush Did More for Africa Than Any Other President
February 20th, 2008 at 06:40am Mark Noonan
KIGALI, Rwanda — Bob Geldof has parachuted into the White House travel pool here in Rwanda, and will join us on the flight from Air Force One to Ghana tonight.
He’s going to interview President Bush for Time magazine and several European outlets, such as Liberacion, about aid to Africa for HIV/AIDS, malaria, and business development.
Mr. Geldof is an Irish rock and roll singer and longtime social activist who has helped, along with U2 rocker Bono, raise awareness about need in Africa. His most well known achievement is organizing the Live Aid concert in 1985, which raised money for debt relief for poor African countries.
But Mr. Geldof has remained closely engaged with African affairs since then, and he spoke off the cuff to reporters today who were waiting for a press conference with Mr. Bush and Rwandan President Paul Kagame.
Mr. Geldof praised Mr. Bush for his work in delivering billions to fight disease and poverty in Africa, and blasted the U.S. press for ignoring the achievement.
Mr. Bush, said Mr. Geldof, “has done more than any other president so far.”
“This is the triumph of American policy really,” he said. “It was probably unexpected of the man. It was expected of the nation, but not of the man, but both rose to the occasion.”
“What’s in it for [Mr. Bush]? Absolutely nothing,” Mr. Geldof said.
This is where reality entirely evaporates the leftwing critique of President Bush - which is either that he’s an idiot, or that he’s diabolical. Idiots and monsters don’t do what President Bush has done in Africa over the course of his Administration - and, lefties, this same President Bush who has worked so hard for the betterment of Africa? He’s the same President Bush who ordered the liberation of Iraq - and he did it, boys and girls, based upon the same requirements of morality. Fundamentally, as even Barack Obama recently opined, we are our brother’s keeper - President Bush understands this and during his whole Administration, he’s been motivated by this impulse.
While the left simply believes a string of lies about President Bush, the reality is that he did what he felt was best for the people of America, and the people of the world. Mistakes were made. Things didn’t go exactly as planned or hoped - but the reason he did what he did is because President Bush understands that the only proper policy for a Christian nation (such as the United States) is to do the right thing, regardless of the cost or the difficulty. As I’ve said many times of late, we’re going to miss this man President Bush when he leaves office - McCain is a fine patriot; Obama and Hillary believe in failed policies, but I’m sure they believe they have it right…but no matter which of them is sworn in on January 20th, 2009, none of them will have quite the combination of fortitude and love of humanity displayed by President Bush…all we can hope is that President Bush’s successor can grow into his shoes.
Entry Filed under: Foreign Affairs, President Bush
36 Comments
1. Jeremiah | February 20th, 2008 at 7:21 am
God bless President George W. Bush the Greatest President in U.S. history. Now matter what the lefties say about ya!
I’m afraid we’re going to be pressed to find that person this year, Mark.
The important thing now…hope for the best, pray for the best, and that whatever God allows to happen from the years 2009 to 2012 that He grant us the strength to weather it out, come what may. Not necessarily assuming the worst.
–Jeremiah–
2. steveGA | February 20th, 2008 at 7:31 am
That’s funny, I thought we weren’t supposed to listen to the opinions of singers, actors, and Hollywood in general. They’re buffoons and don’t have the knowledge to comment on politics.
Oh wait, this guy said something nice about Bush. He must be ok, we can listen to him.
What a hypocritical clown you are, Mark.
3. President Bush » Pr&hellip | February 20th, 2008 at 7:54 am
[…] Mark Noonan wrote an interesting post today on President Bush Did More for Africa Than Any Other PresidentHere’s a quick excerptThis is where reality entirely evaporates the leftwing critique of President Bush - which is either that he’s an idiot, or that he’s diabolical. Idiots and monsters don’t do what President Bush has done in Africa over the course of his … […]
4. Iraq » President Bu&hellip | February 20th, 2008 at 8:21 am
[…] Pajamas Media wrote an interesting post today on President Bush Did More for Africa Than Any Other PresidentHere’s a quick excerptHe’s the same President Bush who ordered the liberation of Iraq - and he did it, boys and girls, based upon the same requirements of… […]
5. Zach | February 20th, 2008 at 8:27 am
“That’s funny, I thought we weren’t supposed to listen to the opinions of singers, actors, and Hollywood in general.”
I dont think it takes a genius to see what we’ve accomplished for Africa during the Bush Administration.
Are you saying singers, actors etc are incapable of prasing good deeds? Are they too dumb for you steve?
Listening to Susan Sarandon rant on about foreign policy and throwing in her support to an anti-war candidate is bit different..Dont you think?
I’m sure you realize that there are context differences..I think you’re just trying to find an excuse to call Mark a name..again
6. plainjane | February 20th, 2008 at 8:29 am
I agree on the surface it looks like he did a lot for the AIDs situation in Africa. Bono has also praised the President. But let us remember diplomacy in Central Africa is not that complicated. Most are grateful for any type of aid they get. But with this administration’s record of past incompetence I would like to see a GAO report as to exactly how the billions in American taxpayer dollars were spent in Africa during his term.
7. Magnum Serpentine | February 20th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Going to Africa and flashing a Smile will not counter george’s destruction of the Constitution under the American patriot Act, The spying on United States Citizens under the Spy on America Act, The creation of a Police State, The un-provoked war with Iraq. Oh yes, where are all the WMD??? Let us also not forget that when Clinton lied, no one died, and when george lied, over 3000 soldiers have died.
“The World Wonders” Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz, Pacific Theater, World War II 1945
8. Zach | February 20th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Oh boy…
here we go again..
9. Retired Spook | February 20th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Hey Mag, better double up on your meds. They’re not working.
10. neocon | February 20th, 2008 at 9:13 am
In earlier threads, libT and LiberalMind have lectured us on sacrificing our constitutional rights “that millions have died to defend” and that we lack the understanding of what America stands for. My questions were simple yet have been dodged at every turn. I really want to hear from one of our resident liberals, perferrably Magnum, since he exemplifies the liberal mindset, an answer to the following:
1. Why did so many have to die to preserve our Constitutional rights?
2. What does America stand for?
11. anarchist | February 20th, 2008 at 11:24 am
80% of all african aid money ends up in swiss bank accounts.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/32936.html
Countries that recieve the highest aid typically have the lowest growth rates since their governments focus all their efforts on recieving more western aid rather than their people.
African is over 60% agricultural, our farm subsidies for rich American farmers and trade barriers have caused massive devastaion for Africas poorest people.
Also, before you can give to corrupt African politicians, you must first steal that money from American citizens. Same with Iraq, before you give the Iraqis your political wisdom through military force, you must first steal money from Americans.
When did republicans begin to embrace international socialism?
12. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | February 20th, 2008 at 11:44 am
ana,
Your article and accompanying statistical analysis is from 2005; the same time as when Bush announced the new aid package ($8.6B). If you have something a little more current I’d be interested in reading it. Until then, you’re using old news to make a new point.
13. Retired Spook | February 20th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I really want to hear from one of our resident liberals, perferrably Magnum, since he exemplifies the liberal mindset, an answer to the following:
1. Why did so many have to die to preserve our Constitutional rights?
2. What does America stand for?
Neocon, you don’t really expect to get a reasoned, comprehensive answer to those 2 questions, do you?
14. james allegro | February 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Hey Mark, I have been trying to find news coverage of President Bush’s trip to Africa and except for a few seconds on Fox news channel, there is no coverage. It’s like there is a news black out of the trip. Where is CSPAN? Thousands of people are cheering for President Bush, wearing his picture and throwing flowers in the street and there is no coverage. The only coverage was 3 people holding an obama sign in the street. Where is the coverage!!
15. Percy Beezer | February 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
1. Why did so many have to die to preserve our Constitutional rights?
Lying military recruiters duping poor uneducated inner-city kids with no hope into imperialist wars designed to enhance profits for corporations and dynastic families.
2. What does America stand for?
Imposing an idology of consumerism upon peaceful peoples in an ever expanding web of oppression. And corporations … being all … corporationie … and making money for … Bush and his … croneys!
There! I said it and I’m not ashamed; in fact I’m proud of America for the first time in 200 years, except that slavery thing, and Disco … and everything that happened in the 70’s.
Viva Che!
16. Arctic Fox | February 20th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
I would just like to ask how much of the money that Mr Bush has given Africa, has returned to the coffers of the big American and European banks in the form of national loan interest.
You see giving a country money in aid is only half the issue, whilever they have been loaned billions of dollars by the IMF or international banks, often at crippling rates.
There is absolutely no point in giving money with one hand, and demanding it back in interest on loans granted decades ago with the other. Yet Mr Bush, in common with other “rich” nations leaders, has not made any significant progress in getting the interest payments written off.
The end result is that those millions come right back as interest payments, and they don’t benefit the people at all. It’s a straw man argument. And while the politicians proudly trumpet the amounts ‘given’, they are all strangely silent on the amounts taken back.
If Mr Bush could get those interest payments scrapped, so that every cent given would actually end up helping the people it’s supposedly given too - THAT would be a legacy to leave behind that would be a target other Presidents would have a hard time matching in the future.
17. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | February 20th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Hollow argument fox,
The UN has acted to do just that in 2004; Russia the US, France and Great Britain have already “forgiven” debts totalling billions, those not yet negotiated are not being collected. Next!
18. Percy Beezer | February 20th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
And the G8, too Herk.
“On June 10, 2005, President Bush announced his agreement to join other G8 nation leaders in forgiving billions of debt dollars to select African nations.”
19. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | February 20th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Does this mean that Arctic Fox will join the chorus and sing the praises of George W. Bush?
Nah! Liberals aren’t capable of admitting they’ve misjudged him.
20. Darva Conger | February 20th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I agree Bush has done great things for Africa. I cannot recall one time during either of his terms where he threatened to invade an African nation.
Well done, good and faithful servant.
21. Some Assembly Required | February 20th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
No your right, he just had his Geography messed up, he thought it was New Orleans.
22. Dennis | February 20th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
I’ve traveled through east Africa from Sudan to Zimbabwe, and I can tell you it doesn’t take much by American standards to do a whole lot for such a poor place. If Bush thinks he can patch up his legacy by tossing a few bucks into the collection plate for the poor and needy - sure, they can use it and every bit helps, but it’s a cheap way to look like a swell guy.
And for a little reality check, stack up how much American aid goes to Africa against the nearly $2 billion we burn up in Iraq every week. Consider that for one year’s cost of the Iraq war we could cut world hunger in half, plus cover AIDS medicine, childhood immunizations and clean water for the entire developing world for more than TWO years.
I don’t begrudge help for Africa at all, regardless where it comes from. But don’t try to make Bush out as some kind of hero. Just look at what he might have done for the world but didn’t. Just look at the increasing gap between the richest and poorest right here at home. Watch what he does after leaving office for clues as to his real character. You can bet he won’t be dedicating any of his personal wealth, energy or what little prestige might remain to humanitarian causes.
23. Dennis | February 20th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Mark, you say “Bush who ordered the liberation of Iraq - and he did it, boys and girls, based upon the same requirements of morality.”
Liberation? There is less freedom now in Iraq than there was under Saddam - freedom to move about safely, freedom of women to hold professions and dress as they wished, freedom of religion, freedom of Sunni and Shia to live in peaceful integration. All gone now.
And what “requirements of morality” are you speaking of? Alan Greenspan told it like it was in his recent memoir: the removal of Saddam was essential to secure oil supplies. How nice for you to paint this ugly and completely gratuitous war with pretty humanitarian colors, so you can feel good about your hero deciderer.
24. Sunny | February 20th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
our farm subsidies for rich American farmers - anarchist
You really do not know what you are talking about making such a statement. There are a few large farming corporations with foreign ownership that are rich, but let me assure, as one coming from a farming community, most farmers are not rich. They work very hard, 365 days a year, in all kinds of weather and conditions to put good, wholesome food on your table. The risks are great with the weather conditions and the government controling the price of their goods. So, before you go disparaging farmers, know of what you speak. The farmers would love to get the government out of their business and have the opportunity to sell their products in a free and open market.
25. Canadian Rationalist | February 20th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
As to post #22, I’d like to hear what Jeremiah has to say about this? He claims to be a Christian, and I do believe his faith is true, but his knowledge, worldview and morals are seriously flawed.
I have mixed feelings about abortions, which seem to be his only real issue, but how can you support that and call yourself pro-life, and be for war. How can you call yourself christian and be pro-war. Any war? Didn’t jesus say something about turning the other cheek? And all this anti-liberal fervour… What about the forgivness, and not judging people.
I don’t understand religious people.
Not to mention that anyone, who cannot admit to the possibility, however probable or improbable, of their being completely wrong about everything, doesn’t deserve a vote. Partisans have made their minds up, both left and right. The right isn’t totally evil, and the left doesn’t hate freedom.
Stop the hyperbole and actually think people.
26. jayhay | February 20th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
I saw this quote from Fox on Bush yesterday:
GOLER: The president says it’s better that African nations deal with African problems. White soldiers in Darfur, he believes, would be targets for all sides.
BUSH: A clear lesson I learned in the museum was that outside forces tend to divide people up inside their country and are unbelievably counterproductive.
Has he really learned that lesson? Doubtful…
27. Timmy J. Rooter | February 20th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
GWB: “In other words, people came from other countries — I guess you’d call them colonialists — and they pitted one group of people against another.”
Reads a little different when you get the whole message, doesn’t it?
28. Jeremiah | February 20th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Canadian Rationalist,
Friend, if you could only understand the suffering that Saddam Hussein caused to those people of Iraq; many generations of zero freedom … only oppression. If you could just go an see the piles of twisted, mangled, and burned bodies that had been tortured beyond recognition. Can you just imagine being blind folded and then being struck repeatedly in the head and you could not see where the blows were coming from…? Can you just imagine, then, being burned alive in your, own, living, flesh and blood under that same blindfold? You and your loved ones? No, you most certainly can’t, because you live in a land that is blessed beyond all measure, because of one simple, and yet, so-greatly-known fact that there were men of upstanding values, men of God, blessed with the honesty, decency, and integrity, in honoring Him first in their everyday lives; willing to protect the only last great vestige of hope in the world, this rock of Liberty, this stronghold of a free and prosperous society, we call the Great Republic, and Oh how I Thank God for every last breath of my being to be able to proclaim it. No one can ever erase that fact. Only the people as as one body, seperated from God’s love through their own ignorance could do so.
So, listen up, friend … God says it’s not mine for the keeping, unless I return Him one small favor, and you know what that is? That I only share it with others, that I should not withhold it in selfish pride, but that I would spread this beacon of Liberty to all the world.
Ans so, would it have been right to look at my brothers and sisters of Iraq in suffering, allowing this one man of mass and evil cruelty, bent on world domination through his own sick and twisted dreams to plunder God’s people? Fortunately, no friend, it was His sincere desire that we show the world that we truly care, and that we will not back down in cowardly selfishness and allow this man to laugh in the face of the entire world of good Christian people and mercilessly slaughter His people.
As for this country in their disobedience to God by creating one if not the worst Holocaust in human history, only second to God’s Great wrath at the flood? Well, he’s allowing it to happen, but unless we heed the calling that has been trumpeted throughout the last 40 years, since its beginning, in an earnest plea to stop the slaughter of His innocent unborn children of the womb, it will be brought down as God ordered all the others to be also. It’s just a matter of time.
America seems to be on a steady drift away from God, I can only hope they will turn back to Him, and seek to do His perfect Will. If not? Then she will be laid to waste.
God help America!
–Jeremiah–
29. GOP4ME | February 20th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Amen, Jeremiah, Amen.
30. Dennis | February 20th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Jeremiah, I salute your sincerity but your ignorance of facts is appalling. There is less freedom of most kinds now in Iraq than there was under Saddam. It’s all an illusion and you’ve bought it with your eyes wide open.
Saddam’s own deputy prime minister, Tariq Aziz, was a Christian. The Protestant denomination I was raised in had many churches in Iraq and freedom to worship and operate their ministry, as did Catholic and Orthodox churches. Women were not oppressed or forced to wear the veil. People could walk the streets and travel safely. There was electricity, hospitals and humanitarian services operated reasonably well.
People were generally safe in Saddam’s Iraq, except for his political enemies. It wasn’t perfect, but it was a hell of a lot more secure and free than it is now. Now NO Christian ministry can operate there. Zip. Nada. We, the United States of America, killed freedom of religion DEAD in Iraq. It is now a MUSLIM state, permanently and forever. Got that?
Saddam’s Iraq was an integrated nation along sectarian and ethnic lines. We, the United States of America, enabled ETHNIC CLEANSING on a mass scale in Iraq, and now it is segregated, also probably permanently and forever. Got that?
So we killed a bad guy. Now do we go around the world killing bad guys, and call whatever chaos that comes out of the aftermath “better” just because the bad guy is dead???
Go back and study Romans 12 and 13 again, and apply yourself to understanding just where and in how many ways Mr. George W. Bush blew it.
31. neocon | February 20th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
15. Percy Beezer | February 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
1. Why did so many have to die to preserve our Constitutional rights?
Lying military recruiters duping poor uneducated inner-city kids with no hope into imperialist wars designed to enhance profits for corporations and dynastic families.
I wonder why liberals still want to live in America? Why don’t they have the self respect to leave this country? Are they that self loathing?
On the other hand this is exactly why we can not allow them to have any power whatsoever. I definitely believe that McCain will trounce either Clinton or Obama. I saw a poll today that over 90% of both Obama and Clinton supporters felt that if their candidate was not the nominee, that they would be very dissatisfied. That party is already fractured.
32. Joe | February 20th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
saw a poll today that over 90% of both Obama and Clinton supporters felt that if their candidate was not the nominee, that they would be very dissatisfied
Please link that poll. I’m not believing that one. From people I have talked to and read elsewhere that would be 90% would BE HAPPY with the nominee regardless of who it is.
33. neocon | February 20th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
I guess I heard the percentages wrong, but it still doesn’t bode well and will only get worse.
In one of CNN exit polls for Louisiana 66% of Clinton voters, said they would feel dissatisfied with Obama if he won the nomination. While “only” 50% of Obama supporters would be dissatisfied if Clinton won the nomination. Firstly, “dissatisfied” doesn’t mean “won’t vote for”.
http://kissavegan.livejournal.com/2008/02/09/
34. Canadian Rationalist | February 21st, 2008 at 12:02 am
Deleted - mindless insults
35. Gay Male Incest&hellip | February 29th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Gay Male Incest
came across our site doing some research coming from this other domain but as I can see it has nothing to do with “incest”, guess its a mistake
36. Natalia Vodianova&hellip | March 12th, 2008 at 6:38 am
Natalia Vodianova
Thanks for the nice read, keep up the interesting posts..