Time's Massimo Calabresi probably didn't come up with the headline "Idealistic Synergy" to describe the point of congruence between the most revolutionary conservative American president of the last quarter century and the most hidebound liberal institution of the last half century. But given that both are beholden to global corporate concerns yet still speak in the lingua franca of human rights is a fact well worth appreciating:
Maybe Bush is just toying with the U.N.; employing the rhetoric of the left for the policies of the right is something of a signature move for the President. His compassionate conservative agenda famously undercut Democratic claims to superior humanitarianism. Bush has boosted foreign aid throughout his presidency, but has conditioned it on adherence to conservative principles, like those on abortion. In Latin America last spring he spent much of the trip talking about social justice and promoted the idea of Bolivarian revolution, even as he held the line in trade negotiations and on foreign aid.
David Kuo, formerly the president's faith-based outreach honcho and now a macher at BeliefNet, might twist and shout about Bush's failure to follow up on his promises to faith-based programs. But isn't it interesting that one area of executive largess in which the money-mouth relationship has held steady has been AIDS relief? To my knowledge, neither the Vatican or the National Association of Evangelicals are vocal supporters of retroviral drugs.
As Dan Turner of the L.A. Times reported months ago (and Joey linked to months ago),
Bush upped the ante by asking Congress to double the size of his AIDS program, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, to $30 billion over five years. That is a vast commitment that dwarfs past efforts and provides real hope that humanity will in the near future be able to stop the spread of AIDS—an accomplishment akin, at least in scope, to putting a man on the moon. This disease has killed 25 million people so far and is still raging out of control, especially in Africa. PEPFAR has come in for its share of criticism because of some rules that seemed based more on evangelical ideology than science, but most of its critics have quieted down in the face of its obvious successes.
You know you're on the right track when Bob Geldof and Bono give you credit where they claim your Democratic predecessor only ever gave them the grief of empty promises.