![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Amongst today's passel of lies...
May. 31st, 2007 09:47 amThe Organized Crime Racket of the American Presidency (OCRAP) continues to upmarket its image, following up our maverick, principled (and oh, so timely) stance about Darfur with more genuine, loving care to export to Africa.
The front page photo of the Washington Post Express has OCRAP Head Fuckstick Bush picking up a young black child as he might a pile of dirty underpants or a rotten log, and the caption reads "Bush Seeks $30B for AIDS." (I recommend he look under the sofa cushions; he is as likely to find it there as anywhere else.) Inside, the article takes Fuckstick at his word, going so far as to state, as fact, that the $30 billion represents a "doubling" of current funding.
What the blistering fuck IS this? Where did my liberal media go? (Maybe they're buried in the sofa too; that's what I used to do as a young child when things got uglier than I could deal with.)
There IS no $15 billion to double to $30. The Fuckstick used the number $15 billion once, four years ago, in his "State of the, [his] State of the Union, or State, [his] speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation" in announcing his Presidential Emergency Program For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR); and it was immediately and abundantly clear that the number was entirely fallacious, as solid as a calamari fart and every bit as pernicious. Four budget years later (in which, BTW, the White House's recommended PEPFAR numbers were used) the U.S. has spent less than $9.5 billion, leaving the White House scrambling to get Congress to spend $5.5 billion in a single year. How can our major newspapers allow the criminally lying assholes to get away with this shit on a daily basis? What fucking planet is this?
Ah well. Who cares? Certainly not Fuckstick; he doesn't give a flying fuck who comes up with how much money to combat HIV and AIDS anywhere: not here, not in Africa, not anywhere. He didn't care in 2003 when he dialed up the magic number $15 billion. If he cared in the slightest, he wouldn't try to foist abstinence-only prevention programs on at-risk populations here in the U.S., let alone in Africa, where societal norms around sex and marriage are radically different. Oh wait! I guess it's NOT abstinence-only... Fuckstick's AIDS Mouthpiece Marc Dybul explains:
'Calling ABC programs abstinence-only is also a mischaracterization. There is no abstinence-only provision. I wish people would stop calling it that. It's abstinence until marriage.'
Ah, I see. So not only do we want to tell people how and when to have sex, but we want to dictate how and when people can form primary lifetime 2-person bonds—presumably as blessed in the eyes of an imaginary being that few of the abstaining-until-marriage folk actually believe in.
And then this from Dybul: 'The bottom line is that funding should go to programs that work, and the evidence (supporting) ABC is overwhelming.'
And here I come close to gnawing off my own fingers. There is NO WORD for this kind of horseshit except EVIL. There just isn't. Study after study has found these programs to be wildly ineffective. See, for example, the congressionally mandated study whose results were released last month; also in 2004 Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Cal.) requested a review of federally funded abstinence-only programs aimed at public school students, which found that 11 or 13 of the reviewed curricula contained scientific inaccuracies w/r/t condom efficacy, risk factors, etc. And common sense suggests that, if you tell hormonally wound-up youngsters that their only option is to refrain from sex and don't tell them about STD prevention, a lot of them are going to have sex anyway without appropriate protection.
To argue that these programs are "successful" basically takes the same kind of disregard and disdain for the scientific method that allows Fuckstickians in Kansas and elsewhere to argue that evolution doesn't exist, Yahweh put all those dinosaur bones in the earth's crust just to test our faith, and global warming is a Democratic Party plot to scare citizens away from the GOP.
Nightmare... must... end... Please, gourd, wake up!
The front page photo of the Washington Post Express has OCRAP Head Fuckstick Bush picking up a young black child as he might a pile of dirty underpants or a rotten log, and the caption reads "Bush Seeks $30B for AIDS." (I recommend he look under the sofa cushions; he is as likely to find it there as anywhere else.) Inside, the article takes Fuckstick at his word, going so far as to state, as fact, that the $30 billion represents a "doubling" of current funding.
What the blistering fuck IS this? Where did my liberal media go? (Maybe they're buried in the sofa too; that's what I used to do as a young child when things got uglier than I could deal with.)
There IS no $15 billion to double to $30. The Fuckstick used the number $15 billion once, four years ago, in his "State of the, [his] State of the Union, or State, [his] speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation" in announcing his Presidential Emergency Program For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR); and it was immediately and abundantly clear that the number was entirely fallacious, as solid as a calamari fart and every bit as pernicious. Four budget years later (in which, BTW, the White House's recommended PEPFAR numbers were used) the U.S. has spent less than $9.5 billion, leaving the White House scrambling to get Congress to spend $5.5 billion in a single year. How can our major newspapers allow the criminally lying assholes to get away with this shit on a daily basis? What fucking planet is this?
Ah well. Who cares? Certainly not Fuckstick; he doesn't give a flying fuck who comes up with how much money to combat HIV and AIDS anywhere: not here, not in Africa, not anywhere. He didn't care in 2003 when he dialed up the magic number $15 billion. If he cared in the slightest, he wouldn't try to foist abstinence-only prevention programs on at-risk populations here in the U.S., let alone in Africa, where societal norms around sex and marriage are radically different. Oh wait! I guess it's NOT abstinence-only... Fuckstick's AIDS Mouthpiece Marc Dybul explains:
'Calling ABC programs abstinence-only is also a mischaracterization. There is no abstinence-only provision. I wish people would stop calling it that. It's abstinence until marriage.'
Ah, I see. So not only do we want to tell people how and when to have sex, but we want to dictate how and when people can form primary lifetime 2-person bonds—presumably as blessed in the eyes of an imaginary being that few of the abstaining-until-marriage folk actually believe in.
And then this from Dybul: 'The bottom line is that funding should go to programs that work, and the evidence (supporting) ABC is overwhelming.'
And here I come close to gnawing off my own fingers. There is NO WORD for this kind of horseshit except EVIL. There just isn't. Study after study has found these programs to be wildly ineffective. See, for example, the congressionally mandated study whose results were released last month; also in 2004 Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Cal.) requested a review of federally funded abstinence-only programs aimed at public school students, which found that 11 or 13 of the reviewed curricula contained scientific inaccuracies w/r/t condom efficacy, risk factors, etc. And common sense suggests that, if you tell hormonally wound-up youngsters that their only option is to refrain from sex and don't tell them about STD prevention, a lot of them are going to have sex anyway without appropriate protection.
To argue that these programs are "successful" basically takes the same kind of disregard and disdain for the scientific method that allows Fuckstickians in Kansas and elsewhere to argue that evolution doesn't exist, Yahweh put all those dinosaur bones in the earth's crust just to test our faith, and global warming is a Democratic Party plot to scare citizens away from the GOP.
Nightmare... must... end... Please, gourd, wake up!
