Happy stick safety maker

The news on Wall Street today is good. Really good. The toxic asset cleanup plan announced by Timothy "where's my Turbo Tax manual" Geithner, a folly recycled from the Bush administration, had a Viagra like effect on the market sending it rising for its biggest increase of the year. The Masters of the Universe on the trading floor are sure to be celebrating in hedonistic martini fueled splendor tonight for tomorrow the Dow could return to it's flaccid state of recent weeks. With this in mind, there's an article that caught my attention earlier today that I'd like to run up the old flagpole.

In a move that is anything but protectionist, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has decided to begin purchasing condoms from a Chinese company instead of from their long time supplier in Alabama. Not surprisingly, the move has raised the ire of workers at Alatech, the sole supplier of millions of gloves of love to the government agency. Loss of this work could mean the loss of several hundred jobs. So much for stimulus

The article about this in the Kansas City Star opens the door for an orgy of "if you can't keep it in your pants, keep it in the family" commentary on why United States government agencies should buy American instead of sending taxpayer money to a population controlling, forced abortion Communist country. But there is an even seedier side to this expose that is as thinly veiled as a latex covered ...well you get the point.

I'm not going to attempt to discuss the practicality or morality of free condom distribution as a way to combat the spread of Aids in lesser developed countries around the world. Men who possess much higher intellect, and some who don't, have been discussing this for years. My concern runs to the all too common of Liberal virtues: "it is the effort that matters most."

For years, failed policies have been defended because, after all, good intentions make up for a lack of results. For those who define progress as "helping more people" by increasing the numbers on social welfare rolls or the numbers receiving government aid instead of working to reduce the number who need said help, the distribution of more condoms is the measure of AIDs fighting effectiveness.

USAID does do constructive work with regard to the fighting of this pandemic and I am not trying to condemn them. But, like judging that woman across the pub as a potential mate through six-pack prescription beer goggles, I fear the bean counters at the agency are being a bit short sighted in this move. Cutting costs will enable more condoms to be handed out in villages throughout Africa to natives who, after watching a twenty-something Peace Corp worker put one on a gourd, will wonder why this gum tastes so funny.

China, which has provided the world with lead painted children's toys, toxic drywall, bootleg movies, tainted baby milk and food that has us returning to the pantry thirty minutes after dinner, is now having yet another of it's government run companies entrusted with the lives of millions of the world's randy citizens. As the world's richest (for now) super power, the United States has also been the most philanthropic of nations as well. For us to scrimp in this area begs the question, "What is the cost of a human life?"

Again, I am NOT commenting on the practice of condom distribution, that is a rant for another day. But if this practice is to occur, it should be done not just with the best of intentions but with the best of care. My concern does not arise because an Alabama company is being tossed aside like an aging spouse in favor of a younger model and I'm not just venting like a scorned Cheerleader on her Facebook wall after being dumped by the quarterback. No, this is not our first date with Chinese condom manufacturers who make a faulty product. Like Rihanna going back to that human male member and woman beating Chris Brown, we should know better.

S2