Methodists, Politics, and Bush's Library

I'm curious -- how does the proposed SMU deal compare with the Carter Center's ties to Emory, which also is a United Methodist university? While I personally prefer Pres. Carter's policies and goals to Pres. Bush's, I do worry that a decision that SMU can't be tied to a policy institute supporting any political ideology could have bad implecations for the Emory/Carter Center partnership.

The Bush "Liberry" battle IS about religion.

Chimpy is a scumbag. A sinner.

He ordered torture. He lied to start a war.

And he hates working Americans, our troops, farmers, seniors, and everybody else whose bill he vetoed.

Chimpy is a evil, Godless man.

This IS about religion and morality.

And if you don't see this, and if you think Chimpy is a good Christian, you are a moron.

The Bush "Liberry" will be different from any other Presidential library in the US.

It will be a fact-free environment of lies, spin and propaganda. Lots of FOX News clips.

There will be a room with comfy chairs, coloring books and crayons, and books like "My Pet Goat" and "the Fart Book".

This is not the Children's Wing though.

It is the President's personal "liberry".

It will also have that Camoose feller and maybe some Shakespeares.

emory, do you understand the difference between a library designed to celebrate an administration.. and a center of learning,aiming for peace?

that's the difference.

President Bush and Dick Cheney are not religious men; They are con artists and the Methodists and the Baptists fell for it (they took a lot of money while they were at it, too.) and now they're too embarassed to admit they were wrong and the gravity of their failure.

We are ALL paying a heavy price for this stupidity.

deal with it.

I really don't like that the author of this article equates the morality of the death penalty with the morality or abortion. That's what it seems like he's doing. Presuming the person on death row is actually guilty (that's the tricky part), how is ending the life of a serial killer the same as dismembering a baby who has committed no crime?

I'm not sure how we can talk about convicted criminals and fetuses in the same breath.

It's perfectly obvious that a fetus is "innocent," just as the clouds and trees are innocent. They're all innocent because they cannot physically commit a crime.

I'm also not sure why anyone would call that limitation "innocence" in the first place.

"The fact that George W. Bush wants to build a library, any library, is cause for celebration."

It's actually cause for derision. Who is going to read anything in it? We see another "Mission Accomplished" maneuver. Just go home George; we don't need you any more.

A Bush library on the grounds of the Southern Methodist University? Monstrous! Why in the world would any religious organization want to build a monument to the anti-Christ, to a man who has the blood of thousands of innocents on his hands? The SMU will be infamous for allowing themselves to be used to promote an administration that held itself above the law, subverted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and used torture on innocent human beings.

This is not about religion, but politics pure and simple. Bush should go build his library in Bagdad.

What do you put in a w library? An unopened and unused Bible? A few comic books?

Why all the fuss? As a soon-to-be ex-president, Bush deserves to have a monument to his eight years as America's leader. The library and the think tank associated with the library will be a grand opportunity to demonstrate once again, as some fusty old Frenchie observed, that hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue. The library and its think tank will be a real-time demonstration of propaganda and spin at work, an opportunity for our children and our children's children to gaze upon the gulf between how Bush and his apologists see his presidency and the squalid reality that we are living through and we and our children will continue to deal with long after he has retreated to Crawford.
Let them build it.

Puhlease, puh leeaazzeeee take my library.

How embarrassing that no one wants your library, GW. Your Dad and Mom must be very proud.

Perhaps Letterman will license "Great Momments in Presidential Speeches" to the Library - what fun that would be.

On second thought, the sooner the nation can sweep that miserable Bush family, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the Third Reich into the nation's trash bin, the better.

Sincerely,
Providence Candlelight

I have already sent my mail to the headquarters of the Church indicating that after 45 years of membership, I will be leaving the church if Bush's library and Policy Center are allowed to be constructed on the campus... If it has to do with money, ask me and I might give more, but to take the money from this GWB yahoo - shame on you SMU....

Curious how so many people in the this country who did not even know SMU is in Dallas suddenly become so concerned for the school, and its reputation. Perhaps if they had sent a few bucks that direction, they would be taken a little more seriously.

How can we be talking about a library for a guy who barely picked up a book, let alone the newspapers?

Marik7:

I'm not sure how we can talk about convicted criminals and fetuses in the same breath.

It's perfectly obvious that a fetus is "innocent," just as the clouds and trees are innocent. They're all innocent because they cannot physically commit a crime.

I'm also not sure why anyone would call that limitation "innocence" in the first place.

--Is this really the logic for pro-death stances from the "Righteous" pro-lifers? We can talk about these instances in the same breath due to wrongfully convicted people caught in a system that cares more for money than justice. There is no dancing around this issue. You are pro life or you support capital punishment; you can not logically do both.

Emory alum:

I'm curious -- how does the proposed SMU deal compare with the Carter Center's ties to Emory, which also is a United Methodist university? While I personally prefer Pres. Carter's policies and goals to Pres. Bush's, I do worry that a decision that SMU can't be tied to a policy institute supporting any political ideology could have bad implecations for the Emory/Carter Center partnership.

-Hopefully they don't paint themselves into that corner. They should reject the Bush library and take one from a future ex-president with some decency and/or redeeming value. One thing is for sure...a Bush liberry is nothing more than a joke and it would shame SMUs educational validity to house it on their land.

The entrance to G.W.'s Liberry should bear the Banner:

"ABANDON ALL HOPE FOR TRUTH".

The George W Bush Presidential Library is now in theplanning stages.



The Library will include:


The Hurricane Katrina Room, which is still under

construction.

The Alberto Gonzales Room, where you won't be able to

remember anything.



The Texas Air National Guard Room, where you don't

even have to show up.



The Walter Reed Hospital Room, where they don't let

you in.

The Guantanamo Bay Room, where they don't let you out.

The Weapons of Mass Destruction Room, which no one has

been able to find.



The National Debt room which is huge and has no ceiling.



The 'Tax Cut' Room with entry only to the wealthy.



The 'Economy Room' which is in the toilet.



The Iraq War Room. After you complete your first tour,

they make you go back for a second, third, fourth, and

sometimes fifth tour.



The Dick Cheney Room, in the famous undisclosed

location, complete with shotgun gallery.



The Environmental Conservation Room, still empty.



The Supremes Gift Shop, where you can buy an election.



The Airport Men's Room, where you can meet some of

your favorite Republican Senators.



The 'Decider Room' complete with dart board,

magic 8-ball, Ouija board, dice, coins, and straws.



The museum will have an electron microscope to help

you locate the President's accomplishments.

Admission:

Republicans free

Democrats $1000 or 3 Euros

mikeq1,

Excellent! Thanks for the laugh.

After reading the posts here, it is obvious that the last remaining socially acceptable bastion of hatred and bigotry is against Republicans and conservatives.

Providence Candlelight calls the members Bush administration Nazis. That is usually not tolerated very well when directed at any other social, economic, religious, racial or ethnic group.

The irony is that the Nazi's held a monolithic political philosophy that tolerated no opposition voices. That is a lot closer to the view held by many of the folks posting here where the general belief seems to be that their views are the only ones acceptable and all others must be repressed.

Maybe you are all in favor of identity tattoos on Republicans, conservatives and evangelical Christians.

I do not think it is appropriate to use SMU, a Methodist University as a base for a Bush 43 Library. He will have many policy sharp curves as he wishes to devote efforts to estiblishing Democracy in the Middle East. Some of those Countries now have it and vote in officials (Palestine) he did not want---so what have we accomplished.
His Library needs to be either on the "border between Iraq and Pakistan" (McCain's made up geographical place) or in one of the abandoned buildings or tents at Guantanima Bay, Cuba. Gitmo will have the proper setting for his Presidency and the cruise ships can stop and picnic there. Maybe even have a beer with the President if he is there. And it would be good for America and the Republican Party to have George out of the Continental US for long periods of time. So its a win--win.

Tom Huff writes: "The irony is that the Nazi's held a monolithic political philosophy that tolerated no opposition voices. That is a lot closer to the view held by many of the folks posting here where the general belief seems to be that their views are the only ones acceptable and all others must be repressed."

No, actually the irony is that the administration and party that you have presumably supported for the last 7 years is exactly as you have described above. Boo hoo Tom Huff, boo hoo.

Is it really any wonder that Republicans and conservatives are the object of so much derision?

"monolithic political philosophy that tolerated no opposition voices"

I have to say I have yet to see a protester arrested at any of the Obama/Clinton/Edwards events. I also have yet to see protestors settled in fenced off protest areas far from being seen or heard. Yet I've seen these behaviors from W. Bush and McCain. How does one tolerate voices of opposition if you can't hear them?

MikeQ1 you made my day

Pamo:

All too true about the Shrub, with his totally screened, totally orchestrated farces of 'question' sessions. With some arrests for those who snuck in with the wrong T-shirt.

And all so true that no Democratic candidate has ever stooped to such cowardly behavior.

But McCain? Now I am an Obama supporter, but McCain is legendary for going one on one with a heckler, and often winning. Ya gotta admire him for that. But boy, does he deliver a lousy formal speech, just as bad as the Shrub.

I think I have to go with an article I saw recently about a sewage plant in Georgia somewhere where folks are seriously petitioning the owners/board to name it after W. :)

Trying to name a library after someone who loathed books is really an exercise in futility at best.

Sorta like starting a war based on false pretenses and.. oh wait.

SMU is a spectacularly poor choice for the Bush library. That Southern humidity will have a terrible effect on the coloring books and crayons.

Why is there such a big confusion?
All that Bush has accomplished in the past 8 years can not stand test of anything that could be used for learning or teaching.

Put that library anywhere they want, one has to wonder if there would be rush of people trying to get to it!!

No kidding? "The policies of the Bush administration are in direct conflict with the Social Principles of The United Methodist Church on issues of war and peace, civil liberties and human rights, care for the environment, and health care."

I'm taking back some of the bad things I've said about Bush. All this time I thought he was a completely rotten egg and now I find he's just a sheep wearing a wolf suit. He's still a thief in a cheap suit the way I see it. Maybe the Baptists can change my mind about that?

I have read most of the asinine comments posted here, and would just like to say this:
George W Bush's policies do not conflict with the Social principles. Most United Methodists agree with the Social Principles but disagree on how those goals are to be achieved. I believe that the church is really split about 65/35 as to how to achieve these goals with 35% (including the leadership) advocating an active role for the government in achieving change in the world, and 65% believing that change will only come about by the transforming power of Jesus Christ in the lives of individuals. In my experience the "leadership" of the church has abandoned the membership. In my experience most of the rank and file membership of the church just wishes the bishops and the people who head the various commissions would keep their hands out of the political arena and stick to preaching the transforming power of Jesus Christ. The leadership has almost completely adopted the liberal democrat philosophy that only the Federal Government has the wisdom and the power to make meaningful change in the world.
George Bush's philosophy of government relies, instead on the power of the individual to effect change. In addition, he takes very seriously his oath to protect and defend not only the Constitution of the United States, but the lives of the individuals who live in this great nation.
SMU would be an excellent location for his presidential library.

Tom Huff:

After reading the posts here, it is obvious that the last remaining socially acceptable bastion of hatred and bigotry is against Republicans and conservatives.

Providence Candlelight calls the members Bush administration Nazis. That is usually not tolerated very well when directed at any other social, economic, religious, racial or ethnic group.

The irony is that the Nazi's held a monolithic political philosophy that tolerated no opposition voices. That is a lot closer to the view held by many of the folks posting here where the general belief seems to be that their views are the only ones acceptable and all others must be repressed.

Maybe you are all in favor of identity tattoos on Republicans, conservatives and evangelical Christians

--The only tattoos I'm in favor of on Republican/rightwingers are black and blue. "opposition voices" You've got to be kidding me; like you hold some democratic light to shine for the rest of the population while attempting your goose stepping to a permanent majority.

Don't cry about being made the villain for terrible policy decisions and hypocrisy for the last 30 years. You reap what you sow. Now nobody likes you and sees your politics for the fraud they are....

mikeq1: your post was a riot....love it :)

As someone who once worked with presidential records as an employee of the U.S. National Archives, I find most discussions of presidential libraries to be disheartening. There is so much ignorance and there are far too many false assumptions. This inhibits discussion of the issues. Indeed, when I read the jokes, I wonder how the Archives will be able to get the good and reliable civil servants to come to work at the Library -- people of the type which you, the members of the public, as well as scholars, should hope to see handling the records.

Under a statute passed in 1978, a President's White House records belong to the U.S. government and by law, go to the National Archives. Those records include files generated by the President, his senior staff, support units in the White House and mail received in the White House from members of the general public.

White House records are not the personal property of the former President. Presidents do have the option of establishing private foundations to raise money to build Libraries to house those records, but the records could just as well be transferred into other National Archives' facilities. A President does not have to have a Library although every President since Ronald Reagan has gone that route.

Either way, the National Archives, an executive branch agency which is part of the federal government, is the entity which staffs the Presidential Library and administers, establishes physical and intellectual control over, and screens for public access the White House records.

I used to do that kind of work and the public trust required that my colleagues and I work in an objective and nonpartisan manner. That's why you need to encourage good quality civil servants to work at Presidential Libraries. Their work requires balancing the interests of all the stakeholders, from the creators of the records to members of the public. This requires great skill and sometimes courage. Jokes about comic books are more likely to drive good people away from applying for such federal jobs than to encourage them to undertake the needed effort to work through the many challenges.

A former President plays a role in the process. Archivists first read through records and decide whether they must be restricted or can be released. A former President's designated representative is allowed to screen what federal archivists have marked for disclosure. If the Archives marks something for opening, the former President may claim communications privilege if he wants the item withheld. Courts have asserted that this is a Constitutional privilege.

Presidents typically do not themselves perform such reviews after the federal archivists have concluded their disclosure screening. They tend to name lawyers to do that on their behalf. Such screening receives little coverage in the press so I'm not surprised most people don't know about it. Sandy Berger was a designated representative of President Clinton, for example. A policy institute plays no role in this archival work. It has no legal standing in the disclosure process.

The policy institute (or think tank, as it sometimes has been described) proposed for SMU is a separate entity from the Library. While the Presidential Library is a public sector entity, the proposed institute will be a private sector entity. Over time, opponents of the Library began to make this distinction. But a surprising number of people who comment on this issue still fail to recognize this. Or to consider how statutory controls, Constitutional privileges and other factors affect all of this. Too many people still conflate the Library and the institute which results in a lot of confusion on message boards such as this one.

Evidently Rove & W had a contest to see how many books they could read. I haven't seen much evidence that they learned anything, unless they read The Prince.
As to the liberry any one who wants it should have it and let's see who comes.

"What do you put in a w library? An unopened and unused Bible? A few comic books?"

Don't forget Bush's favorite book "The Pet Goat"
No library should be without it.

George Bush is pro-life, pro traditional marriage, and hard on terrorists. He introduced the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit and extended unemployment benefits. He has infused billions into Education. In fact, there has never been a time in history when we have spent so much on Entitlement programs. Wow, this is un-Christian? We truly live in a Welfare State. It basically all comes down to Iraq. Politically correct wimps like Bishop Groves hate Bush over this issue. And abortion. Abortion is the High Sacrament of the Church of Liberalism--which is all many churches are--the MTV reflection. The notion that 'The Church' has surrendered to the culture describes the sorry state of affairs exactly.

Okay, crazy Libs. You many commence more nonsense/hate speech here. I'll check back for a laugh later.

To be clear, in academia bashing the Bush library will make you popular. You will not receive reproach. So joining in gets you in with the in-crowd. It requires no courage. I'd assume it was actually expected, like breathing, around most academic environments.

But that's just for academics. There's a big cost to the SMU institution.

SMU knowingly competed with other universities to house the Bush library. To put SMU forward for the library then to create a stink when it won the competition shows poor character on the part of people now lamenting.

I'm sure we'll hear the phrase "but because we feel so bad, and because we really think we're right" this justifies our making fools of a campus, reputation, and endowment that others built." Actually it doesn't, although I am sure it makes these people very popular with their friends (friends who don't have to build institutions).

To rebuild the SMU brand, my guess is that it would take at least a $3-5 mm advertising campaign, and that wouldn't really repair the damage because the people hearing these arguments all over the world will not see (nor should they listen to) tinny voices telling us that SMU has little to sell us other than clattering Bush haters who would rather be popular with their friends who agree with them. As such, they submit a substantial bill to their institution's reputation (this would be the place that puts food on their table).

Our institutions don't just happen -- they take time and care to build and just a few silly people to help reduce confidence in them. You buy goodwill in thimbles and you spend it in buckets. SMU's political opponents of Bush have spent buckets other people filled. They are tearing at a fragile institution and, my guess is, will not shoulder the work it will take to build SMU back up once they're done making silly arguments.

.
Anon at 6:12 PM says it's all about the money - the Benjamins.

If rich folks decide that SMU ought to elevate Bush doctrine above the teachings of Jesus,
the poor folks should just shut up and get in line.
.

i realize on some days my methodist friend at st. pauls united methoditst church a church which is across the street from lake ella where i take a lot of my beutiful photagraphs and the church where i was babptised as an adult in the little chapel (my favorite part and service at this church before istopped attending) by catherine fluch price with the full blessing i assume of now bishop charlene (i am tto dyslexic to try to spell hell last name) who was the head preacher there when i wnt and whos servisces seemed to me to be said just for me when i first started going there after a tragic car wreck had shaken my faith to its core.. i bring this up because when i was a graduate stuedent at florida state university while his brother was the governer of florida i did my thesis state on the run up to the iraq war.. i waatched c-span 12-14 hours a day as input bothe the senate and the house.. i saww all the speeches and bills.. i did a show called mistaking profits 4 phophets in a plastic reality world and was not bery kind to mr bus or the congress but it was meant to be truth not politiical. in my home town of tallahassee the mary brogen museum pretends they dont know who i am, my art carreer has gone nowhere and iwas in national shows as a student, my reputation was unfairly slimed and ridaculed making it impossible for me to actually get a job all because i put in ... my thesis statement and stand by these words.. I THINK GEOREGE W. BUSH IS THE MOST SPIRITUALLY MISGUIDED EX METHODIST SINCE JIM JONES... THE MAN WITH KOOL AID IF YOU REMEMBER HE STARTED OUT METHODIST ALSO. being a methodist i thought i had the right to express myself being the son of a airforce officer then goverment agent college professor you pick which is more true perhaps both....i have much of my art that still cant be shown in america ...so please forgive if i don;'t call what the methodist are doing...POLITICS.. i would not want my name associate with this man or his policies either. call it reality , karma long delayed justice befginning , or merely a choice based on fact and morals ..don't pretend it is ..politics ,.. this is america we will be represeted by real representative agin soonm. people will have to account 4 thier actions,

Dear Tom Huff,

You write: Providence Candlelight calls the members Bush administration Nazis. That is usually not tolerated very well when directed at any other social, economic, religious, racial or ethnic group.

Shame on you Tom Huff.

The documented analogies between the Bush administration, Adolph Hitler, and the NAZI's are both L(l)egion and public.

No one person or group other than the bush administration is the target of these analogies.

Your insinuation is disingenuous and typical of NAZI republican misdirection.

Shame on you again, Tom Huff.

Hopefully, the good Methodists will tell GW to take his bloody, bundle of lies elsewhere. They do not belong at SMU.

Best they be displayed in the National Hall of Shame as a memorial to the victims of the Bushes, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et. al. as a reminder to the garbage supported by republicans for 12 long and horrible years.

Sincerely,
Providence Candlelight

To rebuild the SMU brand, it WILL take a $3 million ad campaign.

BECAUSE of the Chimpy "Liberry".

Not if they dump it.

Chimpy is going to be an albatross to anybody who associates with him after January 20.

I've already seen stories about how his liberry will be a propaganda-spewing garbage factory designed to improve his "legacy".

Chimpy HAS no legacy. He is a complete and total failure. He deserves no liberry.

My God, Archivist. Who in their right mind would want to work in Bush's library? Bush is like when your dog has the runs and you have to pick it up with a plastic bag - everything gets slimed with poop.

Anyone who works at Bush's library will be slimed with poop. I'd rather pick jalapeno peppers in Mexico than work at W's library.

Imho, there are 3 types of people in this country. The willfully ignorant, the blantantly stupid and those who think. Anyone who falls in to category 3 will know that any university that is religious and accepts a library for a mass murderer is hypocritical. George Bush presided over 134 executions as Governor of Texas. More than any governor in the history of the country. He waged an illegal war under false pretenses. He continues to lie to congress and the American people. He claims to be a religious man. He claims that God "speaks through him". Unfortunately, those that are very religious are very narrow minded (used to be one so I can speak from experience) they see only what they want to see. Not what really is. They are clearly not as savvy as they should be. George Bush is a war criminal and anyone who professes to be a good Christian should take another look at themselves and what they believe if they believe that he is a God fearing man. He is a con man who played on the fear and gullibility of people. I don't know much about the Methodist faith, but I would like to hope that there are enough people that have some common sense to see this man for what he really is. He is a war mongering fascist. He is not a man of faith and any faith that condones what this man does is not a Christian. The only place that he should open up a library for his one whole book that would be there (everything else is so secret with this administration so what would he actually have in there?)should be a prison cell in the Hague.

I see my prediction was right on..TOM3 you don't disappoint. You're cute little rants are a bit much though. Kinda like my 4 year old being denied candy. You should have your mouth washed out with soap and get a church'in' up! (though not at a standard liberal Methodist Church). Your wish for some of us to explore the nether-regions of the underworld is most impolite. Actually, it is those who truly wish such things (and harbor such hatred in their hearts) that are the ones most likely of winding up there.

Providence, when I think of "bloody hands", I think of the all the abortionists you are so pleased to enable and support. Are you proud of your American Holocaust?

Carry On Libs! 'Talk Amongst Yourselves' as they say. No one really expects to find a representative sample of common sense America here. But it is funny.

"SMU knowingly competed with other universities to house the Bush library. To put SMU forward for the library then to create a stink when it won the competition shows poor character on the part of people now lamenting. "

I work in academia, and I can tell you how it works. Bigwigs in stuffed shirts make Faustian bargains for various and sundry reasons, leaving the pawns on the board to deal with the "official policy". Well, sometimes we pawns fight back for the right issue at the right time.

"George Bush is pro-life, pro traditional marriage, and hard on terrorists... In fact, there has never been a time in history when we have spent so much on Entitlement programs. Wow, this is un-Christian?"

Where are all the terrorists he was so hard on? The Red Cross said over 70% of prisoners in Abu Ghraib were innocent. When the scandal broke we put them on buses and dropped them off in the middle of town. If they were terrorists, why did we release them? If they were not terrorists, why was it morally permissible to jail and abuse them? The estimates of how many at Gitmo are innocent are similar. In fact we have already released hundreds, often after years of abuse at our hands. If it was permissible to abuse jail and abuse them because we were terrorists, why did we let them go? Under what Christian principle do you lock up thousands of innocent people with no respect for bothering to find out if they are actually guilty, and then torture and abuse them? This is Torquemada's kind of Christianity, not mine.

And the entitlement programs? If George Bush's friends and family weren't raping the populace, we wouldn't be having to pay for food stamps and Medicaid for people who toil 8 hours a day at WalMart but earn so little they qualify for benefits.

Arminis - I too see where McCain does take on some who slip into his town hall meetings. But see below in Denver where staffer's requested the police to remove a 67 year old librarian because she had a BUSH=MCCAIN sign. Don't think she'll be applying at the W Library anytime soon.
http://www.denverpost.com/newsheadlines/ci_9844803

Tom, "Maybe you are all in favor of identity tattoos on Republicans, conservatives and evangelical Christians."

I"m an independet but change that to neo cons and I'll suggest a nice Swastika tattoo for you forehead.

Robert B:

George Bush is pro-life, pro traditional marriage, and hard on terrorists. He introduced the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit and extended unemployment benefits. He has infused billions into Education.

Pro life? We are all pro-life. Bush has more blood on his hands since _________ (fill in the blank).

Shame on you Robert B.

Pro traditional marriage (you are proud of that?)? Perhaps GW should offer his library to Saudi Arabia.

Shame on you Robert B.

Hard on terrorists? How laughable. GW is the terrorist. Just ask anyone related to the 100's of thousand innocent dead but not only relatives of the dead.

Shame on you Robert B.

Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. Puh lease, bush and the republicans signed on only to steal from the taxpayer in order to give to the Big Pharmaceuticals. Mom and Dad get the left overs.

Shame on you, Robert B.

Education? This is the biggest lie of all. Shame on you Robert B.

Even so, GW's legacy is well cast. Why thrust it on the Methodists? It isn't wanted.

Sincerely,
Providence Candlelight

As a United Methodist I am appalled that our church could even consider allowing a monument to this man and his administration. Can you imagine the sign? "Welcome to SMU home of the Anti-Christ's Presidential Library."

Tom3, forget about Robert. He's a circular-logic fellow. It's easier for Robert to believe lies than admit he's are wrong. Christianity, to dupes like Robert has NOTHING to do with Christ but all to do with being infallibly right. His type keep voting in murderers like Bush because they think he will end abortion. Bush has been in office 8 years lying, cheating, borrowing, spending and killing. But is abortion illegal?

It's useless to bicker with idiots. Better to spend your time making a donation to Obama's campaign.

Off the top of my head, here are some of the failures of the Shrub, that Neanderthal dragging his knuckles around the Oval Office, wishing for another aircraft carrier to parade around on:

1. Afghanistan - a righteous war, but screwed up by the administration because of Iraq. Not to mention our failure to get OBL at Tora Bora because of too few boots on the ground. Our commanders on the ground there were crying for more troops, but noooooo.......

2. Iraq - the Shrub's ego trip, fomented by lies. For oil too. Funny - while the Iraqis were gleefully looting the entire country, instead of throwing flowers, as the neocons promised, our troops guarded nothing but the oil ministry.

3. Katrina - "You're doin' a heck of a job, Brownie!". That beautiful city still in ruins, despite promises. Odd that most of those displaced people probably voted democrat.

4. The shredding of our Constitution through unlawful spying, among other things like suspending habeas corpus.

5. Torture. Totally against the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which governs the armed forces. Totally against the Geneva conventions. Totally against anything remotely moral. But the CIA did not have to follow any of this, and the army was told not to follow it either... more damage done to American prestige than any other action in our history.

6. The 'No Child Left Behind' act. Known to many teachers as the 'No Teacher Left Standing' act. Studies have shown little progress.

7. (Add your own entries, the list goes on and on.)

Arminius, this isn't about Bush being a failed president in terms of policy (a la Carter). Its about him having made a mockery of "faith" to justify immorality.

Oh, not the kind of immorality his minions like Robert try to use to distract the good Americans from the real issues - i.e. gay marriage, etc. The kind of immorality where he use faith to justify torture, abuse, usury, war profiteering, and unjust war.

And yet, its more than just enshrining one of the most immoral presidents on a Christian campus. Its the propaganda institute that goes with it trying to whitewash his image.

If we are lucky enough to ever get to the bottom of this latrine, I think this nation will be shocked at what was done in our name and the name of the Lord.

I commend GWB's symbolic gesture to equate himself and books.

I feel sure that had he the ability to read during his time in office, it would have made a big difference in his ability to comprehend some of the big issues that he has been involved with.

Maybe the fraudulent invasion of Iraq that so seriously misallocated our security resources and empowered Iran would not have happened had Mr. Bush been literate.

It's never too late to learn to read and I commend his decision to create a library (in his own image) so that he can begin this important task.

I just had a post impounded. Another Phillipic against the Shrub. Oh well.

To whoever replied to me and accidently used my handle: Yes, it is also about true faith being perverted. But that was not my point.

I accidentally wrote my post in armenius' name instead of responding to his post

SOrry about that chief

This is certainly a balanced article, so balanced it says nothing. Or maybe the point is that Methodism says nothing or means nothing.

Tom, thanks for the well-wishes! My only relief is that it is clear that you're not old enough to vote. Perhaps 2012..or 2016?

Providence, when traditional marriage (Man + Woman..what a concept?!?) is somehow compared to Saudi justice and sense of mores then you simply confirm most people's view of the Looney-Left Democrat Party. It's hardly worth debating. (plus it's a stupid comparison..w/a polygamous society?). The Iraq war? .like you'll change your mind. But I await with glee your reaction, should the Big-O make it into office, when he keeps our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for years to come (he mentioned 2010 today). There will be no immediate exit. And you and your buds will howl with outrage. When history takes the long view, Bush will be vindicated. That's what you hate most, isn't it?

"we are all pro-life"????Not the Methodist Church. That's why Hillary's been so comfy there... and not your alternate church, the Democrat Party. 3-5 thousand babies have been butchered today. My, how proud you must be!

Martiniano, Christianity has everything to do with being fallible--of which I plead guilty. And Our only redemption is through Christ. The exclusivity of this claim makes you squeamish, yes? Oh! I'm so closed minded!!! I guess Jesus was too.

Some Methodists think the war in Iraq is just and righteous. Others find it illegal, immoral and unwise. - as more light is shed, it is increasingly apparent that intelligence reports were manipulated to reach a predetermined conclusion. Much of it has gotten little publicity - like the letter that Oak Ridge ( a nuclear facility) scientists wrote informing Bush that the aluminum tubes couldn't be for nuclear weapons, followed by their alarmed calls when they were rebuffed, followed by an order to accept that the president had decided what the tubes were for and if they wised to keep their security clearances they'd cease and desist contradicting the president.
Some think we are called to protect God’s creation from global warming and other man-made ecological woes. Others think we have rightful dominion over all of creation. Is it a GOd given right to despoil it for our children too?

Some oppose abortion but support the death penalty. Others do just the opposite. Some say judge not lest you be judged.

Some say God rewards the holy with spiritual riches. Others say we’re also entitled to material wealth in the deal. Does that include war profiteering, usury, and paying employees so little that they qualify for food stamps, so that you can jack up your profit sheet on the backs of the taxpayer?

Some say health care is a God-given right. Others say it’s a privilege that must be earned. WHat would Jesus say?

The Bush library plan would allow Bush to squirrel away documentary evidence that's public property until he's dead so that he can avoid prison.

FREE AMERICA

DIRECT DEMOCRACY

actually, I wonder why they need a library anyway. All the papers on important policy decisions will certainly be lost lest they be subpoena'd for evidence in a war crimes trial

Patriot,

No problem. Been there, done that.

There is the group in the methodist church which supports ecumenism which allies itself with other false religions. These are the same people I suppose that don't want that library. Devils uses all kinds of "good" reasons just to stop what is suppose to be a good project.

If they don't want the library, Liberty University would accept it MOST GLADLY. Some stupid people are not worthy of help, I guess.

Robert, I notice you put up a straw man but failed to respond to how Christian behavior was compatible with jailing thousand of innocents, justifying torture, abuse, neglect and denial of human rights in the name of "they're terrorists", and then freeing them by the busloads when your treatment of them comes to light. (After all, if they're terrorists, why on earth would they be released? Bush is tough on terrorists, no? So, I guess they werent' terrorist then if he let them go?)

Is it Christian to torture and abuse terrorists? If so, how much responsibility does a Christian have to actually make sure they are terrorists before affording them such abuse?

There is the group in the methodist church which supports ecumenism which allies itself with other false religions. These are the same people I suppose that don't want that library. Devils uses all kinds of "good" reasons just to stop what is suppose to be a good project.

If they don't want the library, Liberty University would accept it MOST GLADLY. Some stupid people are not worthy of help, I guess

Living close to the debate concerning the Bush Library it is all but over. Bush 1, liberal whiners 0.

Hundred years from now people will know and appreciate that Prez. Bush brought Freedom and Democracy to at least 58 million people.

And they will know that Prez Bush laid low terrorist, saddamist, theocrats and their sympathizers here and elsewhere around the world.

While it took United States democracy over 100 years plus a civil war to stabililze and become universal for its citizens it hopefully will not take as long for the good and freedom loving people of Afghanistan and Iraq.

As for Bush's detractors, well no library for them anywhere.

Liberty U - NOW we know what stone Spidy crawled out from under....

"In effect we're subsidizing that land toward a policy institute that supports a political ideology," delegate Jeannie Trevino-Teddlie told the Dallas Morning News. "I believe that's contrary to what our [Book of] Discipline says Methodist property can be used for."

Is Ms. Trevino-Teddlie blinded by her own ideology? Every top notch, major university in the U.S. subsizies the political ideology of the left. I have heard and seen the conservative quota system enforced blatantly at several of the most august institutions of higher learning in the U.S. Where a new conservative is brought up suddenly the odd arguments begin like "they can't be collegial" (trans: they'll disagree with me)or "Their papers are too long" (This from a world renowned place). Most conservatives, no matter how qualified, can't get a foot in the door these days to the very top schools, let alone tenure.

Such imbalanced ideology is a disservice to our current and future generation. It also means our students are going to be rolled over by people who weren't patronizingly shielded from a robust and honorable framework of thought.

In the top universities, liberal ideology operates in lock-step, and is pronounced (especially ideology regarding Marxism and the politics of victimization). I have not found that these teachings have necessarily made more of those who are learning them. I have seen a lot of people stumbling around once they got their first job, then mocking out of touch professors. And I find the latter to be as disturbing as the former. I believe professors should speak sense and be afforded respect.

Folks, we're in this world together. There are some excesses on each side. I applaud those schools that are going against the grain to get enough conservatives to give some good sense conservatism a shot. In this UC-Berkeley and Texas A&M are good examples of world class, respected places where they are trying to have more than one point of view. Their students at least have a chance of hearing a balanced view of things.

More middle ground!

this scumbag's library would be more appropriately placed on the campuses of any of those so-called colleges from which he recruited the religious whackjobs to administer agencies and laws which they opposed. as planned, they spent their time trying to confound and stifle the missions of these lawfully constituted institutions and running off those faithful public servants who were trying to do their jobs. but then, honor has never been a virtue they understand or admire. if not liberty, regent, or bob jones u., why not that sewage plant in california for which his name has been nominated?

Not a problem! The Bush library will only need one book shelf. Cliff Notes and 1 copy of "The Presidency for Dummies" will not take up much room.

What will be in the Wibrary? Everything in the Bush Adm. is TOP SECRET -- even his snot-filled tissues. The whole concept is a joke.

Look Jane. Here is spot. Spot is black and white just like Mr. Bush was. Mr. Bush was a president who did not like to read. Do you like to read? Tell your friends why you want to learn things from books. Mr. Bush did not want to learn so he rode his bike and did not read anything. But, he was not happy because he did not understand important things you learn from reading. He was always confused and he said things that made no sense. What are some important things you have learned from reading? If you were president would you ride your bike all the time or would you read to learn all you could? Why do you think Mr. Bush did not like to read? Do you know people like Mr. Bush who do not want to learn? Do you think they would make a good president?

Who is David Waters? Why is it that the Methodist church is his "beloved" Methodists? He seems shocked at some of the basic aspects of the UMC which differentiate it from other mainline Christian denominations. It is hierarchical, rule bound bureaucratic organization which has obvious roots in the Anglican tradition. It is not a congregational church -- the congregation has NO voice in choosing their pastor. David Waters talks like a shocked Baptist here. The UMC has a liberal tradition at the top which is often in conflict with its more conservative congregations. I left the UMC because I found more meaning in the Episcopalian focus on ritual, and my husband finds the Methodists to be "powerfully boring". However, I do not understand criticizing the church for taking time to be thoughtful about what it chooses to do with its land. Why are people so angry about this? Why did you bother to write such a pointless piece about this? It certainly would have been more interesting to talk about how this debate within the UMC mirrors several other issues in the UMC, and that the UMC's inability to take a moral stand one way or the other could be leading to the death of the organization.
p.s. Perhaps you should have a more moderated forum -- these comments are inane

Lynchburg, VA or Liberty University in Norfolk would be more appropriate.

Build it in Baghdad.

Please, get the name right.

It's the George W. Bush Presidential Li-berry.

ROBERT B. WINS THE TRIFECTA.

(Dear reader, please forgive my slang and mean-spirited frame of mind, also please forgive me for taking advantage of Robert B.).

Robert, you have revealed yourself to be stupid, ignorant, and immoral.

I say stupid for the reason that you are unable to read for content.

E.g., my recommendation of Saudi Arabia (for the site of the collection) had nothing to do with Saudi justice (your word);
it had everything to do Saudi homophobia;
it had everything to do with Saudi Arabia being a more fitting home for the "collection" than a Methodist institution;
it had everything to do with the Saudis and Bushes sharing the same bed (metaphorically, I think).

It was just over your head, Robert. Stupidity is nothing of which to be ashamed. There is nothing you can do to improve your stupidity.

On the other hand:

I say ignorant for the reason that you mis- characterize the UMC.

Please read what the National Right to Life, champion of the unborn, has to say about the UMC. Should you be ashamed of your ignorance? probably.

Fortunately, Robert, you do not have to remain ignorant; to do so will be your choice. Here is a bit of reading for you. It will help you better understand the UMC.
http://www.nrlc.org/news_and_views/May08/nv052908.html

BTW, did you know that GW is a member of the UMC?

Here's the zinger, Robert B.: If you did not know then you are ignorant.

If you did know, why disparage Methodists while at the same time touting GW? hahahahah.

If you did know, you were unable to correlate why a United Methodist member, GW, would offer his blood stained collection to SMU, a Methodist institution.

It was just beyond your kin; further evidence of your stupidity?

Does being stupid and ignorant make you immoral?

No, your lying makes you immoral.

I do think (as another reader has suggested) that Liberty U - I suppose any institution can label itself a university these days - would be a suitable place for the collection.

I am not suggesting that you are a "graduate" of Liberty "U". I am not suggesting that you are a graduate of any university.

Now to the issue of the blood stained hands:

Wrong again Robert. I stated that I was pro-life, but you simply ignored that - Does that make you stupid? no; ignorant? no; immoral? yes.

That's another example of your immorality. Fortunately, unlike stupidity, immorality is an area where you can improve yourself; but are you too stupid to realize this?

I will work with you anyway I can as long as you are honest with yourself.

Good luck, Robert B.

Sincerely,
Providence

Why are they fighting? Why do you think? Bush is the most corrupt, destructive, amoral president in this country's history -- and he wants to create a propaganda museum to airbrush away all the breathtaking failure of his presidency.

Duhhhhh.

That the Methodist Church would have reservations in hosting the Bush library is evidence of the kind of decay that one always sees when a church comes under the sway of false teachers. The Methodist Church is no longer Christ's Church but it rather a church of a different god - liberalism. It is time to clean house and get rid of the so-called leaders of the Methodist church. Better yet, it's time for the Methodist church to stop hemmoraging and just plain shut down.

This is a Christian nation, founded by good Bible-believeing Christians in the name of the Lord God and the savior Christ Jesus. It should be law that all churches should subscribe to the doctrine of infallability - or shut down.

George W. Bush is a Bible-believing Christian who has served his nation and the Lord God with grace and dignity. None of the current canditates even come close. God will punish us for going back to the days when we choose those weak of faith as being our leaders. If B. Hussein Osama is elected, it is surely a sign that the final days are not far off.

May God bless America and may God bless George W. Bush. Praise God!

Matthew said - "This is a Christian nation, founded by good Bible-believeing Christians in the name of the Lord God and the savior Christ Jesus. It should be law that all churches should subscribe to the doctrine of infallability - or shut down."

How silly of me. I thought this nation was founded on the principles of religious freedom.

What did Founding Father Thomas Jefferson have to say about making this a Christian nations?
"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors. "
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
Or, what about: "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
But this one's my favorite: "Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination. "
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

Lets think about Matthew's desire that "It should be law that all churches should subscribe to the doctrine of infallability". Law? Who should write that law? Which infallibility doctrine should it mandate? The Pope's? The Methodist's? Matthew's? Which legislator is Matthew approaching to write the Amendment to the Constitution to make this law?

The Constitution is on life support but not yet completely dismantled. If we do not act soon, we will all be at the mercy of Matthew's Christian Taliban soon.

I wonder if there will be a shrine room where Christians can celebrate the death of Pat Tillman and insult his family like the Colonel who headed the investigation into his death (who memorably, if somewhat inaccurately, called him "worm dirt" and said his family were complaining because they are atheists and thus know Pat died for nothing).

Robert B and Matthew are extremely lucky that they have the opportunity to see their Bible come to life.

Everytime they read their Bible and come to the work "Pharisee", they have only to hold up a mirror in front of their own face, and they get to see what one looks like!

As a lifelong Methodist (and a rather conservative one in many respects), I must say that I am not at all happy to have the name of my church associated with the unchristian policies and immoral acts of my co-religionists Messrs. Bush and Cheney. If the institution (rather erroneously called a library) must be built, at SMU because Mr. Bush and his associates have already bought off the powers that be there, then let it be built, but the university should then have the decency to drop the word "Methodist" from its name.

Matthew, you are joking, right? Please tell me we don't have such ignorance still in the USA? The USA is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation founded upon a constitution of religious liberty and tolerance.

What part of that do you not understand? Oh, I'm sure you are joking - and you pulled it off very well!

...grace and dignity... pure genius!

Robert B I'm waiting for your answer.

Is it Christian to abuse and torture terrorists?

If the answer is yes, how much responsibility does a Christian have to make sure they are actually a terrorist before abusing and terrorizing them?

We released hundreds and hundreds of people from Abu Ghraib in the wake of the scandal - some of whom spent years without charges or due process of law. If they were not terrorists, was W behaving as a Christian when he supervised their arrest, abuse and torture? If they were terrorists, was W being "tough on terror" when he supervised their release?

I'm waiting Robert, mostly for the straw man you'll introduce to duck the question.

The whole argument in the comments shows that this debate has nothing to do with religion. The vast majority of posters do not use the Bible in their comments. They only care about the politics.

SMU should accept this library because it is an honor to get a Presidential Library.

Before everyone attacks me for this opinion, ask yourselves, have you never sinned?

I tend to agree with some of Bush's policies but disagree with some as well. I do not have a strong opinion on Iraq. I do know this, that if those who are against it are right, and it is an immoral war, George Bush will need the saving grace of Christ more than most. And perhaps, they are right, he has sinned more than most. Was that not the whole purpose of Christ? Did He not come down here to save the world from their sins? Did He not come for "the wicked"?

Just my thoughts. Attack away.

martiniano, I also considered that Matthew was joking, but decided it would just bee too hard to write that without vomiting.

I was visiting a church a few weeks ago when I noticed all the females in the religious depictions had their heads covered. I wondered why people whose every image of Mary showed her with a covered head were so offended by the covered heads of Muslim women? Then I realized that they just haven't been told yet by George Bush, and Robert B, and Matthew, and James Dobson and Rush Limbaugh that they are supposed to be offended by Mary's covered head as a sign of Muslims trying to take over Christian art. With Rush carrying the water, it is time to insist that they remove all images of Mary in Muslim headdress from all our churches, and go back the purity of Christianity and our more virtuous bare-headed women. Don't you agree?

And the Queen of England, she's never seen without a hat. I bet she's a closet Muslim too. Soon we will have the head of America as a closet Muslim (B Hussein), and the figurehead leader of Britain as a closet Muslim, and all the religious depictions of women in Christian stories wearing Muslim headdress so who must also be closet Muslims. Good grief, we're being overrun by Muslims. Quick, get Rush to sound the alarm.

Not as good as Matthew, but I try

What a shame that GHW Bush won't let his useless son put his two coloring books in a utility closet in his own library and useless George drags a church into the mud. Or tries to do so.

"you have to be kidding me" - Good one!

Bush is morally weak. When he leaves office in disgrace the neocons will have no further use for him - they're already too busy whispering sweet nothings in John McCain's ear. (If its really really quiet you can sometimes hear them crooning "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran..."

Without their spiritual guidance, Bush may someday find repentance and redemption.

Anonymous

Are you saying you are morally stronger? If so, I would argue that is not a very Christian stance. I know that I have sinned many times in my life. I know that I will likely continue to sin.

President Bush has also sinned, and will likely continue to do so.

Just because you do not like his politics, does not make him less of a Christian.

Jesus came to Earth to pay for my sins, President Bush's and yours. To not allow a library on your property because you feel he has sinned too many times, is to wholly reject the teachings of Christ, in my opinion.

Christ died for ALL of our sins.

You have got to be kidding

Is it necessary to recognize that one is a sinner to be called into fellowship with Jesus Christ?

Library yes, Think tank no. SMU is a rich kids Texas Ivy League School,( they like to be known as the Harvard of the South,)but without the academics anyway. It's located just next to North Park and Neiman's and it's ye shall be judged by the Prada bag you carry and the frat you pledge. Laura Bush went to school at SMU. You pay about $250,000.00 for a law degree. Fail a course, pay to take it over and your F goes away forever. Most of the students are Republican and relegion plays very little part in the school - most students don't even know there's a seminary at SMU. Great place for a Bush Library - it'll fit right in, but the neocon think tank is down right dangerous.

The perfect university for W's library? Easy, Clown Collge.

"Are you saying you are morally stronger? "
No, I don't recall saying that.

"President Bush has also sinned, and will likely continue to do so. "
Judge not lest ye be judged

"Just because you do not like his politics, does not make him less of a Christian."
I don't recall commenting on his politics. I recall commenting on murder, torture, unjust war, war profiteering and other sins. It would be a sad day indeed in America if these constitutied politics.

"Jesus came to Earth to pay for my sins, President Bush's and yours. To not allow a library on your property because you feel he has sinned too many times, is to wholly reject the teachings of Christ, in my opinion. "
He is free to sin as he wishes without my judgment. But using church property to build a temple to whitewash the sins and glorify unrepentence is a sacrilege.

Anonymous:
You have got to be kidding

Is it necessary to recognize that one is a sinner to be called into fellowship with Jesus Christ?

July 23, 2008 1:02 AM | Report Offensive Comments
}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}]]
If that is a serious question, then you are asking a great question. The answer is in the book of Romans. Furthermore, Jesus came to save only sinners. He didn't come to call the righteous to repentance.

Well building the GW Library at SMU maybe a good thing, if they could just give it the shape of giant toilet.

"In effect we're subsidizing that land toward a policy institute that supports a political ideology," delegate Jeannie Trevino-Teddlie told the Dallas Morning News. "I believe that's contrary to what our [Book of] Discipline says Methodist property can be used for."

How many churches already violate that policy?
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
Political ideology....church....what name comes to mind? It's Wright here on the tip of my tongue. It's between Isaiah and Lamentations.....just won't come to me. I'm too focused on President Obama's trip to the Middle East.

To Jeff Taylor

It is indeed a serious question.

If one must repent to be called into fellowship with Jesus Christ, then what must one make of W's insistence that he cannot think of any mistakes he has ever made?

The tradition of ex-communication would entirely support barring an unrepentant sinner from building a temple to unrepentance on church property.

Arminius-

Are your comments re: Spidey something Jesus approves of?

I wonder about you sometimes.

This article isn't about the Bible; it's about Methodist policy.

Regarding Methodist policy

What does it say about rewarding unrepentant sinners?

It is laughable that a publication known the world around for journalistic accomplishment would devote a front-page web segment to mutterings of the superstitious among us. Evidently the competition for readership is intense indeed. Other than in sustaining the pretense that the Pope, various Bishops, clergy etc., have something meaningful to say to us as a function of "faith" (as opposed to, say, reason with common sense and compassion), the summation of significance of the material in "On Faith" - including any comment of mine about it - is equivalent to that of National Enquirer and other tabloids that blare at us from grocery checkout racks. One needn't be an atheist (as I am not) in order to understand this.

how much space does " MY PET GOAT " occupy????????????

It is dishonest to present the Bush project as a "library" when, in fact, it will be a propaganda machine (ergo "think tank") to continue the disinformation and deceit that were the hallmarks of the Bush presidency into eternity. As a lifelong Methodist, I am sad that Bush and Cheney have brought disgrace to my church.

I believe that a person should actually have read a book before anyone names a library after them.

In response to

"MOwoman:

It is dishonest to present the Bush project as a "library" when, in fact, it will be a propaganda machine (ergo "think tank") to continue the disinformation and deceit that were the hallmarks of the Bush presidency into eternity."

Almost everyone who is commenting here has conflated the two. The Library is governmental (part of the National Archives). The think thank will be private sector. They are two separate entities. Civil servants will staff the Library (I once did that type of work with Presidential records.) Far from acting in a propaganda capacity, the public trust demanded that we act in an objective and nonpartisan fashion. And we did, often at some cost as we got caught in some crossfire. If you have time, scroll down and take a look at my detailed explanation around 5:52 on July 22.

Why should a library have to be attached to a Church?

Why not to the school, college or University President Bush attended?

Or a completely independent library attached to nothing/local government, located in one of his favorite places?

Or in an institution that needs a good library desperately but cannot afford it? That would be very selfless and Christian.

All this fuss over one copy of My Pet Goat.

For Mr. Waters,

If you plan to write again about the George W. Bush Presidential Library, and want to avoid comments that do not center on the issue at hand, I have a suggestion. Spell out clearly, at the beginning of any essay you write, that a Presidential Library is part of the federal government and is staffed by and administered by the U.S. National Archives. Whether it is located on a campus or in the suburbs of Washington, DC has no impact on its internal operations or ability or inability to release the White House documents it holds.

In the case of SMU, the Library was presented to all the sites bidding for the Library (such as Baylor) as part on a non-negotiable package which also includes an institute or think tank. That is unusual and did not occur with the establishment of any other Presidential Library. (There are 12 Presidential Libraries, for Presidents Franklin Roosevelt through Bill Clinton).

That is not to say some such libraries are not located in campus settings that also include policy institutes. But in those instances, the institutes, although they may bear a President's name, are run by the university, not by a private foundation set up by a former President as will be the case with that for Mr. Bush.

The situation at SMU is unique. But you need to spell out what the components are and to separate them. Doing so may not prevent people from making silly Pet Goat and comic book jokes about a repository which actually will include, among other things, letters received at the White House from members of the public just like the people posting here. Of course, it also will include the records (electronic and paper-based) generated by the President and his senior staff.

Having once been tasked with screening White House records to see what could be released for public research, I can say it is a job worth doing, in the nonpartisan, objective manner the laws require, regardless of who the President is. Our nation's history is too important not to make the effort.

But to get that point across, you first need to separate upfront the Library from the Institute. Bottom line: in writing about this, do not use the term Library when you mean the think tank. As the comments posted here show, conflating the two leads to far too much confusion.

I think the library should consist of every book Bush has ever read. We can put those two comic books in the bathroom and call it a day!

"The entire debate could turn on the technicality of whether SMU's plan to lease land for the institute violates its Methodist articles of incorporation."

Sounds like to me the decision has already been made to turn down the President.

When a legal technicality is the focus more often than not it is just a smoke screen for covering up the real intentions of those making the decision. They don't like Mr. Bush. Yet they want to hide their hate in order to appear righteous. They have no real justification for turning down the President of The USA and a great honor because, yes, they and many churches already violate the policy technicality in question. But never mind because legalism is always about obscuring things, excuses, and technicalities.

These hypocrites do what every church leader past and present has always done. They turn to legalism to justify their actions.

Mark 7:6-13 And he said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’ You leave the commandment of God, and hold fast the tradition of men." And he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God, in order to keep your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die’; but you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is Corban’ (that is, given to God)— then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the word of God through your tradition which you hand on. And many such things you do."

The nub of the issue is this: George Bush authorized torturing innocent people, and we have tortured 25 to death. He has lied about it. What church would want to be affiliated with that sort of behavior?

I have a compromise solution. Let Bush push the library cart around the penitentiary he will serve in for his high crimes and misdemeanors.

Please excuse me for ignoring the point of the article and commenting on a minor point, the quote: "Some think we are called to protect God’s creation from global warming and other man-made ecological woes. Others think we have rightful dominion over all of creation."

These two items are presented as contradictory, but it is important to recognize that they are not. Yes, Christians believe that people have rightful dominion over all of creation, but that means that we should care for it, not abuse it. This does not allow for its abuse any more than the President of a company who has dominion over the company has a right to abuse his or her employees. The true difference among Christians on this issue is more subtle, not whether creation should be cared for but the priority it should be given in comparison to other, also important issues.

Would you want your University to host a George W. Bush Library? Am sure SMU is concerned about being labeled a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah in which every vestige of the Bush Presidency is wiped from the face of the Earth. There are some more extreme right wing Universities that might welcome such attention.

I have a compromise idea. Let Presdent Bush have his library, but only house books he has actually read. Is it possible to construct a building not much larger than a suit case.

George Bush's daddy has a perfectly good library just down the road aways in College Station, Texas, home of Texas A & M. Couldn't they just add a wing on to daddy's library for Shrub?

"...
The situation at SMU is unique. But you need to spell out what the components are and to separate them. Doing so may not prevent people from making silly Pet Goat and comic book jokes about a repository which actually will include, among other things, letters received at the White House from members of the public just like the people posting here. Of course, it also will include the records (electronic and paper-based) generated by the President and his senior staff.
..."
---
Well, in the case of this president and his staff, some of the electronic records will make it to the library. Others have mysteriously disappeared.

Is the issue about the internal conflict in the Methodist Church or is the issue whether SMU should host the Libary and Institute.

The Church leaders could decide to not host the Library and Policy Institute because they don't like the way President Bush struts. SMU is acting as the private institution it is. If they don't want to host the buildings that's their choice. I don't really care what their reason is either way.

If the issue is the internal conflict in the Methodist Church and the library/institute is just an illustration, then the issue has been overcome by the details of this particular example. In which case you might consider re-writing the piece.

Not being a Methodist, I'm not sure I care a whole lot about what Methodists are so conflicted about. Look on the bright side, if President Bush was the President of SMU, he would promote a schism and start a holy war killing everyone that disagreed with him. You know ... "You're either with us or against us." ... next thing you know Jeannie Trevino-Teddlie would be in GITMO and we would have a confession that she had WMD and was trying to destroy the "Methodist way of life". I'm not clear what the "Methodist way of life" is, but I do know that it would make a great bumper sticker.

What was that thing about "church and state"?

You have got to be kidding me:

"Just because you do not like his politics, does not make him less of a Christian. "

If GW Shrub is an example of what being a Christian is, then color me a Druid. I want nothing to do with Christianity ever again.

He is a dispicable human being who has caused untold harm to hundreds of thousands of people -- and can not admit it. To get forgiveness one first has to recognize that one has sinned -- and he has never admitted that -- so take your false Christian and put him someplace.

One of the ironies of hosting a Bush Presidential Library is that President Bush signed an Executive Order on 1 Nov 2001 that allows a President to restrict public access to Presidential papers from any Administration. A violation of the Presidential Records Act [1978].

Presumably that Executive Order would be in the Library. After that, who knows what else there might be.

Should this library not be built in Mexico or China? After they are the two countries as president he served the most!

Three words...Bob Jones University.

Or as an alternative...Make Bush's price of admission to SMU include all the "missing" emails, records of the "secret" energy meetings and a transcript of every message sent or recieved from Rove's Blackberry.

Now thats a library I'd pay to see.

ironic to associate bush with a think tank. why don't they build the library on the edge of campus and buy a contiguous piece of land off campus for the thin tank. ? Unless a site is available in the Hague.

Hmmm.... I would think that members of a religious university should have major problems with a building glorifying a war criminal.

To be fair to the critics, one problem is the label "library." This facility will house Bush's papers, a museum (which will become a celebration of Bush's policies), and a think tank (that will labor to defend Bush's policies). If the Bush "library" like those of his predecessor it will be (at least in the short term) a continuation of administration politics.
If I were at SMU I'd be glad to take the facility. However, I understand reluctance to place a political facility in the middle of a religious school.

Is there some reason you don't mention torture at all in this column? To me, that's the deal-breaker with regard to George Bush's many sins.

It is my understanding that the manufacturers of the portable toilets often seen at outdoor events have been awarded the contract for the Geo. W. Bush Library.
The architectural firm of Bowels & Crapper submitted a design of a series of large inter-connecting cubicles in the shape of large Port-o-lets.
Each cubicle will be named for a signer of the Constitution with the center most and largest Port-O-Let named after John Hancock. A copy of the Constitution will be emblazoned on the walls of the Port-O-Lets, as they have been so named by Bowels & Crapper.

The discussion about a Bush library is ironic because this man takes great pride in avoiding the printed word.

Robert B., people who talk about a Holocaust when they're not referring to Hitler, Pol Pot or Stalin show such a lack of reasonable perspective as to make anything else they say suspect.

When did presidents start establishing libraries? Was the practice started when the amount of paperwork produced by a single administration would have overwhelmed the National Archives?

Most of the documents related to an adminstration are public property anyway: memos, policy papers, etc. Why should this go to a special library built with private funds? If a president wants to donate his private diary or the tie he wore when he signed some noteworthy legislation, he can give them to whichever institution wants them. The rest of the stuff belongs to us.

Why does a igorant, anti-itellectual such as Bush need a library at all?

Why does an ignorant, vain and anti-intellectual person such as Bush need a library at all? This does not make sense at all!!!!!

Why does an ignorant, vain and anti-intellectual person such as Bush need a library at all? This does not make sense at all!!!!!

Who cares? It's not my church, it's not my school, it's not my money, and Bush is not my president.

Once this unhappy idiot leaves the scene I'll never have to think about him again. I already don't think about SMU.

Just a correction on your story. The Bishop who has to rule on this is from Oklahoma not Texas

Why does he build IT on his ranch in Crawford TX?

On the upside, given what he has actually read, it could be a VERY small library, think "broom closet".

Ipanema wrote -- Why does an ignorant, vain and anti-intellectual person such as Bush need a library at all? This does not make sense at all!!!!!

Why all the fuss about any Chief Executive's papers when, theoretically, they belong to the archives of the United States government - which means they belong to the people!!!

Not so since the very same people arrogate the power to say when their documents can be publicly displayed. Catcy "their documents" which is an oxymoron in itself.

another sop to making the supposedly democratic president more royal than he or she is. We Anericans are dumb when it comes to putting these would be men in their place - someone who has been clever enough to convince the American people that they are above average in intelligence. Above average alright in the con man department.

considering that everything that will be displayed within this "proposed" library will probably be redacted, why bother with it at all? It will be 50+ years before we know w's reasons for doing what he did.

Bush 41 with a library?? Why? The man claims not to read. I realize this is to house all his important papers, but his WH is closed to public and doesn't work for us, so why should we all care to visit his so called library?? Wouldn't most of his papers be blacked out to protect him??

､Let's clarify the composition of prosperity to which the present United States
biased very much.

Anything has been hardly brought to the greater part of people though the boom of the stock market in the United States brought the rich to the American of the handful. The investment doubles in five years if it is historically an annual interest of high 15 percent. Only recently, the stock market in the United States has kept good through the 90's though the adjustment phase like the fall of the Internet stocks of NASDAQ etc. has gone out.
Is S&P500 (500 kind of standard and Parz Co. stock price average)1983?It includes ..the re-investment of the dividend.. in total in 1995, and earnings of 582 percent have been raised. However, the simultaneous period and American family's properties have decreased by a central value by as much as 11 percent.

Income of worker who decreases from Nixon era
The centralization tendency to the financial asset rises, and the home of the most significant one percent almost owns the half of all financial assets. Moreover, the centralization tendency is seen in the most significant one percent, and the home of five percent of high rank *･ has the financial asset of 42 percent.
The net property at home of the inside title 20 percent has been adjusted the inflation and has decreased to 45,900 dollars from 54,600 dollars in 1989 to 1995.

The income of an average worker decreases from the Nixon political power age if the inflation is adjusted. It might be also natural that the maintenance of the living standard and the debt for managing to raise school expenses have increased as a lot of working hours of the American becoming long.

American family of debt pickle

The debt of the home has increased as the real wages decreases. Now, the debt accumulates to American family. The proportion of the debt in an individual income increases to 85 percent (76 percent from 58 percent in 1973 to 1989 and 1997 years).
General worker's pay keeps being sluggish and American economy growing up in foreign countries in the United States though there was an economic crisis in Russia and Asia. It is because American family increases the debt and consumption has been maintained. On the other hand, long-term health of the national economy is remarkably sacrificed with American family about many.
An increase in the debt without being continued has danger of amplifying the influence of the business cycle downswing at the same time as gnawing at the foundation of the economic recovery. The interest-rate run-up afflicts the home newly borrowed. Only the unemployment rate's slightly increasing might bring a great increase in the bankruptcy and the mortgage attachment of the bad loan and the individual.
There is the one whose persistent solicitation the financing ahead and irresponsible financing are the beginnings in the inside though most of the increased borrowing depends on the cost of living's increasing while pay is unable to move upward, too. Moreover, American family might increased Cane further because they promote the pursuit of consumption (far-off and high priced) as a culture.

I googled "Presidential Libraries" and found a little.

There are Presidential Libraries for all the Presidents since Herbert Hoover. They are libraries only in the sense that each houses the Presidential archives of its President. These libraries are part of the National Archives. It is part of the "system" of how things are now done, and is pretty much unavoidable. Most Presidents take an active interest in their libraries and seek to influence their "legacies" but as they get old and die, and as their fans or detractors get old and die, these libraries do serve a real hisortical function.

Four posts on this site are worth reading:

* Two are by Archivist. Thank you for clarifying the rules and the distinctions.

* MikeQ1, who should apply for a position with Letterman as monologue writer. Brilliant stuff right there.

* And Jim, who wrote: "One of the ironies of hosting a Bush Presidential Library is that President Bush signed an Executive Order on 1 Nov 2001 that allows a President to restrict public access to Presidential papers from any Administration a violation of the Presidential Records Act [1978]."

I've been privileged to visit four presidential libraries, and I hope to visit the rest. Most have a museum where visitors can view the first ladies' inaugural dresses, interesting correspondence, bejeweled gifts from foreign leaders, and important artifacts, some of which will take your breath away. (On display in Independence, Mo., is a Purple Heart returned to President Truman by the parents of dead soldier. He kept the medal in his desk -- and no doubt looked at it and thought about it -- until the day he died.)

Expectedly at these museums, accomplishments are celebrated, and failures are diminished. In Little Rock, the situation surrounding the impeachment of President Clinton is treated as a constitutional tussle; at the Hoover library in West Branch, Iowa, the Great Depression earns a niche about the size of a large refrigerator.

Museums aside, these places should be about openness and transparency for the purpose of historical research. Given the Executive Order reported by Jim and the presidential review authority described by Archivist, one would imagine that SMU leaders and faculty who support academic freedom would run away from a proposal for the Bush about as fast as they can. One imagines that this "library" will be, more accurately, a vault, the combination to which only one or two people will have. If the recent past of this administration is prologue, this library will be about hiding information from historical researchers and journalists. If that is what SMU is about, then perhaps the library is appropriately located there.

The think tank portion presumably would be similar to the Carter Center in Atlanta, which, in my understanding of it, has sought to advance the views and perspectives the former president and continually make them available to the nation and the world. That's fair for President Bush, although I tend to agree with most contributors to this discussion that there's not much to advance there. Just my view. Perhaps SMU can add some meat to the thin bones of this administration's accomplishments. If that's part of the university's mission, go for it. For an example of how a "think tank" or "institute" associated with a politician might work well on a university campus, check out http://www.doleinstitute.org/about.shtml

Most importantly, however, religion and politics aside, I'd be most worried about the money. I'm not sure what the "bidding" was about, but if I were Methodist or a donor to or an alumnus of SMU (I'm none of those), then I wouldn't want one thin (Roosevelt) dime of the university's precious financial resources -- made more precisious in the current economic environment that is emerging as this administration's most significant legacy -- to go to this library or institute. Let this president's oil industry friends and other Saudi princes, made more rich under his administration, fund this library and institute.

For Pisor--

A President first established a National Archives administered Libraries in 1940. That is, the first such facility was dedicated that year. Presidents donated papers to such Libraries as "personal property" between 1940-1974. After Nixon resigned as President in 1974, Congress first passed legislation that gave White House documents governmental rather than personal property status. These days Presidential Libraries receive the files by law rather than under deeds of gift as FDR and his successors had used until Watergate.

U.S. CONSTITUTION - WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES

DEMOCRAT $24 BARREL OF OIL
DEMOCRAT $1.50 A GALLON OF GASOLINE

OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE

A GALLON OF GASOLINE WAS $1.50 WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
A GALLON OF GASOLINE WAS $1.50 WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
A GALLON OF GASOLINE WAS $1.50 WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE

GOP REPUBLICANS TOOK OFFICE TO CHANGE OIL TO $145 A BARREL
GOP REPUBLICANS TOOK OFFICE TO CHANGE GASOLINE TO $4.50 A GALLON

GOP REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL
GOP REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL
GOP REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL

A GALLON OF GASOLINE IS $4.50 UNDER THE GOP REPUBLICANS
A GALLON OF GASOLINE IS $4.50 UNDER THE GOP REPUBLICANS
A GALLON OF GASOLINE IS $4.50 UNDER THE GOP REPUBLICANS

YOU DO THE MATH AND DECIDE IF TEXAS OIL MILLIONAIRES WARRANT INVESTIGATIONS TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

HOODWINKED BUSHWINKED BUSHWINKED BUSHWHACKED BUSHWHACKED BUSHWHACKED BUSHWHACKED

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND STEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TREASURY.

GOP REPUBLICAN ABUSIVE POWER AND BLIND GREED RUN AMOK TO TRANSFER THE AMERICAN ECONOMY INTO THE PRIVATE CAPITALISTIC POCKETS OF THE SUPER RICH WHO OWNS AND RUNS WALL STREET.

GOP REPUBLICANS ARE MANIPULATING THE MARKET SYSTEM TO MAKE THE MANY (95 PERCENT OF AMERICAN CITIZENS) SUFFER AND SERVE THE SUPERWEALTHY FEW (5 PERCENT WALL STREET SUPERCAPITALISTS).

GOP REPUBLICAN MCCAIN-MCBUSH III TRILLION DOLLAR WAR CRISIS

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.

NO MORE GOP REPUBLICAN LIES, CONSPIRACIES, AND GRAND LARCENIES.

GOP REPUBLICAN $155 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $175 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $195 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $215 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $235 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $255 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS

GOP REPUBLICAN $4.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $5.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $5.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $6.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $6.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $7.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS

WHEN DOES IT STOP IF EVER?

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION DOES NOT WORK.
GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION IS HURTING AMERICA.
GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION IS HURTING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

STOP GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY
STOP GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY
STOP GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY

GOP REPUBLICAN OIL ADDICTION HAS BECOME THE NEW CRACK DRUG AND WE BETTER GET OFF SOON
GOP REPUBLICAN OIL ADDICTION HAS BECOME THE NEW CRACK DRUG AND WE BETTER GET OFF SOON
GOP REPUBLICAN OIL ADDICTION HAS BECOME THE NEW CRACK DRUG AND WE BETTER GET OFF SOON

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS AMERICAN JOB OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.

NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.
NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.
NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.

CLEAN NUCLEAR ELECTRIC ENERGY IS THE ANSWER

WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.

BARACK OBAMA WILL BRING BACK OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND RIGHTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.

STOP GOP REPUBLICAN MCCAIN FROM SELLING OUR AMERICA.

This remarkable unleashing of deep Democratic energies went hand in hand with clever GOP Republican efforts to subvert the will of the American People, whether by overt corruption or covert manipulation. This corruption or manipulation resulted from the widespread market activity that was incompatible with the good of the American Public. American Citizens were well aware that the voices of the People could be offset by powerful GOP Republican market elites bending the system to serve the interests of the few. The economic power of the GOP Republicans were recognized to be the primary source of Wall Street speculators’ corruptions.

Democratic dialogue was motivated by opposition to the market–driven greedy GOP Republicans obsessed with obscene quantity of moneymaking with little regard for the quality of the Public’s Democracy. Democratic love of wisdom was contrasted sharply against the GOP Republicans love of money.

Impeach the defunct GOP Republican Party of Wall Street Super Rich Thieves for milking our country the way wolves milk cows. America deserves intelligent and honest leadership demonstrated by scholars who love America, Americans and Our Freedom. America the Beautiful belongs to All Americans and will no longer be the plaything of Wall Street Super Rich GOP Republicans wolves.

I am struck by an arguement made here that it would be unChristian to for SMU to decline this neoconservative propaganda "think tank" cleverly disguised as a Library simply because Bush is a sinner, when after all, we are all sinners.

I wonder why I didn't think to use that arguement when I was a teenager and my parents tried to maintain a certain standard of behavior. "It is unChristian for you to punish me for staying out past curfew, when you yourself were late for dinner last night just because your golf game ran long". "It is unChristian of you to ground me for swearing, I heard what you said under your breath when you backed the car into the streetlight last week". The possibilities could have been endless.

So you see, the rest of your arguements are pointless. It doesn't matter whether or not Bush authorized torture, or enabled usury or war profiteering, or if the war in Iraq was unjust. After all, we might have once fudged on our time card at work and made a little profit on someone else's back too.

It's not our place, after all, to expect people to be willing to admit they sinned as a condition of being re-communicated with the fold, nor to judge whether or not they can use Church property to build a false church to the idols of torture, unjust war, and mostly, whitewash and unrepentance.

This issue seems to be to be indicitve of the use of Religion for political purposes of this candidate. First of all this President who claims such strong faith and wants his library to be on the Grounds of University funded in part by the tythes of fatful members of the United Methodist Church, however while serving as President he could not seem to find the time to attend a local Methodist Church with any regularity. Now lo and behold he is such a good Methodist the he has to have his thik tank located on Methodist ground. This decision is to be made by the Bishop of the Conference in which SMU is located, that is reasonable as that is the conference from which support of the University primarily comes. Were this decision being made in the Holston Conference I would use every mean in my power to stop this use of the Church for political purposes. Of all the Pastors I have had in the Methodist Church I can think of only a couple that I had any idea what thier political affilation was. Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors

I was born and raised a Methodist, like David Waters. Alot of non-Protestant people think that Protestants are all alike. But they are not.

Underpinning all religions, there is a complex theolgoical rationale that gives it a formal reason to exist. And then, there are the folk customs of the people who actually practice the religion.

I know Methodists. Methodists are very big on "doing good works" in the world, and they are very slack on religious dogma, which is often thought to be a riddle, and a concern more for the next life. In general, Methodists are among the most progressive-minded of Christian people, and are often thought of as "apostates" by all the other "little" Protestant communities.

President Bush is not a traditional or "ethnic" Methodist, and I don't really think he understands Methoidst ways.

If I had to bet, I would say that this library will never happen at Southern Methodist University.

ORF wrote - "Who cares? It's not my church, it's not my school, it's not my money, and Bush is not my president."

Sorry ORF, but Bush is indeed your President. The bombs that killed six thousand innocent Iraqi men, women and children during the "shock and awe" campaign were paid for by your tax dollars. Every American who abused prisoners at Abu Ghraib (particularly the vast majority of them on whom we had no evidence and released after we abused and tortured them) collected a paycheck signed by the receiver of your taxes.

Tell me ORF, what did you do to stop Bush from waging unjust war and torturing in your name?

We the People allowed this because we were afraid. We are the first generation of Americans too afraid to stand up for decency and right. We are happy to glorify the thousands of Americans who died defending the Constitution, then we spit on their graves and allow it to be dismantled because we are afraid (ironically, by one who took an oath on a Bible to defend the Constitution).

America, stop being afraid.

But here's the rub. Bush did put his hand on a Bible and took an oath to defend the Constitution. Is it hypocritical for Church hierarchy to deny Church land to one who would violate such a sacred oath?

Thank you, Archivist, for your valiant attempts to elevate the level of conversation and to make the appropriate distinctions between the presidential library, which will be operated by the National Archives, and the autonomous think tank that the Bush Foundation insisted be part of the library complex. SMU is violating its own commitment to academic freedom and intellectual inquiry by allowing the autonomy of the think tank, which thereby will not be required to follow academic standards and processes regarding the appointment of scholars or the factual and intellectual quality of publications produced. The autonomy of the think tank also CLEARLY violates Article XIII of SMU's Articles of Incorporation, which requires that campus property sold or leased to third parties must be under "the immediate discipline and control of the University authorities."

Allowing the independence of the think tank violates both SMU's Articles of Incorporation and its commitment to academic practices, standards and principles. This is not a partisan issue, period.

To "Emory Alum": The SMU/Bush Foundation agreement is the complete opposite of that between Emory University and the Carter Center. The Carter Center is located 3.5 miles from Emory's campus, yet Emory jointly appoints the members of the Carter Center's board of directors, and the university oversees the hiring of the Center's staff. By contrast, the agreement between SMU and the Bush Foundation puts on SMU's campus not only the presidential library and museum, but also an independent "policy institute" intended "to further the domestic and international goals of the Bush Administration" (i.e., an ideological think tank) over which the university will exercise NO control (contrary to SMU's own ARticles of Incorporation, by the way). The agreement gives SMU the "right" to appoint one or two directors to the Institute's board (only one if three to five persons comprise the board, two if more than five comprise the board -- i.e., always a minority of the board), but that "right" is subject to an absolute veto power by the Bush Foundation's director, in consultation with the Foundation's board, over any person nominated by SMU.

Not only is this not at all like the relationship between Emory and the Carter Center, it is unprecedented for any university. I know of no other major university that has allowed on its campus an ideological institute, and, even worse, an ideological institute that is independent of the university's control.

It is embarrassing that SMU's administration and trustees have so prostituted themselves to the Bush Foundation.

SMU Professor:

Excellent and informative posts, thank you. I am really beginning to understand this conundrum.

I live in the Atlanta area. Carter is still widely respected here, and I have known die-hard conservatives that would not tolerate any bashing of Carter because they know what a good person Jimmy Carter is.

The contrast between Carter and Bush is telling. Carter has devoted all the long years after his presidency to peace, feeding the hungry, combatting poverty - the work that Jesus told us to do. And the Carter Institute is open to all.

Bush, on the other hand, wants to establish a highly restrictive monument to himself. No mention of helping anyone, in other words, an ego trip. And what will Dubya do after his eight horrible years are done? In his own words, get paid lots of $$$ for speeches, and work on his 'ranch'. Sickening.

I'm still having trouble with seeing 'Bush' and 'Library' in the same sentence.

Does. Not. Compute. :)

How about some kind of...

"Pressidentitious Libary?'

:)

I mean, of all things, what I find troubling as an American, is in some elementary school classroom, if we have a public school system by then, in some future incarnation, I'm gonna have to look at a classy blue-and-gold poster with the little oval portraits of 'The American Presidents,' and *that* dude is gonna be smirking at me before we get let out early to scavenge remnants of our proud society.

Presidential library? What they gonna put in it, "Here in this wing is the censored and sealed records, here's a Bible, and we got that picture book about a goat over here."

I dunno. Should we have that anywhere?

The Bush Lie-brary should be housed in a FEMA trailer.

Wouldn't a Bush library be dangerous precedentially? (I mean, what would be stored in it?)

Up until now, haven't libraries housed texts, i.e., written documents?

Ooof. Alarming concept of enshrining the Bush version of history anywhere. The only good he ever did in *my* world was make me feel better about turning down Yale cause I couldn't afford it. :)

Academic Administrator:

You ask for more middle ground (July 22, 2008 9:05 PM). Don't you mean more Reich wing conservatism?

Connected with Texas A&M? (Providence rolled on the floor in riotous laughter).

What on God's green planet does Texas A&M have to do with this discussion? Does A&M want this garbage of a library?

There is no need to insult us (or T.
A&M for that matter) by insinuating that Texas A&M is remotely in the same league as Berkeley. Texas A&M must stand on its own, well deserved, and cultivated reputation as an extraordinarily right wing school.

A&M isn't even in the same league (we are speaking to the support and nurture of a broad academic middle ground - not football) as UT Austin (a truly great institution), much less Berkeley.

T. A&M MIGHT be a respectable 5h or 6th within the confines of Texas.

Texas A&M is our nation's second best example of ultra right wing, conservative, red neck, inbred academia. It might rank first as the nation's most conservative, state supported school.

If you are nominating T. A&M for GW's bloody bundle , well, you will hear no complaint me (though I think it sad for any university to actually want to be associated with GW).

BTW, it is a great pleasure to listen to the Fightin' Texas Aggie band - a truly fabulous band.
AND, good luck to Coach Sherman in the up coming Fall Campaign.

IF you want T. A&M to be a great institution - as good as UT Austin, you must broaden the philosophical range of the faculty and then the student body itself.

Good luck.

Sincerely,
Providence Candlelight

Most folks forget that Texas is the absolute epicenter of the bible belt - with the notable exception of Austin, the state capital.

There are probably more fundamentalists per square mile in Texas than any other 3 southern states combined.

But I'm with several others - why not put the Bush lib ary in Crawford? That way, they'll have plenty of NSA staff already in place to protect all classified information and control the bare trickle of traffic.