PonyFans.com

Don't forget Leslie's Chicken Shack................

SoCal_Pony wrote:That way, supporters could have spent a lovely week-end in Waco touring Baylor University, the Branch Davidian compound, the Dr Pepper plant, and the W Library. Somehow there seems to be a natural harmony there.

A.

EastStang, not sure what you mean by "next door to campus." But, let's focus on the real issue-the exclusion of SMU from the operation of this partisan policy "think-tank" as somebody put it, which is located on its campus. I can't believe doesn't bother some of you, whichever side of the political spectrum you fall on. If SMU was allowed a couple of seats at the table it would be a different thing all together.

Water Pony, I am not saying SMU will be advocating Dubya's policies. I'm saying somebody totally unrelated to SMU will be advocating Dubya's policy's from on campus at SMU. That has the appearance of SMU being partisan to those policies.

jtstang wrote:As I understand it, the library will house a Bush "policy center" wherein Dubya will be accoladed for the great things he did like get us into the Iraqi quagmire. Now, that is not that bad, in and of itself, but I understand SMU has been told it will not have say in any of the content and programs connected with the "policy center", which will be run solely by Bush cronies. Rather, SMU's involvement will only be connected to the library collections. And yet, we will forever be connected with advocating Bush policies because it will be located on our campus. The kicker is that I understand the library was marketed as a package deal, that you could not be considered for the library if you wre not willing to house the "policy center" as well and cede all control to Dubya's buddies, most of who will have no connection to SMU. I just do not think this sits well with the mission of a university.

Very, very well said. Politics aside, we will be viewed as a university that supports President Bush - live outside the country for a while and you'll realize that the number of people who think that is a good thing dwindles every day. Personally, I don't dislike him that much, but I see the arguments for both sides. My objection is that he's such a polarizing figure that the presence of his library conjures up more emotional reaction - from both sides of the political pendulum - than if we had, say, his father's, or some other president. I live halfway around the world and already I'm hearing jokes about SMU, when basically my alma mater, whose role in this image-polishing palace amounts to little more than a corporate landlord with a great football coach and a butt-kicking women's basketball team.

that's great raplh wrote:this is a good thing for our university - in 100 years, people will not remember the politics, they'll just know that our university is worthy of a presidential library

Or at least that we were willing to give Dubbya's camp complete control of a facility in which they could re-shape his image. Peachy - I'm so proud.

SoCal_Pony wrote:That way, supporters could have spent a lovely week-end in Waco touring Baylor University, the Branch Davidian compound, the Dr Pepper plant, and the W Library. Somehow there seems to be a natural harmony there.

You and jtstang should have been on the committee when this thing was in its infancy.

SoCal_Pony wrote:JT, from an over-taxed Republican who voted for W twice and has benefited enormously from the Bush tax cuts, I understand your concerns. They are legitimate and hopefully won’t diminish our school’s reputation. In the end, I also believe this library will be a plus for our university.

But putting down my SMU alumni glasses for a moment, I personally think the Bush library would have been a better suited down south.

That way, supporters could have spent a lovely week-end in Waco touring Baylor University, the Branch Davidian compound, the Dr Pepper plant, and the W Library. Somehow there seems to be a natural harmony there.

Be sure and include the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame. (The shoot 'em up kind not the baseball kind)

mrydel wrote:

SoCal_Pony wrote:Be sure and include the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame. (The shoot 'em up kind not the baseball kind)

Yeah, we got that when you didn't say Hall of Shame.

mrydel wrote:Be sure and include the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame. (The shoot 'em up kind not the baseball kind)

"And let's continue the tour .... here's the Steve Beuchele Wing .... to the left, the Roger Pavlik Room .... downstairs is the Kevin Brown boxing ring and heavy bag ...."

Official--linked from Drudge-

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

And the SMU release.

http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/announcements/

And in fairness to what I have been saying here, this may not be as bad as I thought. This is the first I've heard of SMU having a presence on the governing board of the "institute":

To facilitate ongoing interaction and collaboration between the University and the Presidential Center, a governance system has been established. The Foundation will be led by a Board of Directors of three to 12 members, elected annually, including two members appointed by SMU. The Institute will be governed by a Board of Directors of from three to nine members, elected annually. If the Institute Board consists of five or fewer members, SMU will appoint one member; if more than five, SMU will have two members. SMU and the Institute also will establish an Academic Advisory Committee with representatives from the University and the Foundation to explore joint programming opportunities.

Actually, I was hoping that SMU would let it be completely separate. Now it does look like SMU is actively involved in the Institute but only has a minority vote. I think those who clamored for the school to not let this Institute be completely independent are going to regret it. But hey I liked Bush as President and I'm probably classified as a Conservative, so I won't be an alum who is embarrassed.

Dittos.

Cue PF.com's favorite Spanish lecturer.

mrydel wrote:
Be sure and include the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame. (The shoot 'em up kind not the baseball kind)

Texas Ranger Hall of Fame is in Waco. So Baylor has that going for them.

SMU Football Blog wrote:

mrydel wrote:
Be sure and include the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame. (The shoot 'em up kind not the baseball kind)

Texas Ranger Hall of Fame is in Waco. So Baylor has that going for them.

That is what I said. Now get your act together and do an updated Blog!!!

The big issue I have with the library is that unless something changes, it will not be a source for scholarly study of W's presidency.

In 2001, W signed an Executive Order that basically reversed the public right to access presidential papers, which was part of the 1978 Presidential Records Act.

The Executive Order allows W (and his heirs) to indefinitely postpone public release of sensitive material past the law's 12 year waiting period.

I am afraid that we might have a library with no presidential papers in it.