EastStang wrote:Here is how the decision will be made. Laura: "George you know what happens if SMU doesn't get that library?" W- "Yes dear".
have to revert to George's coment ''I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." If George didn't give SMU the libray then that would leave only Barney supporting George in Iraq.
EastStang wrote:Here is how the decision will be made. Laura: "George you know what happens if SMU doesn't get that library?" W- "Yes dear".
have to revert to George's coment ''I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." If George didn't give SMU the libray then that would leave only Barney supporting George in Iraq.
We have his failure to withdraw to thank for Jenna and Barbara.
EastStang wrote:Here is how the decision will be made. Laura: "George you know what happens if SMU doesn't get that library?" W- "Yes dear".
have to revert to George's coment ''I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." If George didn't give SMU the libray then that would leave only Barney supporting George in Iraq.
We have his failure to withdraw to thank for Jenna and Barbara.
Doesn't this belong on the recruiting board under "Nathan" withdraws.....
If it members of the faculty really do object to the library, or the ramifications THEY think it will have on the university, or because the sun rises in the east instead of the west, it would be more embarrassing if they failed to object. They'll all benefit from the library, and they'll be good soldiers, but asking everyone to agree on anything, especially something as polarizing as a president, it unrealistic and frankly undesireable. A difference of opinion is healthy and educational for any university and for the people within the university.
I saw their questions for Turner. The funniest one was whether this would inhibit recruiting of student recruiting in New England. I think we usually get more students from North Dakota than New England. Give me a break.
From reading various news accounts the last few days, I have concluded that Professor Susanne Johnson is the most hopelessly ignorant person I have ever come across.
Yesterday, she talked about how she had no idea that a think tank was part of the Bush Library proposal, when it had been common knowledge for quite some time. Today, she said she was had no idea the secrecy regarding SMU's bid was due to the cutthroat competition to get the library. "I wish he would've told us that six years ago."
Apparently now everyone is just opposed to the think tank and not the library itself which is their way of saying, "We are now aware of how blankin' stupid it would be for SMU to turn this down and especially how stupid SMU would look if it turned it down NOW after trying to get it for six years. We are now just opposing the think tank even though we know it won't do any good, but it allows us to keep our liberal credentials."
Now we see how John Kerry was for the war before he was against the war. Or was it the other way around. Same flawed logic. These folks are just visceral in their hatred for George W. Bush and its almost pathelogical. In the end its just plain pathetic.
It is interesting I thought the Right was a bit over the top in their hatred for Bill and Hillary (though I didn't care for them). I still don't see them as particularly effective, except for being politicians.
I want leadership and to strengthen this country. Geo. Bush is often tone deaf and this State of Union would have been more effective when the Republicans where in the majority. That is leadership.
What I don't understand (because it weakens us domestically and internationally), is the outright hatred for George. No matter what he says or does, the 'loyal' opposition dismisses it before it is even expressed.
I am looking for someone on either side to show "leadership", and not self-serving actions to gain control or get elected. Joe Lieberman and John McCann seem focused on the real issues our country will face internationally well into the future. Domestically, the question is how we need to strengthen our competitiveness and how to continue to grow the economy to benefit everyone.
So, to the faculty, thanks for your opinion, but SMU and free dialogue win with a Presidential Library, think tank, etc.
SMU Football Blog wrote:From reading various news accounts the last few days, I have concluded that Professor Susanne Johnson is the most hopelessly ignorant person I have ever come across."
I'm glad someone shares my opinion. Her comments were astounding.
[quote="SMU Football Blog"]Yesterday, she talked about how she had no idea that a think tank was part of the Bush Library proposal, when it had been common knowledge for quite some time. Today, she said she was had no idea the secrecy regarding SMU's bid was due to the cutthroat competition to get the library. "I wish he would've told us that six years ago."
Apparently now everyone is just opposed to the think tank and not the library itself which is their way of saying, "We are now aware of how blankin' stupid it would be for SMU to turn this down and especially how stupid SMU would look if it turned it down NOW after trying to get it for six years. We are now just opposing the think tank even though we know it won't do any good, but it allows us to keep our liberal credentials."[/quote]
Could not agree more. You nailed it. Hope you sent those sentiments to the Letters page of the DMN.
Agreed 100% Blog. Tenure can be both a good and questionable (bad) thing. Since the Pye era, I have tired of 'mid to lower level management' (i.e., faculty) and their elevated egos believing that those who have given considerable money and time to this institution really give a tinkers darn about what (some of) the rank & file hired hands think. They mimic pro athletes. Offer more $$$, they're gone in a flash. Thank goodness for a strong Board & Dr. Turner at this point in time.
