There is a seriously humorous – humorously serious –
back-and-forth going on via email among SMU faculty regarding the Bush
Institute.
The majority of faculty members, if not all, have finally accepted
the Library as a fait accompli. Indeed,
for the majority of faculty, the Library is no longer the primary concern. To paraphrase James Carville, it’s the
Institute, stupid.
Not so much the Institute as the structure of the Institute.
As it stands, SMU will have zero control over the eponymously oxymoronic Bush think tank.
Concerns ranging from the Institute’s policy focus
(preemptive war, denying global warming, expansion of executive powers,
creation of an imperial presidency, privation of civil liberties, torture) to
who will hold fellowships have many faculty rightfully concerned.
More important, the prospect that departments will be
required to accept co-appointments of Institute fellows who, by virtue of their
appointment to the Institute, will be exempt from the normal departmental
hiring practices.
In short, many faculty members are seeking assurances. So
far, the Administration is saying, “Trust us.” For some faculty, those two words are enough.
For others, they have given them their just consideration – just about
worthless.
The bottom line is the Institute, too, is a fait accompli. The trustees want it. Bush wants it. If Bush
has been successful in communicating anything in the last six years, it’s that
he’s the “decider.” The faculty has absolutely
no bargaining power. Some have accepted that and acquiesced; others haven’t.
SMU isn't the University of Florida; and the Bush
Institute isn't an honorary degree. The faculty can't vote to deny W his
Institute the way the University of Florida Faculty Senate voted to deny brother Jeb an honorary degree.
Those who have acquiesced comfort themselves by thinking about
“the potential for classroom visits and other student access to institute
fellows would be a tremendous asset to our teaching, particularly in fields
like political science, history, and economics.”
Some have even resorted to the desperate claim that anyone
who continues to express concern or offer opposition “seeks to circumvent the
duly constituted authority of the Faculty Senate.”
What’s next? Accusations of unpatriotism? Of aiding and
abetting terrorists?
I realize that more than a few professors in some
departments are as giddy as schoolgirls about the prospect of some Republican history-makers
in residence at SMU.
I’m quite sure that at night some even dream of discussing
Soviet-era diplomacy or listening to stories about the good old days at the
Hoover Institute with Condie over coffee
and donuts or hashing out the nuts and bolts of Mid-East power brokering with James Baker at brownbag lunches.
Perhaps by the time the Institute is built, Condie’s dream of "work[ing] with our many
partners around the world ... [and] build[ing] and sustain[ing] democratic,
well-governed states that will respond to the needs of their people and conduct
themselves responsibly in the international system" will have become a
reality.
Some no doubt think that having Karl Rove or Donald Rumsfeld speak to classes is a good
idea. I know I would go to any length to secure a front-row seat to hear Paul
Wolfowitz justify his failed pre-war assessments (just don’t ask him to take
off his shoes) or listen to Council on Foreign Relations President Richard
Haass argue that the Administration’s primary mistake was planning for the wrong peace rather than
the wrong war.
Indeed, our students could learn so much from anyone in the
Bush cabal who has had a direct hand in formulating the myriad of failed
policies that constitute the worst presidency in history.
I bet there’ll even be a position for Mary Cheney as the
Senior Fellow for Gay and Lesbian Studies. I can’t wait to read her first
white paper: “Acquiescing to Homophobia for the Good of the Party.”
Alberto Gonzales,
of course, would be Senior Fellow for Constitutional Law. His white paper, “How
to Interpret the Constitution to Justify Whatever the Boss Wants to Do,” would
be instructive for law students.
Former Bush speechwriter David Frum, now at the American
Enterprise Institute, could be cajoled into giving lectures on “How to Sell the
War of Your Choice” or “How to Create Scary Buzz Phrases Like
‘Axis of Evil’."
Scooter Libby, no doubt, would be called upon to teach
seminars on “Taking the Fall.” Harriet Miers will certainly be free to do
something, bring coffee, remind the guys that they are the best. Jack Abramoff
should be out of jail by then. They’ll probably want to tap him to be the
Institute’s lobbyist.
And they’ll need someone who works exclusively on firings. Kyle Sampson,
Gonzales’s fired chief of staff, could hold that “fellowship.”
Oklahoma Republican Senator (and global warming denier) James Inhofe and convicted Deputy Secretary of
the Interior Steven Griles could duke it out to be the first
ExxonMobil Distinguished Fellow of Environmental Studies.
The Distinguished Fellow of Election Fraud, uh
Reform, has yet to be decided. That one will probably go to Rove. Rove,
I'm sure, will hold multiple fellowships.
The list of Bushies with impressive records of
disservice to our country is long and infamous. Of course, the government will
probably want to open a federal prison near by so fellows can rotate weekends while serving their sentences for
corruption, perjury, obstruction of justice and treason.
What have I been thinking? Institute supporters are right.
Now that I’ve thought it through, I am excited about what our students could
learn from such the cast of miscreants and criminals that could grace our
campus.
