Bush's (f)antastic Freedom Institute

What a difference an article and a capital letter make. After the New York Times ran some excerpts from Robert Draper's Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush, the Blogosphere -- both mainstream and arcane -- has been filled with comments about the president's post-presidential plans to build "The Fantastic Freedom Institute."

Now, from a guy who referred to the 9/11 terrorists at "evildoers" and reduced the office of the presidency to being "the decider," it doesn't take a leap of faith to believe he'd build a joint that sounds like (INSERT COMIC BOOK SUPERHERO JOKE).

Only, it's not quite so.

The actual quote reads: "We'll have a nice place in Dallas," where he will be running what he (the president) called "a fantastic Freedom Institute."

The article of import is "a." And fantastic is used purely as an adjective, rather than as part of the title of the institute. I do think it's important to note the difference between The Fantastic Freedom Institute and "a fantastic Freedom Institute."

By now we all know the president is grammatically challenged. But to mock Bush for giving an overreaching cartoonish moniker to his institute leads one astray from what really needs to be discussed, and what seems to be at the heart of Draper's book. The title alone, Dead Certain, says it all: that Bush is resolute in his decisions and ultimately does not look for, or care to truly consider opinions that run counter to his desires. Again, in and of itself not exactly a revelation. The book, however, does offer up some bright shiny new nuggets of alleged recalcitrance. Apparently even the decision to bring Cheney on the ticket was done over the stringent objections of Bush's closest advisor Karl Rove who saw the move as seeming "needy."

So, then, here is what seems fantastic about Bush's plans for his next act: It is not that a man who took us to war wishes his legacy to be about freedom. If there were a Nobel Prize for hypocrisy I think Kennedy or Johnson would be running neck and neck with Bush. What's "fantastic" about Bush's plans is that he wants to propagate freedom without seeming to understand the fundamentals of liberty. It ain't all about bombs and tanks and diplomacy from the working end of a gun. It is about unrestricted exchange. It is about occupying real estate where reasonable people publicly tussle over tough ideas. It is opinion given unadorned rather than served with ginned up intelligence or hidden behind executive privilege and presidential clemency or warrant-less wiretaps. Freedom -- as trite as it sounds -- requires vigilance and oversight. And fortunately our system has been set up so that there are those who can watch the watchmen even as public disclosure runs counter to national security. But time and again - in the run up to the Iraq war through firing of federal prosecutors - the president has shown abject disregard for contrary opinion, full disclosure and governmental oversight. I would hate to think the president, or anyone for that matter, would gather young leaders and school them that the path to freedom is paved with autocratic tendencies.

With fear of stating the obvious: freedom belongs to "We the People," not "They the Politicians." We are the deciders, it's our government and we have a right to know. Before he builds himself an institute -- magical, marvelous or otherwise -- what would be fantastic is if George Bush finished his term by demonstrating he understood as much.

Comments

[PoliceState]

In a nutshell, this Freedom Institute is going to be yet another neoconservative Israeli lobby, masquerading as a think tank.

It will be composed of: a) neocons who never saw military service, and b) retired US generals.

It's aim, repsectively, from the above paragraph: a) to continue to get the US to fight Israel's proxy wars, and b) to make boatloads of money through contracting.

These retired generals are creating contracting start-ups by the gross. Their mission is to subscribe to all the neocon wars as war profiteers.

Neocons and generals who sold out their country: a match made in Hell.

[Dap]

Dear Mr. Ridley,

Ya knocked that one out of the park, stright-away center field. Good on ya! Agape.

[splashy]

He does not understand the spirit of freedom. He only understands freedom of himself and his cronies to steal, kill, maim, and con everyone else. That is HIS idea of freedom.

[deminmo]

Why can't President Bush come out to the Midwest, have a town hall meeting with non-hand picked voters who can ask questions about any of the topics covered in the blogs? Without a speach writer, and responding to people who do not agree with his actions we would get a better view of the real man. I don't think Mr. Bush is up to that type of challenge.

[Richard729]

Bush has said in the past when referring to his legacy that historians are still writing about George Washington 300 years later. He presumes that history will be kind to him and he went on to say that he is not worried about number 43. Of course, that also presumes that years after a president's term is complete he will eventually be remembered fondly. It's going to take one heckuva historian, possibly one recruited from Fox News Network, to see much if any good that this dysfunctional incompetent has achieved during his tenure in the White House.

Bush also presumes he'll be spending a lot of time advising world leaders at his Freedom Institute where he believes they will come to forge policies for spreading democracy, not only in the Middle East, but also throughout the entire world.

Somehow, I don't see Gordon Brown, the new British Prime Minister and no big supporter of Bush's Iraq War, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, Spanish President José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero who ran and won as an anti-Bush Iraq war candidate, and soon-to-be elected Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd who has vowed to pull out the remaining 1,600 troops that country has based in Iraq. So, just whom might these world leader be who will come flocking to Bush's Freedom Institute?

In any case, I suggest Bush should open up his monument of lies in Baghdad with the Baghdad Museum of Fine Farts complete with a statue of Bush at the entrance. The statue depicts Bush with his face between his legs, mooning the world. On the pedestal these words appear: "I Said to Bring 'em On and They Brung 'em On!"

What a fitting tribute for G. W. Bush and one that can described as a Fantastic legacy that world leaders can remember him by, maybe even longer than George Washington.

[Richard729]

Bush has said in the past when referring to his legacy that historians are still writing about George Washington 300 years later and presuming that history will be kind to him he went on to say that he's not worried about number 43. Of course, that also presumes that years after a president's term is complete he'll eventually be remembered fondly. It's going to take one heckuva historian, possibly one recruited from Fox News Network, to see much if any good that this dysfunctional incompetent has achieved during his tenure in the White House.

Bush also presumes he'll be spending a lot of time advising world leaders at his Freedom Institute where he believes they will come to forge policies for spreading democracy, not only in the Middle East, but throughout the entire world.

Somehow, I don't see Gordon Brown, the new British Prime Minister and no big supporter of Bush's Iraq War, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, Spanish President José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero who ran and won as an anti-Bush Iraq war, or soon-to-be elected Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd who has vowed to pull out the remaining 1,600 troops that country has based in Iraq. So, just whom might these world leader be who will come flocking to Bush's Freedom Institute?

In any case, I suggest Bush should open up his monument of lies in Baghdad with the Baghdad Museum of Fine Farts complete with a statue of Bush at the entrance. The statue depicts Bush with his face between his legs, mooning the world and on the pedestal these words: "I Said to Bring 'em On and They Brung 'em On."

What a fitting tribute for G. W. Bush and one that can described as Fantastic legacy that world leaders can remember him by.

[BRed]

"If there were a Nobel Prize for hypocrisy I think Kennedy or Johnson would be running neck and neck with Bush."

What? Kennedy was not a hypocrite. He was not the deity he's become since his death, but hypocrite? How exactly?

Johnson was dead wrong on Vietnam, so maybe you have a point there. But his domestic accomplishments were certainly worthy of praise.

I think a more apt comparison would be Nixon, who campaigned on ending the war only to increase troop levels.

[magen]

It WILL be a fantastic Freedom Institute.

They're just leaving out the part about ONLY for rich, white, psuedo-Christian, closet homo, republiCON males.

[WolfLarsen]

Conservatives think that liberals believe all Republican presidents are dumb. Not quite. Eisenhower was greatly underrated. Nixon was evil. Reagan was dim and overrated. Bush Sr. was better than Reagan, but that was a low bar to clear. That's brings us to Dubya. He is both dim and evil combining the worst attributes of Nixon and Reagan. Reagan served half his presidency under the influence of Alzheimers and still was more in touch than Dubya. That says it all. What's next, another bad actor with folksy comments and a vacant stare? They aren't that deluded and gullible? Even the neo-cons learn from history, right? Wrong.

[SlinkyTWF]

At least Reagan seemed to have second thoughts about some of the bone-headed ideologies he espoused throughout most of his life, and perhaps even had some regrets. How does that bumper sticker read...

Dubya = Nixon minus Brain?

[WolfLarsen]

Love it Slinky!

[Taan]

Bush thinks he's going to cash in on the lecture circuit? Reading TelePrompTers or bundles of notes? Written by whom? Will there be enough Republicans left who give one whit about this fractious impostor to pony up a hundred grand to watch him continue to mangle the language? If he had two cogent thoughts in his head at one time, they'd have to be siamese. His inglorious departure from the White House will be a cancer excised from the national politic.Unfortunately, he can't take with him all those ill informed voters who put him in the Oval Office to begin with.

[Nonamnesiac]

The Dems have embarked on a strategy that will achieve the impossible, just as Kerry achieved the impossible in 2004 -- they will lose one or both Houses of Congress AND the White House. Because the Dems have proven they stand for the same things the Republicans stand for while trying to convince everyone they don't, they will lose despite the overwhelming desire of the American people for change. The Dem front runners favor keeping "residual" troops in Iraq and keeping the war going and the Dems united with the Repubs to pass the Patriot (Traitor) Act and the Protect America (Expunge Civil Liberties) Act. The Freedom Institute will assist the next Republican Administration while elitist liberals and progressives continue to call Bush stupid. I don't know why Dems, liberals and progressives insist on underestimating the enemy -- and Bush is clearly a brilliant, accomplished enemy who has achieved truly evil things against incredible odds.

[Aanya]

As we now all know, Bush never earned a thing he got, in his entire life. All his riches and rewards were gifts of his lineage. He is so hardened and so set in his ways, he is not capable of understanding your very insightful piece. Bush is a pathetic result of his upbringing. Although we have seen small signs that his father sees a tiny bit of this, his mother is totally immune to her contributions. I'm convinced that Bush was chosen for this position because he would eagerly play the part. The puppet whose strings were controlled by all the members of PNAC. It is amazing that any of them still show their faces today, but to have fallen for the braintrust in the first place, each member was as pathetic and as self absorbed as the one chosen to sit in the Oval Office. Just as when Bill Kristol visits Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, there will always be little remarks to these fools just to remind them that we all know who they are, and we will never forget or forgive!

[CharliePfromHB]

Yes, but "we the people" have to recognize that energy and military policies are supported by oligopoly, government, and international cartel combinations in restraint of change. Free enterprise and populism can drive the world back to the track of international cooperation. But freedom is being suppressed by misguided lobbyists for the status quo. America's guiding light on the hill is its creative energy, drive, and tenacity. The fog covering the light is the anti-freedom power of international monopoly and supportive corrupt politicians. Yes, freedom is fantastic, and terrorism is evil and misguided. But the fog must be lifted by "we the people", or the light will only show the way to failed policies and results. Yes, results that will definitely follow us home. Like it or not, we are in a global village, and the consequences of our actions, (and our enemy's actions), are just around the corner. But "we the people's" biggest enemy is denial.

[roccoco]

A Freedom Institute by GWB would be like a war institute by Ghandi or a KKK institute by MLK. Even Fidel Castro knows more about freedom than this pathetic idiot. And besides, he's dumb. Like, really dumb, you know what I mean?

[Aanya]

Yup!

[Bocababs]

I often wonder if the country would still have gone into Iraq if Cheney had not inserted himself into the Vice Presidency.

I cannot wait for the next "crazy statement" from our President.

Good article...John.

[film381]

I agree with all but the last statement...

John, "We the people" have historically given up our freedom to politicians for many decades...

Until ALL the people learn ALL they can about any candidate, they will continue to give up their freedom. The main key is that the PEOPLE, for some dopey reason, which I think is laziness, HOLDS ALL POLITICIANS TO THEIR PROMISES and to MAKE SURE that the politicians SERVE THE PEOPLE, that freedom will still be in the politicans.