Bush's Closing Years

"Bush is more likely to choose a similar post-presidential path, at least initially, as that of Jimmy Carter... [who] became a globe-trotting humanitarian and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his work promoting social and economic justice...
Bush and his handlers are mapping out this phase of the president's post-White House years. Plans are well under way for a "Freedom Institute" that will aim to promote democracies abroad...."Bush has never liked the academics, and this is a nonacademic institute... pro-democracy foot soldiers who are green-lit by George and Laura Bush are in the mix."

-Alexander Mooney, CNN

This article was first sent to me with a two-line comment, which included "Was this a joke?". I couldn't help but look, and read. I was astounded to discover the above quote woven into the text. There are just so many things wrong with the whole thing. To begin with, comparing president Bush to president Carter is... well, wrong. They are, and were, on opposite sides of the universe in philosophical terms, beyond just political parties. I wonder what Mr. Carter thinks about this article, considering that over the last couple of years, he has referred to aspects of this presidency as being the worst in history. He may have backtracked a bit on some of the comments, but this is probably more because ex-presidents aren't supposed to be critical of each other than any real remorse.

This "Freedom Institute", a "non-academic... think tank" sounds like a parallel to "The Institute for Creation Research": bad science and worse philosophy behind a glitzy, shiny pseudo-official front end and lots of money. The name sounds good, but is it really accurate? Has freedom itself actually progressed one iota over the years that Mr. Bush has been in power? Or has it reversed? I'm sure that his freedom has certainly expanded: unlike most of the citizens of his country, who are mired in economic circumstances that are anything but free. Do you feel like you have more options to pursue today, or eight years ago? My personal desire for freedom was, as many people know, the reason I left the U.S. and came back to Canada: I was not free to marry, which should be a fundamental right. (I know, I know, I was free to marry any woman I wanted. Thanks.)

Mr. Bush has never really stood up for freedom of any kind: except for the freedom to exploit as much as a person wants in the drive to gather as much money as he can. If anything, his perspective of freedom was limited to the elite of the nation, where freedom (and everything else) was concentrated. His policies, which are about to change (although I hope not forgotten) regarding everything from climate change to terrorism to international relations were built on short-sighted goals that were entirely aimed on gathering wealth now and screwing the future. His new organization should be called the "Capitalism Institute". At least it would be more accurate. His legacy, I hope, will be that of an experiment in unbridled capitalistic exploitation, leading to everything from war in the Middle East to the mortgage meltdown (which he encouraged by claiming that in a good economy, all people should own their own homes), to the related, current economic crisis that is worsening as he leaves office. It is unfortunate that those kind of policies are difficult to reverse once implemented, but we can only hope for the best. Call me a socialist, but I don't think I want the world to know more of that kind of freedom.