I whole heartedly support think tanks. Don’t you?

America needs multitudes of thoughtful think tanks to address the vast variety of issues we face today.

That is, democratic, collaborative think tanks that promote diverse views.

American, melting-pot-style think tanks. Not so-called think tanks that represent and serve but one side of the political aisle. Or worse, exclusive think tanks composed only of the elite wealthy or highly educated few.

We especially need think tanks that include women. A think tank with some estrogen in it would rarely be guilty of excluding the fine arts of empathy, sensitivity and compassion.

Macho, tough-guy-only think tanks should become a thing of the past.

Since President George W. Bush just reintroduced to the American people the lost art of an apology, perhaps a conciliatory, olive-branch, liberal and conservative think tank could be the next vogue thing.

I think a collaborative, all-American think tank would be more likely to represent all of us plebian masses. Think tanks with regular people would be better educated to comprehend the daily life or difficult plight of the times we live in.

A collaborative think tank would (or could):

– encourage open debate over issues of conscience and conviction

– be respectful of disagreements and the differing conclusions of others

– allow pointed criticism without petty reprisal

– reject mockery, silencing or oppression of opposing viewpoints

– be bipartisan, diverse, thoughtful, knowledgeable and research-filled

– serve as an example of democracy in practice (especially to all those nations we hope to free and liberate).

Sounds like the kind of think tank that might fulfill the mission and vision of both SMU and the United Methodist Church.

Anyone want to debate me on this collaborative think tank solution? I am open-minded and welcome any and all of your diverse and opposing points of view. I will seek for this plan to remain flexible because only time will tell whose view will win out. The best one, I am quite sure.

SMU Ed Board and “lovers of SMU,” I too am frustrated!

Since the SMU administration and faculty members won’t open their discussions to the all “lovers of SMU” regarding the George W. Bush Presidential Library, Museum and Institute, instead of writing about “open discussions occurring behind closed doors,” why not host them yourselves and invite everyone to attend?

It is true that SMU exists to serve you, too.

Other campuses have had student-led movements before. “Lovers of SMU” can “just say no” if they don’t like or want campus-wide, all-inclusive discussions.

This question just keeps ringing inside my thoughts: Whose SMU is this anyway?

I, for one, don’t think that is an all-or-none question.

Well, “lovers of SMU,” I will just have to wait and see.

About the writer:

Shannon C. Jacuzzi is a 1988 SMU B.A. History/French minor. Graduate Certificate in Conflict Mediation, University of Arkansas at Little Rock.