Does Clinton's Impeachment Inoculate Bush From Same Fate?
It's hard to believe that over 8 years have passed since a GOP-controlled kangaroo court convened, and presented articles of impeachment against President William Jefferson Clinton. Looking back on the Jones-Whitewater-Lewinsky-Tripp-Starr smudge on history, it's also hard to believe that the neocon contingent in congress was so hell bent on removing a sitting President over what was essentially a personal matter.
Without splitting the "perjury" hair, and for the purposes of this post, let's stipulate that Clinton's impeachment was clearly politically motivated (you'd have to be a dunderhead to believe otherwise anyway). But why? Certainly, the GOP leadership waged a war with the Clinton White House during his entire administration. And it wasn't even so much ideological - hell, in any other era of the country, Bill Clinton could have just as easily been a moderate Republican. He removed a lot of social welfare safety nets. Utility deregulation was allowed to occur during his administration. Enron thrived. Grandma Millie was getting hosed a long time before George W. Bush was installed as President in late 2000 by the Supreme Court. Clinton didn't serve in the military, yet he wasn't averse to projecting U.S. hegemony in the world via military engagement. In other words, Bill Clinton was a conservative's type of "liberal".
So what happened? Could it be that the entire 8 years that Clinton was in office was simply a setup for the Bush regime, and that the impeachment of Bill Clinton was little more than a sting operation by the neocons in the GOP to inoculate a future GOP president from the same fate?