In a recent interview with President Clinton, CBS
anchor Dan Rather asked the former head of state why
he risked everything to have an inappropriate
relationship with a White House intern. Why would he
provide his political enemies with what turns out to
be almost enough legal ammunition to impeach him from
office? His answer? “Because I could.”

During the 2000 campaign, President Bush sold himself
as the "anti-Clinton". Whether he realizes it or not,
over the past four years Dubya has turned out to be
much more like President Clinton then he portrayed,
especially when it comes to abusing power. If
President Bush was watching the interview, I hope he
paid very close attention to what President Clinton
said. I say this not out of any concern for protecting
President Bush from his political enemies. He is good
enough (as is Mr. Rove) to do that on his own. No, I
think he ought to take note of Mr. Clinton’s answer
because of the inevitable question he will face when
he finally leaves office – why did we invade iraq?

Of all the reasons given by the Bush Administration
for killing tens of thousands of people, sending over
a hundred thousand Americans to occupy Iraq, and
spending hundreds of billions of dollars, none have
been even close to the truth. Weapons of mass
destruction, bringing democracy to the Middle East,
freeing the Iraqi people from a horrible dictator, all
of these explanations ring hollow in the eyes of the
world. No my fellow Americans, the Bush Administration
never truthfully explained why we invaded Iraq. That
was done by Senator Kerry (then Presidential candidate
Kerry) in an interview with Chris Matthews. “Why did
we invade Iraq?” Matthews asked. “Because we could.” said Kerry. Ironic eh?

I ask you now: what kind of a reason to start a war is
“Because we could”?