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”?