by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright December 27, 2005
All Rights Reserved.

ormer President Bill Clinton believes historians have been unfair portraying his impeachment in U.S. history textbooks. When Clinton raised his hand before the Paula Corbin Jones Arkansas grand jury March 26, 1998 he swore under oath “to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,” but instead insisted “he did not have ‘sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.'” Clinton was finally acquitted of perjury and obstruction of justice on a partisan vote in the U.S. Senate Feb. 12, 1999 but his impeachment has now made its way into history textbooks. No matter how well the economy performed or whether he kept the country at peace, he's forever linked to the Monica Lewinsky sex affair. While Clinton sees the mess as a partisan witch-hunt, historians record his impeachment as the first one since 17th President Andrew Johnson faced the same fate Feb. 24, 1868.

      Clinton's impeachment was his own doing. Despite Special Prosecutor Ken Starr's $40 million Whitewater investigation [looking into possible crimes connected the Clintons' botched land investment deal tied to the failure of Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan] no one told Clinton to spin a grand jury under oath. He had the nation's top PR consultants and attorneys advising him at the time, including his savvy Washington personal attorney Bob Bennett. When asked under oath about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, Clinton could have taken the 5th. He chose instead to split hairs with his now famous line, “it depends on what the meaning of the word is, is.” Had Clinton taken the 5th, the Lewinsky affair would have appeared as an inconsequential footnote. Whether justified or not, the Clinton presidency is forever tainted with the cruel facts of history.

      Clinton-Lewinsky blanketed the tabloids in 1998-99 like a true Hollywood sex scandal, turning water-cooler gossip into a national obsession. No matter how Clinton tried to ignore the subject it wouldn't go away because he refused to admit undeniable reality. When he failed to confess and denied any involvement in the Jones' grand jury, he created the maelstrom that dominated the headlines. “It should not be in the book for titillating purposes or settling scores,” said Columbia University Provost Alan Brinkley, author of several history textbooks. “It should be in the book because of its significance in our recent history,” summing up Clinton's real problem: that presidents make history, for better or for worse. Once events saturate headlines, it's difficult undoing the PR damage, rewriting history and changing the image because it doesn't match partisan interpretations or preferences.

      Clinton presided over an unprecedented bull stock market, driving share prices through the roof, adding to record capital gains revenues and contributing to welcome budget surpluses. No matter how Clinton wants to pick and choose, history has a funny way of recording what's found the headlines. Now he must contend with textbooks reporting on salient events from 1993 to 2001. In McGraw Hill's “American Journey,” the text attempts counterbalance real events with partisan shenanigans. “Although there was general agreement that the president had lied, the country was divided over whether his actions justified impeachment,” read the passage, understating the vicious partisan divide caused by Clinton's conduct. No single event galvanized the GOP more than Clinton's stunts in the Oval Office. Right wing radio talk shows proliferated like dot-com stocks.

      Historians work hard at being nonpartisan but it's difficult containing liberal or conservative propensities. Prentice Hall's high school text “A History of the United States,” refers to the impeachment scandal as a “sorry mess,” sounding a critical note on Clinton's legacy. Saturation news coverage from the time the story leaked on Intenet news and opinion portal called “The Drudge Report,” all the way through Clinton's acquittal in the U.S. Senate, created Clinton fatigue. By the time Clinton's vice president Al Gore ran for president, the country was so disgusted it looked for a new face in George W. Bush, though the country was bitterly divided as seen by Gore winning the popular vote. History hasn't been kind to the former chief executive, highlighting the Lewinsky escapades over a solid track record of foreign policy, economic and social accomplishments.

      History mirrors the preponderance of news reported in print and seen on TV. Clinton created his own tabloid-hell, monopolizing headlines and fueling right wing talk radio gossip. When he refused to own up and apologize for his misdeeds, he turned his private tryst into one of the nation's most publicized sex scandals. If anything, textbook makers bend over backwards sanitizing Clinton's indiscretions, frequently omitting lurid details. Describing Clinton's dalliance as “a personal relationship between the president and a White House intern” or an “improper relationship with a young White House intern,” doesn't begin to accurately give the sordid details that disgraced the Oval Office and infuriated fair-minded people, especially religious conservatives. When Clinton admitted he “did it because he could,” he helped write his legacy of profound selfishness and egomania.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.