Maybe the "Clinton" that started all of the personal (or personnel) attacks was George Clinton, the New York political boss who replaced Vice-President Aaron Burr on the 1804 Republican ticket. Maybe not. But it makes as much sense as blaming any other individual for all the troubles of the world.
I wouldn't even blame SFT for all the troubles at USM. That would be giving him more credit than he deserves.
But, sadly that all changed in the mid-90's with the rise of personnel destruction politics. Some individuals (named Clinton) decided that it would be easier to dispatch their political foes if they attacked the person and not the idea.
Hmm...remember the Swift Boat Veterans? Even if you think Clinton started this (which I don't), you have to admit that Karl Rove has him beat by a country mile. Did Clinton teach Rove or did Rove learn how to be that nasty all by himself? You be the judge.
Look, Cossack, will you stop beating this dead horse? I never said that the charges brought against the librarian had any merit...frankly, I wasn't there and have no knowledge of what really transpired. Most universities have their own internal system whereby faculty-to-faculty grievances are dealt with. I have no problem with someone bringing a grievance, and having it go through the proper channels to determine if it indeed has merit. That's the way these things work (and I'm glad for it!).
What got me going on this thread was when you tried to use this lone example as a lightening rod for "Liberals vs. Christians" in the mode of Bill O'Reilly ("gosh durn libruls trying to take away our Christmas!"). It's a ridiculous assertion that drives me nuts.
The bottom line here, is that a few individuals wished to completely discredit another individual based on his political beliefs, so they decided to not only assult his character, but also his career and eagerly tried to take away his ability to earn a living. Those are top notch individuals.