|
|
Hillary owes her victories to
a cleverly devised “October Surprise”
E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Ghanadot.com
Politics is rarely nice, but the Clintons know how to play at
gutter level. After going negative this weekend, for victories
in Texas and Ohio, you wonder what next - another role reversal,
from Hillary the vicious to Hillary the magnanimous?
Obama should note now that playing fair with the Clintons is not
the best strategy. It is a risk not worth taking.
The big story last weekend going into the Texas and Ohio
primaries, call it the “October
Surprise” if you would, was that Obama was cutting a
sweetheart deal with Canada on NAFTA, while telling the people
affected most by this North American Free Trade Agreement , in
Ohio and Texas, another story.
The Canadian
government came out to deny the story. But
the attack on
Obama had already gained the desired impact.
How the news
surfaced with that critical timing should not be a surprise. The
tendency for false information to seep into the news cycle at
decisive moments is nothing new to American politics. It is
called the “October Surprise.” And like the venomous bite from a
snake, the method gives no room for its target to recover until the damage is done.
Thus, the effort by the Canadian government to deny the false
report on Monday was of no consequence to the results of the
primaries in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday. Both major states went
to Hillary.
Obama is reported to have vented his frustration at the negative
campaign waged. He had acknowledged that the negative tactic had
caused him a setback. He should have known that something of
this sort was coming. If he didn't know then, he knows
now.
In his recent utterances, he has
sharpened his criticisms of Hillary.
"What exactly is this foreign policy
experience? Was she negotiating treaties? Was she handling
crises? The answer is no." Said Obama.
The build up to Hillary’s victories in Ohio and Texas was
fascinating in its mischievousness. First, there was the New
York Times attack on McCain for sexual misconduct. That
accusation or innuendo eventually proved to be false. Some would
wonder how that could have helped Hillary.
Up to that point Hillary, unlike Obama, was showing poorly
against McCain in the polls, especially after the original
“Super Tuesday”. The probable solution was, therefore, to bring
down McCain a notch. Make McCain vulnerable, then how Hillary
fared against him would be a non-issue, so far as Democrat
primary goers were concerned.
Meanwhile, as the media, consciously or not, was helping Hillary
regain her footing, she was spending time crying foul for anyone
who cared to hear, about how the same media were being nice to
Obama. And she was all the more willing to point out the spots
where the scrutiny of the media on Obama should be directed;
knowing all the while that she was preparing the ground for her
"October Surprise.".
Her critical examination of Obama’s record culminated in the
release of an advertisement, reminiscent of President
Johnson's advert, the "Daisy
Girl" or “Mushroom Cloud” ad against Barry Gold Water in
1964 presidential campaign.
In the Hillary advert, a phone at the White House rang in the
middle of the night and the question was who you would rather
have answer that call, presumably Obama or Hillary?
The advert itself was replete with opportunities for Obama to go
negative on Hillary. Surely with Bill, her husband’s reputation,
that call in the middle of the night could be about something
other than essential state affair!
It wasn’t the phone in the advert alone. Somehow, and
mysteriously, there was a bunch of misinformation making the
rounds on the internet – that Obama, because of his middle name
Hussein, was not a Christian and that Obama had the support of
the KKK because he would be the easier one for the republicans
to beat in the general election.
The Clintons have denied being part of this misinformation in
the same way they have denied every negative thing said about
Obama to date; with a wink and a nod. But the viciousness of the
accusations is undeniable. And its success is unquestionable. It
has garnered victories. Therefore, you need not wonder about
whom it benefited.
Flush with victories from Texas and Ohio, Hillary has started
hinting at sharing the ticket with Obama, with her name at the
top, of course.
However, it is hard to forget that at the close of every debate
they have had so far, Hillary was first to promise congeniality,
and publicly to offer the olive branch, like she did in
Congress, at the occasion of the State of the Union address by
President Bush, only to pick up the cudgel against Obama the
moment she hit the campaign trail.
It may turn out to be that this promise of a place on the ticket
is another stratagem to shove Obama off completely.
E.
Ablorh-Odjidja, Publisher
www.ghanadot.com, Washington, DC, March 6, 2008
Permission to publish: Please feel free to publish or
reproduce, with credits, unedited. If posted at a website,
email a copy of the web page to
publisher@ghanadot.com . Or don't publish at all.
.
|
