Tuesday, September 23, 2008
I think Bill C’s behind this.
Hill declines to attend claiming to have been “blind-sided” by Palin’s invitation. Was she? Who knows, but it makes a somewhat legitimate explanation, and given the media environment, one that won’t likely receive much attention.
So, Bill convinces Hill to pull out, knowing that it puts Obama on the spot: how does he proceed? Do I support the country by sending a replacement, or, god forbid, attending myself (before a gigantic audience—the rally being in NYC the blue factor would have made this an adoring crowd—for his message). Or do I play this for electoral advantage?
Say what you will about Bill, but he IS a good judge of character. He knows Obama is all about an Obama victory. He knows Obama will hide behind Hill—it was her decision. He knows Obama won’t send a replacement because there’s more political advantage gained by ensuring Palin doesn’t get a chance to sway those blue, blue New Yorkers. He knows Obama isn’t even up to the task of making the decision to STAND UP FOR HIS COUNTRY.
Bill also knows that someone will ask why Palin was disinvited, for, surely, it was a crazy decision: due to Palin’s rising mind-share and the media’s desired to catch her up on some gaffe, her speech was sure to get much air and would surely be a mega-hit on You-Tube. A mega-hit regardless of whether she knocked it out of the park or really put her foot in it. Bill knows someone in the dead-wood media would find out about the pressure from the groups noted in the article and it would all be traced back to Obama.
Obama’s chances go down. If he loses, he won’t have an easy go of beating Hill in 2012.
It really is genius, if Machiavellian to the max.
Slick Willy, gone but not gone.