So here's the situation faced by the Obama campaign: on top of the Drudge Report is a link that states "Agents of Hillary claim 'scandalous information' on Obama; decided not to use it... " You can view the archive of the Drudge Report here
If they don't respond, then the MSM, puppets of Drudge, will start reporting on the story. They'll question what dirt it could possibly be. Rezko? Money problems? An affair? They'll focus on all the negatives of Obama's past. I can just imagine one of those talking heads saying "Well... he's already admitted to using marijuana and cocaine so it can't be that." That is not the kind of coverage that Obama wants.
Or they could respond, get the Hillary campaign to unambiguously deny they have dirt, and kill the story. More after the jump...
Unambiguously deny is important. If the Obama campaign let's the Hillary Campaign leave any doubt that this story is true, they will still face the negative media coverage, the questions about what the 'scandalous information' is will still be there. That is why it was so important for the Obama campaign to press the Hillary Campaign to clearly state that Novak's column is false.
The Hillary Campaign framed this issue as the inexperienced Obama Campaign falling into the trap of a Republican columnist set to pit the Democrats against each other. No. By getting the Hillary campaign to the debunk this, the Obama campaign prevented a Republican columnist's false claim from smearing both Clinton and Obama. The Swift Boaters weren't credible sources but their message did a lot of damage.
Novak is a scumbag, but if his column is on top of the Drudge Report, his message will get out.
The Hillary Campaign apparently thought, despite the false allegation, that they shouldn't immediately debunk this story. They could have been slow to react, but every time there has been a false allegation, such as not tipping a waiter, related to Hillary on the Drudge Report, her campaign has responded almost instantaneously. On this story, there was no response until one was demanded by the Obama Campaign.
Their first response to the Obama Campaign further confirms that they didn't intend to debunk this story until the Obama Campaign's request.
"Experienced Democrats see this for what it is. Others get distracted and thrown off their games. Voters should be concerned about the readiness of any Democrat inexperienced enough to fall for this. There is only one campaign in this race that has actually engag[ed] in the very practice that Senator Obama is decrying, and it's his. We have no idea what Mr. Novak's item is about and reject it totally.""
Their message is Hillary, the experienced Democrat, ignores false allegations on top of the Drudge Report, but because the inexperienced Obama asked, we'll clear this up. (It takes another response from the Obama campaign to unambiguously clear this up. Rejecting Mr.Novak's item is different from saying they have nothing to do with it.)
The Obama Campaign should be angry about the Hillary Campaign's resistance to publicly declaring that this is story is false. Only the Hillary Campaign could set the record straight and should have done so as fast as possible.
The Obama Campaign made the right decision to fight this story and demand the Hillary Campaign debunk this nonsense. No matter who you support in the primary, we can all agree this election shouldn't be decided by B.S. on the Drudge Report: whether it be haircuts, tipping, or 'scandalous information.'