---

PLP defenders Cal Smith and Julian Hall are lashing out at any criticism of Dr. Brown.

The latest target is former Premier Alex Scott.

As much as they would like to steer any bad news topic away from Dr. Brown and brand Alex Scott or virtually anyone else as the bad guys, that isn't going to happen.

The reason is that the PLP is being dragged down the same road that caused the UBP to lose out in 1998: arrogance, indifference, and acting like they own the Cabinet offices.

And Dr. Brown is the leader of that pack.

Should the PLP lose the election, you can bet there will be all sorts of accusations directed at one entity or another for causing their downfall.

The real cause, however, will be the 'man in the mirror.'

It is not Dr. Brown's critics who avoided questions by labelling them "plantation questions" or who described the possibility of a change of government as "back to the plantation."

On this point, PLP leaders pride themselves on ushering in an era of increased freedom of speech.

They must expect, therefore, that questioners will be bolder than they were in a previous time.

They can't have it both ways, wanting kudos for more open communication, then balking when the result is being asked questions that weren't asked of previous leaders.

The questions about expenditures of the people's monies needed to be asked, should have been asked, and should have been answered.

Racially divisive

Dismissing the questions with a racially charged epithet may have successfully shielded Dr. Brown from having to respond to an embarrassing question, but it was racially divisive and set a tone that cannot by any stretch of the imagination contribute to racial harmony.

Further, it was not Dr. Brown's critics that claimed "exoneration" in a case where he was never questioned even though there were numerous allegations about his impropriety.

It was not Dr. Brown's critics who lied on television about whether the public would have to travel through a tunnel as was planned at Southlands.

It is not Dr. Brown's critics who show up for every possible opportunity to milk an event for favourable publicity, but are never to be seen when there's bad news or some unfavourable political fallout.

It is not his critics who want to appear as author and inventor of every good thing the PLP has done but blames someone else when there's a mistake.

Smear tactics

It certainly is not Dr. Brown's critics who felt it necessary to mislead even his own supporters prior to overthrowing Jennifer Smith.

It is not his critics who set themselves up as the PLP's Messiah, then tried to paint himself as the victim.

It isn't Dr. Brown's critics who have used an array of smear-words but tried to convince his listeners that others were the guilty ones.

No matter what his defenders say, the Doctor has earned every ounce of criticism, and then some.

Reflecting on Mr. Hall's attacks on Alex Scott, it helps to remember that Mr. Hall has tossed quite a few Molotov Cocktail-like comments himself.

Surely he would not claim exclusive rights and deny Mr. Scott the opportunity if he felt the need to toss his own.

Mr. Scott, along with the rest of the party, was forced by the sudden election call to abandon their internal leadership issues.

Did Dr. Brown call the surprise election expressly to head off a leadership challenge?

It is a well-worn tactic to divert attention from trouble within by focusing everyone's attention on an external threat.

In that light, contrary to Mr. Hall's thrust, Mr. Scott's plea may have been a last ditch effort to save his party, not destroy it.[[In-content Ad]]

---