In Virginia, McCain plays catch-up in the ground game.

McCain and Palin are in the Commonwealth today, Bill Clinton's on the scene, too.

Meanwhile, VA GOP chair Jeffrey Frederick compares Obama to bin Laden.

Comments

[Ged]

Wow, I wonder what McCain will say about that (Frederick's comparison). Will he say nothing and let the slur fester or will he speak up and announce that such bile has no place in this election discussion?

[Ged]

My bad, I didn't read down far enough in that article:

"Gail Gitcho, a McCain spokeswoman, also denounced Frederick's remarks, calling them "not appropriate. While Barack Obama is associated with domestic terrorist William Ayers, the McCain campaign disagrees with the comparison that Jeff Frederick made," Gitcho said."

Good for them.

[Dave Ribar]

Frederick's "comparison" was pretty weak (i.e., that Obama and Osama "both have friends that bombed the Pentagon"). Unless one of the candidates says something offensive, maybe we could declare today an umbrage-free Monday?

[Ed Cone]

McCain himself can't quite condemn the statement.

Which, considering the recent history of equivocation within the campaign between "be civil" and "Boo!," is not surprising.

[Joe Killian]

I'll admit I haven't waded knee deep into all of this and sorted it with my own hands, so excuse me if I'm getting this wrong. But unless I misread this article and a number like it in the last few days wouldn't it at the very least be factually incorrect to say that Bill Ayers, whether or not he's a friend of Obama's, "bombed the Pentagon."

The way I'm reading this, Ayers was a member of a group that set a bomb in a Pentagon bathroom but didn't actually take part.

By that logic, as a member of the News & Record's newsroom, didn't I just sell the Weather Channel for a ridiculous amount of money? Didn't I cover the statehouse because after all, Mark Binker and I are part of the same group? Didn't I win all the awards our staff has ever gotten and make all of the mistakes that ever got any of them fired?

I'm not saying bombing other places is better than bombing the Pentagon or that the guy didn't do that -- but it seems to me that we should get the places he did bomb straight, at least.

[Joe Killian]

The above comment is predicated on the notion that this line from the Post story and other like it are accurate:

"Ayers did not participate in the bombing at the Pentagon but admitted to involvement in other blasts."

I haven't read Ayers' books or researched who did what myself.

[Mick]

He was a founding member and leader of a Domestic terrorist group. Deal with it. Soft sell it all you want though Joe. They were just little bombs afterall.

Lots of bad guys go to jail for things their underlings do. Lots of people go to jail for unintended circumstances indeirectly caused by their actions. Bin Laden didnt fly any planes.

All that being said, the comparison in question is harsh and over the top. And kinda stupid too.

Oh and totally unrelated,

Joe, your crap about Palin porn and it's corresponding defense caused me to care far less about your opinions in general. I lost a certain measure of respect I guess.

[Joe Killian]

While I've gotta tell you I don't stay awake nights worrying about how much people on the Internet respect me, I think it's important to note that I didn't defend Palin porn - I made a post about the fact that it was happening. As did any number of bloggers and news organizations across the political spectrum.

The only thing I defended was the idea that the fact that it's unpleasant and in bad taste doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it.

I'm not saying Ayers is a nice guy or should be forgiven for the things he did do -- I'm saying we should figure out what he did and didn't do and stick to condemning him and sliming people who've associated with him for the things for which he's actually responsible.

[Mick]

Dont care you dont care... I wanted to tell you. And I was referring to your defense of why you posted it not defense of the porn itself. BTW... why should we discuss it at all? Dont care who else did it. I am talking to you.

I am a reader of the paper and frequent visitor of the N&R site not "people on the internet".

What Ayers did do was help found and run a terrorist organization. I dont care if he built the bombs or shot the Brinks guards himself or not.
Do you?

[Joe Killian]

Mick -

I think it's worth discussing the fact that a woman has a legitimate shot at being the vice presdient (and potentially the president) of the United States and they're making porn movies about her. Says something about the country, maybe, about the porn business certainly and the culture generally.

Not wanting to take part in that conversation - whether to condemn the movie, say it sounds hilarious, wonder why someone would do it -- that's one thing. To argue that the conversation shouldn't take place -- that's simply not something you and I are likely to agree on. Arguments that people shouldn't discuss things that disturb other people -- they just don't reach me.

I bring up that it was widely covered by various other outlets because I don't remember there being outrage from anyone in particular about those people covering it. Fox News does a segment on it and we don't have to have an argument about whether it's appropriate for their air waves -- I make a post about it and I have terrible judgement, I'm obscene, I should be fired. Does not seem to make a hell of a lot of sense to me.

I've since been told by a few people via e-mail that there problem wasn't that I posted on the film or described what it would be like -- it was that I did so and then did not condemn it. So I can discuss these things...as long as I clearly condemn them. I can encourage a discussion -- but only if I first tell you what I think the right answer is.

That line of reasoning loses me at the first turn.

[mi]

Not every discussion is suitable for every situation or venue. In my opinion, the post was unnecessary and in poor taste. Simple. You crossed my line and I have had my say.

[Joe Killian]

We disagree on this issue, but that's all right. I can disagree with you without losing respect for you.

[Tony Wilkins]

Joe K., my objection was the graphic descriptions in the Palin Porn post, not that you were simply stating it was being made.
If you can look into the face of the administrator at Wesleyan Christian Academy and justify the post being associated with their ad then we just have a different way of thinking.
"The only thing we knew for sure about Henry Porter is that his name wasn't Henry Porter"...Bob Dylan 1986.

[Dave Ribar]

Sigh, so much for umbrage-free Monday.

[Mick]

Joe,

I've disagreed many times with you in the past w/o losing respect. Just not this time.