Air Wars Continue

Both Jerry Kilgore and Tim Kaine are airing new and gritty attack ads today, and Kilgore is up with a new positive ad as well. Kaine is still running his positive ads featuring Gov. Mark Warner and his transportation plan.

The ads will be linked here as soon as they are available online.

Kaine's ad attacks Kilgore on abortion, saying that the Republican wants to ban abortions unless a woman reports a rape or incest within seven days of the assault.

"Seven days," an announcer says while the screen shows a distraught woman sitting in a darkened kitchen. " Jerry Kilgore would outlaw abortion and victimize victims yet again."

Kilgore has consistently said he does not want to criminalize women who have abortions. But he has refused to say whether he would sign a bill outlawing abortion if the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. And he has reaffirmed previous statements saying the only exceptions to a ban should be for rape and incest victims who report the crimes promptly.

Kilgore's attack ad calls Kaine a liberal who would raise taxes if elected.

"The press says Kaine is 'playing games with voters.' Talking out of both sides of his mouth. He increased real estate taxes. Sales taxes. Supported a record increase in the gas tax. Passed the largest tax increase in state history. ... Tim Kaine. Liberal on taxes. Too liberal to be governor."

Kaine disputes the claim that he would raise taxes, saying he wants to lock up the transportation trust fund before he considers any proposal to increase the gas tax increase.

Kilgore's positive ad is one of the few with Kilgore speaking directly to the camera.

"Growing up I learned some pretty important things," Kilgore says, appearing in the woods with a jacket and orange shirt. "Like the value of hard work. I'll make creating jobs my top priority. I'll make sure we fully fund education. I'll oppose higher taxes. I'll make government more accountable. You have my word on it. I'm Jerry Kilgore and I ask for your vote on Tuesday."

By Michael Shear |  November 1, 2005; 10:31 AM ET  | Category:  Jerry Kilgore , Tim Kaine
Previous: Potts Stays In | Next: Abortion Response

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



I was wondering what people up in Northern VA thought about Kilgore's stance on route 66 inside the beltway. He gave his support to building an outdated plan for a bypass here in Charlottesville. In the case of Charlottesville he knows that few people actually know the statistics about the project and what it will (or better yet, wont) do for traffic around here.
Once again he proves that he will say anything to get elected.

Posted by: UVA08 | November 1, 2005 01:32 PM

Once again, Kilgore is discussing an issue that isn't solely up to him. Rte. 66 has always been an issue and local government plays a role, too. And, from what I hear, they are against this expansion. This could all end up in court. But I believe the residents of Northern Virginia recognize that Kilgore is making promises that he cannot deliver on. And by expanding Rte. 66 inside the beltway both ways, he will not solve the traffic issue...more people will just be prone to taking Rte. 66 into the City, again increasing congestions. Kaine's transportation plan (regarding increasing Rte. 66 west inside the beltway to allow for better evacuation of the City in case of emergency) makes sense, and can be done. On top of that, there already ARE regional transportation boards (although they don't have very much power). Is Kilgore suggesting scrapping these boards and appointing his OWN? Will they have budgets? Will they be taken seriously? I doubt it.

Posted by: falls church resident | November 1, 2005 02:27 PM

Kilgore says he wants to give local authorities more power, but in reality his regional authorities -- rejected by voters in 2001 referendums -- would take that power away. Rather than a more accountable government, regional authorities would add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy to government. And the key difference between Kilgore's and Warner's authority proposals: Warner had a way to pay for them. Kilgore wants to raid the general fund for transportation dollars, hurting essential services and starving our schools for needed dollars.

Posted by: Omar | November 1, 2005 07:24 PM

As for the I-66 widening, locals oppose it. If Kilgore really believes in local authority, he should listen. I-66 sits right along a major Metrorail corridor that needs investment of its own. Let's reward the people who are part of the solution for taking public transit or carpooling. Heck, I-66 should be made HOV-3 during rush hour just like 395 to encourage slugging and really get traffic moving.

People also forget that there's a major bike route that sits right along 66 that would be threatened with any widening project. Let's leave well enough alone and promote alternatives to driving so that there's less traffic to begin with.

Posted by: Omar | November 1, 2005 07:28 PM

Omar and FallsChurch... the thing is Kilgore probably knows everything you all know he just will say anything and do anything to get elected. I gave him a fair shot. Im not going to sit here and say that I didnt lean Kaine from the beginning but Kilgore has made it so that not only am on Kaine side but im pulling people over here with me. Its no wonder his unfavorabiity ratings are so much higher than Kaine's. In my opinion he exemplifies the worst type of politician.

Posted by: UVA08 | November 1, 2005 09:05 PM

Woah...this website just blew the lid off of Dave Albo and what happened in 2004....

http://protect.org

Just updated.....

Posted by: Not Dave Albo | November 2, 2005 10:22 AM

I don't know if Omar's a NoVa guy, but he's basically got it - Arlington County hates this.
And yeah - if my bike trail on 66 goes away, I'll be superfreakin' you-know-what.

There probably IS room in the existing ROW to widen, but you can bet some residents are going to have sound barriers literally RIGHT in their back yards.

The big thing is how to pay for it.
The Kilgore camp think the project'll be $193 million total. Even at that price, they say they'll need an extra $33 million in "other federal funds" (whatever the heck THOSE are) to complete it.
VDOT thinks it's gonna be more like $224-$466 million.

[pause to let that sink in]

Even if they're right (which they may not be, it could be more), that could be an extra $200 million dollars.

Where the H-E-double hockey sticks is THAT cash coming from?

95's a worse problem.
64 probably is too.

HOV-3 sounds good, but probably just results in more tickets (I myself have gotten on 66 West at exit 71 many times in the afternoon and just crossed my fingers until the Dulles Access Road), and WAY more side road congestion (which is also bad now in Arlington), WAY more metro congestion (ever see the Orange line at rush hour? Parking at Vienna?)

Also, unless you're building/widening a bridge to DC, you just move the constraint. Yes, a lot of 66 travellers work here in Arlington. But a lot are headed into town, too. Now DC's involved, and things get messier.

Btw - I love how Kilgore said in the second debate he'd "work with Tom Davis" on widening 66 inside the Beltway, when Tom Davis doesn't represent a square inch of the 6.5 miles in question.

Posted by: William Edwards | November 2, 2005 10:50 AM

PS. I'd love to see a 66 proposal that included HOT lanes.

Come on, Frank Haney!

hahahahahahahahaha

Posted by: William Edwards | November 2, 2005 10:55 AM

The fact that Kilgore says he wants to widen 66 shows that he is completely out of touch with transportation problems in Northern VA! The cost would be rediculous because there are already existing walls, overpasses, tunnels, trails and HOMES!
Metro needs to be improved so that people ride it (not just on weekends).

I watched the debates on COX 35 and Kilgore just does not seem like a leader. Frankly, Kaine was making him look silly on stage (people were laughing). Kilgore had touble answer questions outright. Instead he danced around the issue whilst slinging mud at Kaine.

Kilgore's adds hit hot issues while dropping cliche political slogans about himself.

Does Kilgore really believe that he can improve problems in the Commonwealth w/o raising taxes?

Kilgore just does not seem like a good leader.

Posted by: Ryan | November 2, 2005 11:46 AM

Did Dave Albo try to lower the penalty for child molestation or not? Here's his side:

5. What is Albo's side of the story?


Albo Alibi #1: Just Another Option! Albo first claimed (very creatively) that his attempt to downgrade penalties for child rape would not actually be a reduction in punishment, because he left the originial, much tougher Rape law on the books as well. This is little different than if Albo had introduced a bill to make bank robbery a misdemeanor, then denied he had done anything wrong because felony bank robbery was still on the books as well.


Albo Alibi #2: What Are They Talking About? Albo next claimed that he could not understand PROTECT's objections at all, that they simply made no sense to any of his Richmond cronies. Yet he managed to remove every last word that we opposed under pressure from PROTECT and Virginia citizens.


Albo Alibi #3: Saving Sodomy... Albo has also claimed that his bill was an attempt to make sure laws against sodomizing children would still be on the books if the Supreme Court struck down Virginia's sodomy laws for adults as unconstitutional (under the Lawrence v. Texas decision). This tortured argument ignores the fact that if Albo really believed the Supreme Court was addressing child sexual assault (and not just adult consensual sex) and he wanted to make sure he kept sodomy against children a crime, he should have made it a real crime, requiring mandatory prison time. But he didn't. It also does not explain why he also included sexual intercourse and other acts in his expanded definition of "custodial indecent liberties."


Albo Alibi #4: Protecting Teens... Albo also claims that House Bill 1054 would have been a new tool that actually increased penalties for sex with teens. They say that if an adult has sex with an older teenager who is in the adult's custody or under his supervision, it could be considered a misdemeanor (contributing to the delinquency of a minor). But the truth is, the Albo bill applies to babies and young children, not just teens.

Posted by: Not Dave Albo | November 2, 2005 12:52 PM

How about a little attention to the disgraceful mailing for "progressives" with the Democratic logo on the front page.

I live in Midland and usually vote for the Democratic candidate.

This afternoon, with my mail, came a brochure with the promise to tell me which candidate for governor truly shares my progressive principles.

And voila! It was none other than State Sen. Russ Potts.

This bit of dirty tricks came courtesy of someone who obviously was not associated with the Democratic Party, bold front logo notwithstanding.

Posted by: MImi Schaeffer | November 7, 2005 06:11 PM

Oh and now the sleeze campaign is calling progressives under the guise of some organization called NARAL and telling progressives Kaine doesn't support women's choice or gay rights and therefore, they should all vote for Potts.

Thank God liberals don't have the herd mentality of Republicans and can think for themselves and not fall into the trasparent trap.

Give me a break, folks. Is that all you got...?

Posted by: Mimi Schaeffer | November 7, 2005 09:14 PM

In response to Ms. Schaeffer above, NARAL is hardly just "some organization". It is the most powerful political arm of the pro-choice movement in America.
Besides that, NARAL did NOT endorse Potts/tell everyone to go and vote for him. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/16/AR2005081601329.html
Also see: http://www.bushvchoice.com/archives/2005/08/virginia_candid.html

Their choice made sense. Potts was the only truly pro-choice candidate and that is the purpose of NARAL in candidate endorsements: to protect choice. If they endorsed Kaine, that would send the message that it is okay with them for a candidate to violate a woman's right to choose...and if it's okay with NARAL, who else would there be to stand up for choice?
They did realize, though, that Potts is not going to win and that the best shot for pro-choice Virginians would be to put Kaine in office. Their lack of official endorsement made perfect sense.
It seemed as if you were suggesting that NARAL was a guise of sorts for the GOP, and that is certainly not the case, as you will find out from anybody familiar with the organization and its activities.

Posted by: Kamelia Ghazvini | November 9, 2005 08:42 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2006 The Washington Post Company