From ClarionLedger Blog:
The volume of the complaints — on both sides — of the “Thad” post-card issue in the State Senate runoff between Will Longwitz and Charles Barbour rivals anything I have recently seen in a legislative race. It’s really enough to make me wonder whether everyone is not protesting too much.
Charles Barbour’s post card yesterday re-hashing the matter quoted an early draft of a blog post I wrote on the issue, and did not reflect the change I made in the permanent post and as the post was printed by the Clarion-Ledger edition. Moreover, the Barbour card was sent using my name but without my authorization, and after I had declined to give his campaign authorization to use my name in a radio ad.
As for the “Thad” card and the Longwitz campaign, I’ve been told that the card was a result of the innocent signing of individual cards by a volunteer in the Longwitz campaign, unknown to Will Longwitz himself.
Both the Barbour card and the Longwitz card are tactics that the campaigns have to live with. In NCAA regulations dealing with the oversight of university athletics, there is a concept known as “institutional control.” It means the school is responsible for the actions of its boosters.
And campaigns are similarly responsible for the actions of their supporters, for good or for ill.