Posts belonging to Category Catherine Crabill



Bill Kling: Just as crazy as Crabill.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

If you want to download the whole file to your hard-drive click here (11.6 MB MP3).

Things to consider as you listen to the audio:

  1. Winning against no one with 63.89% of the vote is a “substantial margin”?
  2. Of course, the federal government dared to provide response and recovery operations when a federal building was destroyed (federal jurisdiction) and a large quantity of explosives were used (again, federal jurisdiction).
  3. Yes, that evil liberal Washington Times misquoted her. I blame the Reverend Sun Myung Moon.
  4. It’s nice to see him getting friendly with 9/11 conspiracy theorists like Jesse Ventura. ‘Oh, I don’t agree with him, but he raises the same points about 9/11 that Cathrine does about Oklahoma City.’ Uh-huh…
  5. And, yes, those evil blogs like Virginia Virtucon. Interesting fact: The 99th Legislative District Committee’s website actually links to Virtucon.
  6. And it’s nice to see that Bill Kling confirms everything that the Democrats have been saying about the “tea party” movement: There nothing but a bunch of crazy Republican astroturfers.
  7. And how does comparing your town to Mayberry make the people “country bumpkins”? Last time I watched The Andy Griffith Show, everyone on the show, for the most part, was portrayed as being pretty smart (Barney and Otis being the exceptions). What Mrs. Sili was saying is that she didn’t want to have to work with people the day after election after supporting someone that called anyone that disagreed with her a “traitor”.
  8. And, of course, that evil Albert Pollard engineered a conspiracy to call Catherine Crabill’s home! Call the police! And, funny, when I was doing door-to-door in Spotsylvania County for the Republicans I encountered a bunch of solid Dems that were on the Republican lists. So I guess I was engaging in “voter suppression”.

Cross-posted at Virginia Virtucon.

Catherine Crabill: Still crazy.

What more can I say? Her comments made at the 99th Legislative District Committee meeting last night:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

If you want to download the whole file to your hard-drive click here (5.73 MB MP3).

Cross-posted at Virginia Virtucon.

My agnosticism towards the tea party movement validated once again.

Does anyone consider this rhetoric attractive? (The Free Lance–Star):

Members of the Tea Party faction of the Republican Party and questions about health care greeted Rep. Robert J. Wittman (R-Montross) at a gathering Tuesday night in his hometown.

“Where in the Constitution is government charged with protecting people’s health?” asked Catherine T. Crabill, a maverick Republican who, despite being shunned by Wittman and state GOP leaders, came close last month to winning the seat Wittman once held in the House of Delegates.

“My frustration is that we don’t want any government-run health care. The Constitution is the only thing that will save us from this death spiral that the country is in,” Crabill said.

“Some elected officials are committing treason by not upholding their sacred oaths. Do you intend to uphold your oath of office and fight to make sure that your elected colleagues uphold theirs?” she asked Wittman, who promised he would.

I’m still laughing about how the constitutional scholar, Catherine Crabill, is making comments about what’s in the United States Constitution when she’s apparently unfamiliar with the Article III, where the founders went to the trouble of specifically defining the crime of treason:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

And why did Madison et al. decide to be that specific regarding the crime of treason? Consult Federalist No. 43:

As treason may be committed against the United States, the authority of the United States ought to be enabled to punish it. But as new-fangled and artificial treasons have been the great engines by which violent factions, the natural offspring of free government, have usually wreaked their alternate malignity on each other, the convention have, with great judgment, opposed a barrier to this peculiar danger, by inserting a constitutional definition of the crime, fixing the proof necessary for conviction of it, and restraining the Congress, even in punishing it, from extending the consequences of guilt beyond the person of its author.

But that nut Catherine Crabill wants to prosecute people for political disagreements (and probably execute them). This is the same thing that the crazies on the left wanted to do for George Bush et al. for the Iraq War and the USA PATRIOT Act.

And then we have this one:

“The federal government is gang-raping the people,” said Mark Carpenter of Acorn, a Westmoreland County community–not the controversial Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

Do I need to expand how absurd, vulgar, and bordering on obscene that comment is? Does this idiot need someone to explain to him what the crime of rape is, much less the crime of gang-rape?

Is Catherine Crabill a Provisional IRA member?

The folks at “I’m Surrounded By Idiots” (that would be me) have been wondering for a long time where exactly Catherine Crabill got her infamous ‘ballot box or bullet box’ quote (since Patrick Henry never said anything remotely similar — ever).

While spending too much time on Wikipedia, I came across this quote from Provisional Irish Republican Army leader Danny Morrison:

Who here really believes we can win the war through the ballot box? But will anyone here object if, with a ballot paper in this hand and an Armalite in the other, we take power in Ireland?

Thoughts?

Wow, Catherine Crabill is certainly a constitutional scholar.

Yeah, I know, the election is over. But apparently Crabill’s here to stay since she is redesigning her website and has a comment telling readers to “stay tuned” (possible run against Rob Wittman this coming year? God, I hope not).

First, I have got to comment on her comments made during her infamous ‘ballot box or bullet box’ speech.

If you watch the whole thing (get your link, I am not linking to the Daily Kos), you will see a portion where says that if elected politicians violate their oaths of office (by disagreeing with her politically), they should be tried for treason.

Yes, that is right, if you do something that she disagrees with politically, you should be charged with treason and face the death penalty. She, however, does not say if she supports hanging, guillotines, or firing squads to purge all the traitors.

What exactly is treason? Consult Article III of the United States Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Why did the founding fathers go to the trouble of defining the crime of treason and requiring the presentation of two witnesses or a confession in open court?

So political disagreements didn’t result in treason charges with people getting their heads chopped off left and right.

As James Madison noted in Federalist No. 43 while discussing the power of Congress to set the penalty of treason:

As treason may be committed against the United States, the authority of the United States ought to be enabled to punish it. But as new-fangled and artificial treasons have been the great engines by which violent factions, the natural offspring of free government, have usually wreaked their alternate malignity on each other, the convention have, with great judgment, opposed a barrier to this peculiar danger, by inserting a constitutional definition of the crime, fixing the proof necessary for conviction of it, and restraining the Congress, even in punishing it, from extending the consequences of guilt beyond the person of its author.

If you read what James Madison has written, you will see that the United States Constitution was created and written in such a way to protect the people and the government from people like Catherine Crabill. That is, people who think they have the right to execute people that don’t agree with them politically.

And here is a just funny one from her “Great Quotes” page (get your own link, I will not link to her “blog”):

An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation.

John Marshall, McCullough v. Maryland, 1819

It’s absolutely amazing that a candidate that rants and raves about how the federal government oversteps the authority given to them in the United States, would actually quote the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision in McCullough v. Maryland.

In McCullough v. Maryland, the federal government created a bank for their banking services located inside Maryland. Maryland thought it would be a great idea to levy a tax against this bank and reap the rewards since the federal government would be footing the tax bill.

The United States government essentially said, “screw you”.

The court ruled against Maryland saying that they had no authority to override Congress and that Congress was acting under the “necessary and proper” clause of Article I of the Constitution by setting up the bank, even though setting up a bank was not specifically mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.

In effect, the court decision expanded the power of Congress and permitted them to do things that were not expressly permitted in the United States Constitution.

And while the SCOTUS has used the interstate commerce clause to “justify” acts of Congress more and more, McCullough was cited as permitting Congress to enforce elements of a New Deal agriculture bill which prohibited wheat growers from producing ‘too much’ wheat (Wickard v. Filburn):

It is said, however, that this Act, forcing some farmers into the market to buy what they could provide for themselves, is an unfair promotion of the markets and prices of specializing wheat growers. It is of the essence of regulation that it lays a restraining hand on the selfinterest of the regulated and that advantages from the regulation commonly fall to others. The conflicts of economic interest between the regulated and those who advantage by it are wisely left under our system to resolution by the Congress under its more flexible and responsible legislative process.29 Such conflicts rarely lend themselves to judicial determination. And with the wisdom, workability, or fairness, of the plan of regulation we have nothing to do.

[…]

[ Footnote 29 ] Cf. McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 413-415, 435, 436; Gibbons v. Ogden, supra, 9 Wheat. at page 197; Stafford v. Wallace, 258 U.S. 495, 521 , 42 S.Ct. 397, 403, 23 A.L.R. 229; Board of Trade of Chicago v. Olsen, 262 U.S. 1, 37 , 43 S.Ct. 470, 477; Helvering v. Gerhardt, 304 U.S. 405, 412 , 58 S.Ct. 969, 971.

This is the constitutional scholar that almost became Delegate…

99th district: Make sure you write in Ham Sandwich for Delegate.

The 99th district is at an important milestone.

Will our district continue to support the tax-hiking policies of the current Delegate, Albert Pollard, or will we support a candidate that supports our conservative principles?

Will we vote for a “Republican” candidate, Catherine Crabill, who believes, amongst other things, that the federal government was responsible for the Oklahoma City Bombing, or we will vote for a sane person to be Delegate?

Don’t embarrass our district tomorrow by voting for Pollard or Crabill.

Vote Ham Sandwich, a strong supporter of Bob McDonnell, Bill Bolling, and Ken Cuccinelli and a true conservative for the 99th.

Cross-posted at Virginia Virtucon.

Well, the candidacy of Catherine Crabill has provided some benefits…

It’s allowed us to determine what groups and persons have a shred of intelligence and sanity.

And on that front, it looks like the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) has joined the Gun Owners of America and the “American Patriots Committee” in showing they shouldn’t be trusted as far as you can throw them:

VCDL-PAC is endorsing the following Candidates who are running for the Virginia House of Delegates:

[…]

District 099 Catherine T. Crabill (R)

Welcome to the fringe (and I’m not talking about that great show on Fox), VCDL. I hope you get acquainted with the other crazies there.

Victims and families of victims of the Appalachian School of Law and Virginia Tech shootings endorse Albert Pollard for delegate.

The Shad Plank (the Daily Press’s blog) has the details.

Interestingly, Pollard has also secured the endorsement of the National Rifle Association (NRA).

Ham Sandwich asks the National Rifle Association to reconsider their endorsement of Albert Pollard.

The campaign of Hamilton “Ham” Sandwich, Esq. released the following statement on the news of the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) endorsement of Delegate Albert Pollard:

“I disagree with the National Rifle Association’s endorsement of Delegate Albert Pollard. I have always been a strong advocate of the people’s right to keep and bear arms. While I do not own any firearms currently — nor do I have the physical ability to use a firearm — I believe that I would be a better advocate of Second Amendment rights in the Virginia General Assembly than either Delegate Pollard or Ms. Crabill,” said Ham.

When asked about Sandwich’s philosophy on gun control, Sandwich said: “It’s simple, I believe that noncriminals and noncrazies should be able to purchase and carry firearms. Criminals and crazies — on the other hand — shouldn’t have access to guns.”

“Ham personally filled out the candidate questionnaire but he accidentally left a mustard stain on the paper and the NRA said that the questionnaire was illegible,” said Sandwich’s campaign spokesman Timothy Watson.  “We’ve submitted another copy of the questionnaire and we feel confident that the NRA will recognize that Ham is a strong defender of the people’s right to keep and bear arms.”

Ham, a Virginia native, is running as a Republican write-in candidate in the 99th district. The district includes the counties of Lancaster, Northumberland, Richmond, Westmoreland, and King George, as well as the Port Royal and Bowling precincts in Caroline. He is a member of the Virginia Bar (Golden Phoenix division) and a partner in the law firm of Dill & Gallinger. He is married and lives with his wife and children in Bowling Green, Virginia.

You can learn more about Ham Sandwich by visiting his website at http://www.votehamsandwich.com/, which is in the process of being updated from his 2007 run for Commonwealth’s Attorney in Prince William County.

We finally have a real choice in the 99th: Ham Sandwich declares for Delegate in the 99th!!!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

HAMILTON “HAM” SANDWICH, ESQ. LAUNCHES WRITE-IN CAMPAIGN FOR 99TH DISTRICT HOUSE OF DELEGATES SEAT

CAROLINE COUNTY, VA – Hamilton “Ham” Sandwich, Esq. today announced his campaign as a Republican write-in candidate for the 99th House of Delegates District on the popular local blog “I’m Surrounded By Idiots” run by Timothy Watson. Ham previously ran for Prince William County Commonwealth’s Attorney in 2007 as a write-in candidate and received more than 700 votes countywide with votes coming from every precinct in the county according to Prince William County Registrar Betty Weimer.

Mr. Sandwich’s 2007 campaign web site, located at http://www.votehamsandwich.com/, provides voters with background information on the candidate, his rationale for running in that race, a critique of his then-opponent’s record of failure in the job, information on the write-in process and a list of endorsements among other items. Plans are underway to update the site to reflect this latest run and the difficult issues that Virginians are facing today.

In keeping with his commitment to open government and his Jeffersonian conservative ideals, Sandwich is issuing a challenge to both Del. Albert Pollard (D) and Republican challenger Catherine Crabill to engage him in a series of debates and town hall meetings on the issues between now and Election Day – one each week.

Ham believes that it is unconscionable that Delegate Pollard’s campaign website is completely devoid of any issues save for two – “Responsible Governing” and “The Bay.”

In a statement, Ham Sandwich declared, “Why doesn’t Del. Pollard just declare that he is also for ‘Mom,’ ‘Apple Pie,’ and, well, at one time I would have said, ‘Chevrolet,’ but now must use the term, ‘Government Motors.’”

Likewise, Ham joins Republican gubernatorial nominee Bob McDonnell and his statewide ticketmates Bill Bolling and Ken Cuccinelli in condemning the candidacy of Ms. Crabill who has openly stated on her campaign web site that she believes the U.S. Government was responsible for the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.

Ham, a Virginia native, is a member of the Virginia Bar (Golden Phoenix division) and a partner in the law firm of Dill & Gallinger. He is married and lives with his wife and children in Bowling Green, Virginia.


Warning: Unknown: open(/home/content/36/5675336/tmp/sess_p0co71e47ikujtlmil1iprdbu2, O_RDWR) failed: No such file or directory (2) in Unknown on line 0

Warning: Unknown: Failed to write session data (files). Please verify that the current setting of session.save_path is correct () in Unknown on line 0