Special guest post by your favorite hate-blogger’s mother, Kay Watson:

On Election Day, my son, Timothy and I were doing volunteer work for Congressman Rob Wittman, handing out literature at the Port Royal Precinct in Caroline County. At about 4:25 PM, an SUV pulled up and I got up from my chair, picked up some pamphlets, and started walking over to the car to ask if the occupants wanted any information on Congressman Wittman. I saw it was Catherine Crabill getting out of the passenger side of the car so I turned around and went back behind my table in the tent. Ms. Crabill had already been rude to my husband and me last Friday at the Westmoreland Republican meeting (she called us character assassins) and I did not want a confrontation with her. Timothy was also behind the table talking to his brother on the phone. Mrs. Crabill walked about 50 or 60 feet to our table and started harassing me. She called Timothy wicked and my family wicked and then she said that Congressman Wittman was doing so well because of Timothy’s lies and my families’ lies about her. (Timothy and his brother, Garrett, have blogged about Ms. Crabill on their blogs and have never lied about her. They just wrote about and made fun of her ridiculous statements. And no one has said anything about her family, excluding her husband hiding in the woods waiting for the National Guard which was a direct quote from a magazine article. Before I commented last Saturday on Virginia Virtucon, I have never written anything about her and neither has my husband.) She also called me Jezebel twice (once Timothy got on the following tape). And she implied that I was stalking her by saying she should get a restraining order against me. I have been to four public meetings where she was in attendance. She just happened to come to my voting precinct after Timothy tweeted about being there. The tape starts after she has said that she should arrange to have the demons cast out of Timothy and then she said my family should have the demons cast out and I respond, “You should have the demons cast out of you!” I did not realize Timothy was taping the last part of the conversation but I am so glad he did. This is the real Catherine Crabill. I cannot diagnose anyone’s illness; but in my professional nursing opinion, I do recommend that she make an appointment with a psychiatrist.

Here’s the audio:

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.

Note: In the original, which is available upon request, there’s a 70 second period of dead air and me speaking on my cell-phone before she comes up with a comeback as noted in the transcript below:

K. Watson: Someone should cast the demons out of you… You’re — uh — one thing, you are really a rude one.

C. Crabill: Me rude?

K. Watson: Yes, ma’am.

C. Crabill: I’d love – I’d love to examine your family, the way your son has explained mine, and put it out there for the whole world to see.

K. Watson:  I haven’t run for any office and made the statements that you’ve made, Ms. Crabill.

C. Crabill: Oh. I — I —

K. Watson: Think about it.

C. Crabill: I’m sure —

K. Watson: There are a lot — there are more things that could have been put out there and weren’t.

C. Crabill [sarcastically]: Oh, well, thank you so much, I feel so [inaudible].

C. Crabill: I have said nothing but the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

K. Watson: No, that’s what my husband told you the other —

T. Watson [on cell-phone]: Quiet down.

K. Watson: — day when you called us “character assassins”.

C. Crabill: You are character assassins.

K. Watson: No, It doesn’t have anything to do with character; I think it has to do with poor judgment.

C. Crabill [interjecting]: I — I have — I have never experienced, such a — you are the Ahab and Jezebel of my experience with your wicked son.

K. Watson: You might want to consider getting some help, you really might.

C. Crabill: Oh, I know that you would think that way. I would say the same for you. In fact, I might have to get a restraining order against you.

K. Watson: No, you can’t get a restraining order against us in a public building, in a public meeting, only if we come to your home, which we have no desire to do.

C. Crabill: Thank you for that, I’m so reassured.

[Unintelligible]

G. Watson [over cell-phone]: Call the Caroline Sheriff’s Department on ‘em.

C. Crabill [low]: You might want to break out your little recorder, get this all on tape. You’re missing an opportunity here.

I miss no opportunity Cathy. Carpe diem. Continued from the transcript:

[70 seconds later]

C. Crabill [low]: It’s interesting that you know so much about restraining orders, I guess you’ve had some filed against you.

T. Watson: No, we know something about the law, it’s not very —you know— hard. Kinda like treason being defined in the Constitution.

The 70 seconds it took for Crabill to think of a comeback, as well as her coming up with nothing to my retort reminded me of this video, featuring George Costanza as Catherine Crabill (I would embed the video but embedding is disabled):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLjxp_86dKs

Cross-posted at On The Right and Virginia Virtucon.

And she’s running for Congress why now? She accuses Representative Rob Wittman of not being conservative enough but he actually bothered to oppose TARP and voted against it twice.

When asked by the Prince William County Family Alliance if she would “[a]uthorize regulatory agencies to provide relief to banks in exchange for bank stock”, she checked the “Undecided” box and wrote the following as a comment: “Don’t know enough about this (the ramifications).”

Uh-huh, she doesn’t know enough about this. TARP was almost two years ago, and she still hasn’t bothered to learn anything about it?

Why exactly is she even running for Congress? She yells constantly that she’s the most conservative candidate running, but she doesn’t even bother to state clearly and succinctly that she opposes bailing out banks.

Again, why is she running? Other than the fact that she thinks that Obama is a Communist Muslim who was born in another country and the fact that she hates him. Or is it because she hates Wittman because he refused to endorse her candidacy after it was revealed that she thinks the United States government was responsible for the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City?

In all, it comes down to the the fact that she hates someone, and hatred doesn’t get people very far in politics usually (thankfully).

Cross-posted at On The Right.

I simply have to marvel at the stuff coming out of the Catherine Crabill campaign. At the 99th District Tea Party’s website (get your own link), they ask the question: “Is Rep. Rob Whitman [sic] Conservative Enough ?”

One of the inane points the author uses is that Wittman has refused to debate Crabill despite being offered “several opportunities”.

For the record, I’ve been told that an invitation was extended to Catherine Crabill by e-mail to participate in the 2010 Rappahannock Bloggers Forum. She never bothered to respond to the invitation. Wittman, on the other hand is in, as Democratic Party challenger Krystal Ball.

Then she requested time to speak before the Spotsylvania County Republican Committee meeting. While not a debate per se, the Chairman agreed to give her time to speak and to answer questions presented by the committee at their last meeting on Thursday (May 27th). The Chairman also extended an invitation to Representative Wittman to speak as well. While Wittman couldn’t attend because he was busy on The Hill, he did sent a representative in his stead.

What did Catherine Crabill do? She didn’t bother to show for the meeting last Thursday. This was after she contacted the Chairman and requested time.

Of course, this is not the first time that Catherine Crabill has blatantly lied about Wittman’s positions. First, she accused Wittman of supporting TARP (he voted against that twice). Then she “Oops”, and said that he actually supported Obama’s “Stimulus”. Turns out it was the stimulus proposed by George W. Bush, which was mostly tax cuts. Oops again. And now this.

And, as a final note, the lovely folks responsible for that blog can’t even spell the name of a sitting United States Congressman correctly. If you’re going to attack a Congressman on a blog — much less the Congressman that represents the district you’re in — you might want to learn how to spell his name. It’s Rob Wittman, not Whitman.

Christ, these folks are worse than The Free Lance–Star.

Cross-posted at On The Right and Virginia Virtucon.

Washington, D.C. – Tomorrow, Congressman Rob Wittman will host a live telephone-town hall to hear directly from constituents about their concerns as the first session of the 111^th Congress comes to a close.

Date: Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Time: 7:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.

Call in Number: 877-229-8493

Log in Pin: 13327

To be placed on the call list to receive future calls, please visit Congressman Wittman’s website: http://wittman.house.gov/

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?

Ouch, just ouch.

These people really need to lay off the Glenn Beck and the internet. At the very least, they need to do a little research before they repeat everything they see on television or on the internet. Just because someone writes it on a blog or somewhere else doesn’t make it true.

Heck, just take a look at this blog for example.

UPDATE: Chairman Tom Foley of the First Congressional District Republican Committee had this to say in an e-mail:

Dear Mr. Watson,

At its June meeting the committee authorized $1,500.00 to each of the three challengers running  either against an incumbent or for an open seat in the district.

The 3,000.00 you cite is not correct.  I looked up the SBE report, and upon inquiry have been told that campaign staff filed that report with SBE in person and were instructed to show the single contribution in two places. It is now being corrected.

Okay, but this raises an even bigger issue: If Catherine Crabill received only $1,500 from the committee and not $3,000, that means her campaign committee currently has a balanced of -$480.61, which isn’t possible either logically (since she discloses no debts) or under state law.

CORRECTION: The math actually works out correctly with the removal of the second $1,500 contribution from the committee.

The campaign finance disclosure reports covering July 1 through August 31 for most candidates were released today by the State Board of Elections and there were some surprises in Catherine Crabill’s report.

On July 13, 2009, the First Congressional District Committee contributed $1,500 to Crabill’s campaign. On August 24, 2009, ten days after Bob McDonnell, Bill Bolling, Ken Cuccinelli, and Pat Mullins publicly repudiated Crabill and her campaign, the First Congressional District Republican Committee contributed another $1,500 to her campaign.

There are so many things wrong with this I don’t know where to start: First, the committee contributed money to a candidacy of someone that’s obviously insane and believes that the United States government was responsible for, inter alia, the murder of 168 people, including 19 children, in the Oklahoma City bombing. Do I need to stay more? Do the values expressed by Crabill match those held by members and chairman of the First District Committee?

Second, why is the committee contributing money to the candidacy of someone that doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning? As a sidenote on point two, doesn’t incumbent Rob Wittman have two Democratic challengers running against him in 2010? Am I the only person that thinks they could find a better use for this money they’re blowing on Crabill’s campaign?

Third, why is the committee supporting this Crabill which serves to hurt the candidacy of McDonnell et al.? Are they blind to that fact or do they just not care?

All told, Crabill raised $4,538.95 during the reporting period and has $1,019.39 on-hand. Meanwhile, Delegate Albert Pollard raised $14,101 and has $16,301.36 on-hand.

Cross-posted at Virginia Virtucon.

Nicely handled by Rep. Wittman too:

Cross-posted at Virginia Virtucon.

Ugh, just ugh:

Sound familiar? Sure does for me:

I wish politicians would call these type of people out as the nuts they are, instead of twisting these questions into something that actually sounds sane (like a general question on pollutants). And it’s sad that the myth about mercury and autism survives to this day. If you want a good read about that, check out this article in Discover magazine.

Thankfully, this was the only real nut that attended the Fredericksburg town hall meeting unlike the meeting in Warsaw (still need to post video of some of those questions).

UPDATE: The Free Lance–Star has since updated its story and now shows the correct location of the meeting.

The Free Lance–Star is reporting in today’s edition that Representative Rob Wittman’s (R-1st) town hall meeting for the Fredericksburg area will be held in the Sealy Auditorium at Germanna Community College.

WRONG.

While the town hall meeting was originally scheduled for GCC, Wittman’s website now notes the location as the following:

Date: Tuesday, September 1st

Times: 6:00PM to 8:00PM*

Location:

Univeristy of Mary Washington

Dodd Auditorium

1301 College Avenue

Fredericksburg, VA 22401

*Please continue to check the website for updates as these meeting times, dates and locations may be updated.

I previously noted the location changed on my own blog on August 21st, but apparently The Free Lance–Star didn’t notice the change.

And as a precaution, if you’re of those folks that likes to bring a firearm to town hall meetings, you best leave it in your car (which better not be parked on University of Mary Washington property) unless you want to be spending the night in jail since the event is on University property.

Cross-posted at Virginia Virtucon.