Mr. Cupp and myself (as well as Mr. Watson presumably) do consider our blog posts and email thread commentary to be “getting off our butts and doing something,” as you so crassly put it. Most of us are capable of much more eloquent choices of words, however.

Ms. Crabill has shown a level of dignity in the few times my path has crossed hers. One might, however, question whether blue jeans were the best mode of dress for the convention evening but perhaps she was attempting to appeal to what she considers her base–good, decent, hard-working folk who don’t throw on armani just to elect their party officials.

My feeling has been that there are many like Ms. Crabill with whom I can agree on many things, but who choose to make outlandish statements that make all other agreements moot. Say President Bush had come out in favor of ending home schooling (a hypothetical); would we have continued supporting him for all the other tenets on which we based our original support?

So far the only juvenile commentary I’ve seen has been a mention of a satirical television program and a photoshopped tin foil hat. If that’s all you can be fired up about, it’s easy to see how blindly you’re treading into groupthink with a large portion of the 99th.

And since you think there is action to be taken, please enlighten Mr. Cupp, esq. , Mr. Watson, and myself as to what that action is. Our outspoken opposition to a candidate who promises only to embarrass us (and the rest of the ticket) in November, I feel is about all we’re capable of doing at this point. The 99th has made its bed and it will have to pull the covers up over its head and lie comfortably in it.

Why, she’s just suspicious of the government like Thomas Jefferson to paraphrase one of her supporters. :)

“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” — Goldwater Acceptance Speech, 1964 Republican National Convention

Seems Crabill has taken these words a little too much to heart regarding the place of extremism in political discourse…

I haven’t seen the particular “King of the Hill” episode to which you refer, but I recall some far right-wing types I knew at U.Va. who celebrated the “harvest festival” and saw Halloween as the instrument of the devil, or some such foolishness. Umm… Wasn’t the purpose of Halloween to scare off evil spirits before All Saints’ Day (November 1)?

Well… It’ll be really fun if Crabill goes on an anti-Halloween tirade at some point right before the election. Maybe Pollard can dress up as Smokey the Bear and really get her going!

I don’t follow.

“So was there a hue and cry about taking a vote whether or not to nominate her rather than just giving her the nomination based on being the only candidate?”

A couple of the people wanted it to be clear in the rules that it was alright to vote for no candidate. Webb refused to let a motion for an amendment of the rules go forward however and said there would be a vote to approve her as the nominee or to have no nominee.

So was there a hue and cry about taking a vote whether or not to nominate her rather than just giving her the nomination based on being the only candidate?

But come on, the committee had to nominate her. After all, she’s a Christian and not a moderate.

I swear to God, that’s what eight people said one after another.