Thursday, July 16, 2009


Via ShortsandPants, Not Larry Sabato, and the Huffington Post, I see that the Republican candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates in the 99th District has just suggested that an armed overthrow of the U.S. government might be necessary:

... 'The war is inevitable -- let it come, sir. I repeat: let it come.' We have a chance to fight this battle at the ballot box before we have to resort to the bullet box. But that's the beauty of our Second Amendment right. I am glad for all of us who enjoy the use of firearms for hunting, but make no mistake: that was not the intent of the Founding Fathers. Our Second Amendment right was to guard against tyranny.

This came after she read a resolution passed at the Virginia GOP's 2009 convention:

Resolution in Recognition of the Tea Parties

WHEREAS, the citizens of the United States of America have begun to recognize the destructive nature of the Democrat administration and the Democrat Congress's taxing, spending, and borrowing policies,

WHEREAS, under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, citizens have taken upon themselves the task of organizing and attending the tea party protests,

WHEREAS, the ideals expressed in the Virginia Republican Creed reflect the ideals, goals and spirit of these tea parties,

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican Party of Virginia welcomes those desiring to bring about a smaller and less intrusive government, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Republican Party of Virginia encourages those participating in and organizing the tea party demonstrations to continue to speak out against the over reaching arm of government.

I quote that in full in case you have any doubt about exactly what "tyrants" might be the target of her boxed bullets.

Crabill, by the way, is an Oklahoma City truther:

Crabill also told the convention that she had been "beaten, humiliated and ridiculed" by bloggers who discovered a 1995 newspaper article in which she blamed the Oklahoma City terrorist bombing on the federal government. At the time, Crabill lived in New Mexico.

The Washington Times quoted her as saying:

"'If any militia group is truly responsible for the murderous bombing in Oklahoma City, then I say, 'Hangin's too good for 'em,'" said Catherine Crabill of Aragon, N.M., who belongs to a group called New Mexico Citizens Action Association.

"But Mrs. Crabill said it's her belief 'this heinous act of violence was the work of our government,' which will 'use it as an excuse to aggressively attack the growing militia movement across the country.'"

Crabill denied making the 1995 statement, but, in a recent posting on her Web site,, she said: "I did and do believe that our government was culpable in the [Oklahoma City] bombing. I am not ashamed of standing with my friends and neighbors in New Mexico from the domestic terrorists known as our own government."

(That post is here.)

Crabill also has some interesting theories about the UN. She once told Outside magazine

"That as a result of Presidential Executive Order, the Sec. of the Treasury holds all the power of the Executive Branch and answers to the globalist elite. That there is an agenda that is in our Public Law to surrender our country to the United Nations, and that we are on the verge of having our economy pulled out from under us by all of the above. I mean, it just goes on and on! And these globalists just love you greenies for helping their program along."

-- apparently after Outside (which was reporting on her as a militia member engaged in a "war for the West") characterized her beliefs thus:

Catherine believes, for example, that the State Department, at the UN's behest, is pushing through a "three-stage plan" to disarm the world for its own dark purposes.

Her Web site is about what you'd expect:

The Liberal Playbook to Destroy America...

Has Our Nation been usurped? None dare call it treason…

And this, of course:

Right now on her site she's responding to the outcry against her remarks:

This is a SPECIAL BULLETIN for those of you readers from the Huffington Post.

The speech I was reading was Patrick Henry's address from Richmond, March 23, 1775. The character assassins at Huff Po edited the tape to begin mid sentence where Patrick Henry said, "Our chains are forged! Their clanging may be heard on the plains of Boston. The war is inevitable-and let it come!..."

From that they deliberately tried to insinuate that I was advocating war!

This type of editing and deliberate provocation is despicable. In the same speech, Patrick Henry said “Besides, sir, we have no election.” The point of my comments was that we do have an election, we do have the ability to take hold of our freedoms with the ballot box so we don't have to refer to the bullet box as our Founding Fathers did....

No, Catherine -- you said, "We have a chance to fight this battle at the ballot box before we have to resort to the bullet box" (emphasis mine). Armed insurrection is your Plan B.

She follows this up, naturally, with a denunciation of Barack Obama as a tool of Saul Alinsky .

In 2012, I think she'd make a great running mate for Sarah Palin.

No comments: