[Red6]

I think she's probably the most “truthful conservatives” of the three, but the least politically savvy and her inexperience on the stage, TV, radio etc. caused her to screw up. From what I can see (My own analysis, not what I'm told to think about things), she was being cautious when asked a question by Beck, which could be interpreted as her endorsing or siding with a certain view.

Her big problems are inexperience and the fact that she's such an unknown quantity. It's hard to read someone like this because they can recreate themselves as Obama did (positive), Kerry attempted (failed), and Palin was (negative). The unknown types like Palin can often get crushed as easily and quickly as Obama was recreated as some moderate....... because if your opponent can shape the perception people have of you, well that sort of sucks.

[hocndoc]

Medina proved that she was not truthful on Beck’s show and that she doesn’t have a good grasp on reality when she started claiming that she was attacked by her “opposition,” and then went off the deep end by giving us her theories about 9-11.

Watch the second video, here:

http://www.bigjolly.com/sections/texas/274-debra-medina-on-nyc-fire-and-police-casualties.html

[calex59]

she was being cautious when asked a question by Beck, which could be interpreted as her endorsing or siding with a certain view.

Cautious? Why would a conservative politician have to be cautious about simply saying, "No!" I don't believe our government brought down the twin towers. Either she believes they did or she believes they didn't and her answer makes it clear she believes they did. Even when the "clarified" her statement later she danced around the NO answer and didn't say it.

If you think she was being "cautious" you have blinded yourself to what this woman really believes, IMO.

BTW, I don't live in Texas but if I did I wouldn't vote for this woman.