Beck's tactic will not hurt Medina much

[Liberty Star]

Medina will end up raising more money from backlash against neocons tactics like these witnessed today. The speed with which they had negative headlines ready suggests it was a setup.

This will not hurt Medina much. An off the cuff comment suggesting an agnostic view about offcial claims maybe too cautious but not a false choice, she can rephrase her analytical stance easily. Almost everyone believes that there are unanswered questions about official reasons given for major events from Iraq invasion to find WMDs to 9/11 to spreading freedoms around the world through bankrupting elective wars and occupations.

Most important issue of all is taking America back from those who got us where we are today and preserving constitutional, economic and other liberties.

Money bomb is on Feb 15.

http://www.medinamoneybomb.com/


Remeber the media sleaze we're dealing with:

Beck: Iraq Withdrawal Would Be ‘America’s Most Shameful Act Of Immorality Since Slavery’

 

[thewhammy]

Beck's tactic might not hurt her, but her answer will.

Preface: I'm for Medina. Nothing has changed. Let's not mistake tactical criticism for a criticism of the content.

That being said, this was a huge mistake by Medina. The issue has nothing to do with Texas government, so she has nothing to gain by taking this "nuanced" stance. The question was simple: it was about whether or not she thought the U.S. had any role in the attack. She doesn't think that. Her press release itself says so. She should have just said this, and moved on.

To the average voter (read: idiot), she sounded like a nut.

 

[Liberty Star]

Not much.

Instead of typing again:

Are we just giving this Beck idiot and his sidekicks too much credibility here to let them define what happened in that interview?

Medina's interview response to an ambush question is measured, outside of neocons circles this is not going to play too badly. It would be a distraction no doubt and there will be political attack ads and so forth but all that can easily be overcome. Most people are focussed on real issues resulting from recent screw ups chherled by likes of Beck. When did it become politically wrong to not certify blindly and ask for more info about what any gov says about major war/geopolitical events?

If we had less blind believers and more people willing to ask questions, we would have saved over a trillion dollars and many lives looking for non-existent WMDs in Iraq. I commend Medina for this interview. Asking questions about extremly important affairs is never ever wrong. That's all she said, there are questions. Stating that is not taking a position.

 

[libertybrewcity]

let's hope to god it doesn't affect her polling.

 

[TER]

the next 72 hours will make or break her campaign... It is obvious now that the powerful corporate media elitists at Fox will try to make an example of her and the negative attacks on her will likely become relentless if there does grow a significant backlash against Beck.

It was, after all, those who distrust government who brought Beck to the ratings windfall he has gained. If it becomes apparent that his agenda is not in line with the true heart of the tea party movement, then his shooting star may be soon entering its waning period.

 

[TruckinMike]

If Glenn Beck supports the restoration of the Constitution,
then Glenn Beck would have supported Debra Medina.

This is an AXIOM.

ax⋅i⋅om
  /ˈæksiəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ak-see-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1. a self-evident truth that requires no proof.
2. a universally accepted principle or rule.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Glenn Beck went into this interview with the intent of destroying her. Glenn Beck has kicked liberty in teeth once again. How many more time does he have to do it before the apologists get it?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A note on cognitive dissonance: (from wiki)

A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision." The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would likely reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.

Just thinking out loud...

TMike

 

[nayjevin]

Beck's tactic might not hurt her, but her answer will.

That's exactly what Glenn Beck thinks.

Glenn Beck went into this interview with the intent of destroying her.

Yes, it's quite obvious. One of the first callers after Medina said as much. Good points, Mike.

let's hope to god it doesn't affect her polling.

I fear most MSM will find whatever poll says has affected her. That's why all the trolls have been out saying OH NOES THE POLLZ. See Frank Luntz. I really doubt this affects texans. Over 50% question the official report.

the next 72 hours will make or break her campaign...

Please don't overstate the problem and blow it out of proportion like that. That's like building it up to tear it down. After 72 hours I hope you're not here saying SHE'S DOWN 3 POINTS AND HANNITY SEZ IT'S ALL OVER.

 

[tmosley]

Did you actually READ, or HEAR her answer? It was really an excellent one. It is just being spun as hard as it is possible to spin something. Even a flat out "NO" would have been spun into a yes by this joker.

 

[ARealConservative]

Did you actually READ, or HEAR her answer? It was really an excellent one. It is just being spun as hard as it is possible to spin something. Even a flat out "NO" would have been spun into a yes by this joker.

I sort of agree. the initial response was ok, not great, but ok. But Beck was acting like it wasn't ok because the interview was a hatchet job, and he was given a job to do.

And then it turned worse because she kept rambling on and on.

 

[Liberty Star]

Did you actually READ, or HEAR her answer? It was really an excellent one. It is just being spun as hard as it is possible to spin something. Even a flat out "NO" would have been spun into a yes by this joker.

Exactly.

It's spin pushed by what Ron Paul called a demagogue, and other neocon cohorts media machinery.

 

[wgadget]

Beck's tactic might not hurt her, but her answer will.

Preface: I'm for Medina. Nothing has changed. Let's not mistake tactical criticism for a criticism of the content.

That being said, this was a huge mistake by Medina. The issue has nothing to do with Texas government, so she has nothing to gain by taking this "nuanced" stance. The question was simple: it was about whether or not she thought the U.S. had any role in the attack. She doesn't think that. Her press release itself says so. She should have just said this, and moved on.

To the average voter (read: idiot), she sounded like a nut.

I thought she sounded very common sensical.

ONLY an idiot would give a flat-out yes or no answer to such a loaded (irrelevant) question.

 

[wgadget]

Score Debra Medina 1
Glenn Beck -1

 

[John Taylor]

Score Debra Medina 1
Glenn Beck -1

I simply don't think you're being realistic here. That was a question she needed to slam the hatch down on to avoid Beck doing precisely what he did....dig deeper and deeper into it.

 

[Liberty Star]

I'm beginning to think that all this spotlight could actually boost DM in weeks ahead. She is strong on issues when people find out what she stands for and what her opposition is all about.