Resuming, with Caution, My Support For Debra Medina For Texas Governor

To be clear, it’s the question of consistency that turned out to be the biting issue with the Medina-9/11 hoopla. The common man who knows the value of consistency and strives to live by that value has grown truly FED UP with the inconsistencies of his elected purported representatives, right to the top!

When Mark Davis spewed his stuff into the fan and Debra sopped up the splattering, many honest people took several steps away from Debra because they, and I, truly had, up to that point, come to believe that we had finally encountered the genuine straight-talker, straight-shooter, and everyday-neighbor personality whom everyone craves, one who could not be snookered or compromised while measuring all things against the U.S. Constitution. However, I found her responses to Davis to be somewhat rambling and convoluted, indicating a possible sense of desperation to strike a measured yet credible chord regarding the 9/11 Commission report.

With her assent to such a vicious characterization of 9/11 Truthers after having previously sympathized with our right to harbor conscientious and valid questions about such an incredibly painful issue, she exhibited the same unsavory propensity toward calculated inconsistency for the sake of political expediency that we’ve seen in candidates from both major parties. Such was the shock wave that profoundly resonated throughout the Liberty Movement, resounding still more because of the plethora of damning false flag evidence. From the get-go, however, I sensed that Mark Davis was staging a pre-arranged platform, lending an air of utter dishonesty to the entire act.

I listened to Jack Blood tonight. (MP3) I was reminded of George Orwell’s utterance, “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” Jack Blood was all about doing the revolutionary thing with this airing … out. He helped me to put aside (but not fore-go!) the confusion and disappointment over the Davis interview. I want to make clear that I would have come to the same decision to withdraw support, based not on whether Debra believes 9/11 was an inside job but on the points of her inconsistency and assent to the demonizing of 9/11 Truthers, even had I not first heard about it all from Alex Jones. Nevertheless, it is true that AJ’s long rant served to hammer home these valid points, while his effusive invective over the compromising of principles did have a convicting influence. Engaging in calculated inconsistency, and the maligning of sincere truth-seekers, in one fell swoop, by someone who had garnered our confidence, was, and is, enormously hurtful, especially for those 9/11 Truthers who have been personally impacted by this dastardly, evil, false flag atrocity. God will see to it, I truly believe, that justice will be done, BUT! only *through our participation* in the march of Truth.

With all that said, I acknowledge that no one of us can alter or control what others think of us. In the end, all we truly have is the inner spirit-leading toward all truth, should we choose to follow it, however imperfectly, and regardless of what anyone thinks of what that should look like. I want to resume believing that Debra Medina *would* step forward to explain herself conscientiously were she not needing to walk a fine line to vie for an elected office.

I believe Texas MUST be salvaged from the neo-con, NWO wrecking-yard plans. I think Debra would be the first to agree that, should she succeed to the Governor’s chair, she should be watched like a hawk by the people, many of whom would be engaging in such a level of political involvement for the first time. Regardless of her genuine stand on the 9/11 question, she is, and always has been, all about salvaging Texas for Texans. Basing my feeling on the overall platform of her candidacy, I would be proud to become a Texas resident someday were she to become Governor.

About these ads
This entry was posted in 911, Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, False Flag, new world order, States' Sovereignty and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Resuming, with Caution, My Support For Debra Medina For Texas Governor

  1. StJakk says:

    *** Senator Hutchinson has voted FOR REAL ID. *** She voted to allow our
    privacy to be violated through the collection and digitizing of biometric
    information. *** Senator Hutchinson helped fund so-called “fusion centers”
    that are simply statist attempts to monitor citizens’ private
    information. She was for border funding before she was against it and she
    was against the bailouts before she was for them.Senator Hutchinson clearly
    has a mixed record on the issues. Then there’s Governor Perry .
    *** Governor Rick Perry IS the major promoter of the Trans-Texas Corridor
    which STEALS private property. *** He has not joined the fight to reign
    in out of control public sector unions *** He has not cut or even perceptively
    slowed the size, scope, and power of government while in office. **He has
    usurped parental authority and thinks HE knows whats best for your
    preteen daughter….and that YOUR opinion,Mom and Dad,does not matter.

    “President Fox’s vision for an open border is a
    vision I embrace, as long as we demonstrate the will to address the
    obstacles to it.” – Governor Rick Perry, Speaking to the UT-Pan American
    Summit, August 22, 2001

  2. Amanda says:

    I’m glad you have decided to examine this issue carefully. I don’t believe there is a single candidate out there that people will agree with 100% of the time, but it is possible to choose the one that best matches our goals and values and principles. That is why I’m voting for Debra Medina. I personally didn’t take issue with her statements about 9/11 or truthers, but there are issues I disagree with her on. However, Perry and Hutchison will do the state no good at all, whereas Medina will work toward the good of the state.

  3. Amadon, I appreciated reading your thoughtful comments on resuming your support of Debra Medina. What many people have not considered, and what I, as a psychologist and watcher of political candidates, have observed is that the agreement which Mark Davis seemed to elicit from Debra in this PHONE interview (not in studio as in the case of Glenn Beck where her audio was cut for whatever reason) did not seem like a valid reply to his introductory statement which was cleverly crafted to be a declaration in the form of a question. He did ask a straightforward question, which would demand a different sort of reply from Debra than, “I agree with you Mark.” One does not typically agree with a question. One answers the question FIRST and then perhaps later agrees or disagrees with the sentiments expressed.

    I think that it is significant that Debra has not addressed this flap. It is an obvious distraction to the campaign and giving time to it, as you have noted, would just create more preoccupation with it in the minds of other people besides the “Truthers,” a term which I, by the way, despise. Everybody, as Debra implied earlier, should be a “24/7 Truther” and be concerned with seeking truth in every situation. That being said, it is important to realize that no one ever has the TRUTH. Human beings with their limited brains can only aspire to gaining more and more support for what they speculate, or better yet hypothesize (in the scientific sense), may be close to the TRUTH.

    I think that there is prima facie evidence that the clip of the Mark Davis interview was edited to serve his or someone’s else’s purpose. Perhaps, it was “well-intentioned” to solidify her reputation with those voters who were put off by her answers to Beck. Of course, the end does not justify the means. However, I think that we need to pursue evidence that this interview was recorded before broadcast and then edited to produce the effect that it had on the “Truthers.” Davis has been known to do some shady things before according to the reports that I have read from others.

    In any case, it is important to reserve judgment as you are doing until we have more data. Debra’s response, is, of course, a critical piece of this puzzle, because her agreeing with such a inflammatory and degrading statement as that offered by Davis, is totally inconsistent with Debra’s character and personality. It flies in the face of reason, because she does not, explicitly or implicitly, call people names or label them in the way that she seemed to do in Davis’ broadcast. I, personally, will be interested to see how this all plays out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s