Debra Medina has graciously taken time to participate in my “2010 Project” which gets the candidates to answer questions pertinent to the coming election. And some of the answers are NOT what you might expect from the candidate if you’ve been listening to the drive-by media:
Please answer Yes or No to indicate whether you support the following issues. You may include up to a fifty word response to each topic:
• Abortion on demand – No. 100% Pro-Life from conception to natural death.
• Concealed Carry Reciprocity Laws for all states – Yes. States have the right to make their own laws. I fully support the right of the individual to keep and bear arms without permit or registration.
• English as the official language of America. – Yes. We acknowledge America is made up of immigrants with diverse backgrounds and languages, and that to have a lawful society means to have one that can understand the law as it is written.
• Fair Tax – one universal 20% tax across the board vs a universal federal sales tax – No. The problem is spending. The federal government currently funds a multitude of unconstitutional programs and departments that need to be repealed and those responsibilities and powers returned to the states and the people.
• ID checks at voting places – No. Currently we issue driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. Unless we stop doing that, checking ID at the polling place is not going to prevent voter fraud.
• Immigration Reform, to include a Border Fence with Mexico – Yes, in those areas that it makes sense to have a fence. We are committed to working with the border sheriffs and respecting the private property rights of the land owners along the border.
• Marriage being defined as being between one man and one woman. Yes, but this has to be decided by the states, not federally. The Defense of Marriage Act was voted on by the Texas voters and signed into law in 2003 and is consistent with my beliefs.
• No tax increases may be passed without 35ths of Congress voting for the tax increase. No. There should not be any spending increases at all until Congress returns to its proper duties and limits under the Constitution.
• “One Payer” Universal Health Care vs. Health Care Reform of the system we have now. No government involvement in health care beyond enforcing contracts. The only “reform” needed is removing unconstitutional regulations and monopoly powers that prevent the operation of the market and give advantage to lobbyists and special interests over the people.
• Repeal of the Economic Stimulus Package. Yes, the stimulus is entirely unconstitutional and Congress should repeal its mistakes. Whether it is repealed or not, each state is sovereign and needs to aggressively use interposition and nullification to negate unlawful federal action.
• Repeal of the Federal Income tax. Yes. If man is not allowed to keep the product of his labor, he stops producing. Man must own his property, whether it’s physical property, or the product of his own labor.
• Repeal of the TARP Bailout Bill. Yes, the bailout is entirely unconstitutional and Congress should repeal its mistakes. Whether it is repealed or not, each state is sovereign and needs to aggressively use interposition and nullification to negate unlawful federal action.
• Second Amendment Gun Rights. The right of the individual to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Permits equate to asking for permission, and registration leads to confiscation. Neither has any place in our society.
• Term Limits (12 years each) for senators and Congressmen. We absolutely support term limits on all offices, but they are most properly and directly implemented at the party level as each party utilizes its power to control who is allowed to run on its ballot.
• Union “Card Check” Law to abolish secret ballots. No. Government has no place setting terms or regulations on how free citizens may associate or bargain with each other.
Meanwhile, the Medina camp remains confident when they’re getting press like this:
It’s working. Previously unheard of by the vast majority of Texans, Medina has set the race for governor on fire, upsetting the primary contest between the incumbent, Rick Perry, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Those gathered to see Medina in Lytle loved her. Young and old, men and women, Latino and white, listened with rapt attention as she outlined her agenda and asked them to back her in this week’s first round of voting. If she can beat Hutchison into second place, she can secure a runoff against Perry. That would raise the possibility – distant but real – of a Tea Party activist capturing the government of the second biggest state in America. The Tea Party movement would have gone from being a bunch of ragtag protesters to heading one of the largest single economies in the world. “If we can change politics as usual in Texas, then we can change politics as usual across America. This is not just about Texas, but about changing the whole country,” Medina told the Observer before addressing her supporters in Lytle.
She is not alone in that ambition. Across America other extreme candidates have emerged on the Republican right to challenge familiar party figures with a fiery mix of Tea Party-inspired populism. In Arizona, Senator John McCain is facing a tough re-election fight against a former congressman, JD Hayworth, who has expressed public doubts as to whether Obama was born a legitimate American citizen. In Florida the moderate Republican governor, Charlie Crist, is lagging badly in his own primary election to rightwing challenger Marco Rubio, who has the backing of local Tea Party groups.
On the right of US politics, this is big stuff. Instead of forcing mainstream Republicans to woo them for their votes, the rightwingers are now bidding for power. It is an attempt at revolution that could have huge meaning for America and the world, especially given the disastrous showing of Democrats in recent polls and elections. Medina knows this. After her speech she ended with a plea to her audience. “We can win this race,” she said, then held up her hand and squeezed two fingers together. “It is this close.”
The American way, she said, was simple. “There are two rights essential to freedom: private property and gun ownership.” Such thoughts find fertile ground in Texas. One poll puts her as high as 24%, just behind Hutchison and within reach of catching her and forcing Perry into a runoff. Medina believes she is not really in third place, citing the fact that the polls only telephone previous Republican primary voters, whereas she is bringing in thousands of new supporters. “I feel fantastic. I think we can win this,” she said in Lytle.
Meanwhile Glenn Beck has come under increasing criticism first for his remarks at CPAC last week, as well as for his Johnny-come-Lately conversion to Man-Made Global warming, even as the theory has come to be grossly discredited. In fact, more than a few bloggers have speculated that the notable absence of Michelle Malkin from CPAC (where she is a frequent flyer) may be related to Beck’s giving the keynote address on Saturday night. (Malkin had no comment, although she did make an unannounced visit to blogger’s row at CPAC.)
And while we’re skirting the subject, can I address the whole blow-up between Beck and Medina. Medina on Beck’s radio show said that “there’s some very good arguments and I think the American people have not seen all the evidence there.”
This is a far, far cry from saying that the U.S. Government blew up the World Trade Center — in any way, shape, or form. Because — can I just say it — I too believe there’s a lot of evidence out there the American public hasn’t seen, either. Let’s look at what we DO know:
- The 9-11 Commission acknowledged in their report that the CIA and other government agencies had credible evidence of an impending terror attack for September.
- The government also knew in several cases that commercial airliners would be used in these attacks — and frankly did not believe these reports. (Who would have before 9-11 anyway?)
- The government was in many cases prohibited from passing this information between agencies by an Executive Order. The CIA and FBI could not share and corroborate each other’s evidence.
And whose fault would that be? The previous President’s — Bill Clinton. But with the 9-11 Commission packed with Democrats, this information has not been widely publicized.
Is that what Debra Medina meant? I dunno — but it’s what I believe. And it’s consistent with the evidence presented in the 9-11 Commission report. Does that make me a “Truther”? Hell No — and neither do Medina’s words make her one either.
I do have it on good authority (but not currently able to document it) from a local Radio station manager in the San Antonio area that since Medina’s interview with Beck, his ratings are down significantly, rebounding to about 10% less than the previous levels. Some stations have even cut back Beck;s three-hour airtime to two hours, and about 10 stations nationwide have dropped him entirely in the last two weeks.
So, in case it’s escaped you, I’m still voting for Debra Medina, and you Texans should, too.
Election is Tuesday. Get out and vote — make a difference.