Is Medina finished?

[Lunar]

It's possible Medina is simply a completely unprepared candidate who, when confronted with something she doesn't know how to answer, waffles and gives an imprecise answer to avoid giving a substantive answer which could have unanticipated repercussions.  Look, imagine you went on TV for a political interview and had no clue about the restrictions on banks being able to engage in proprietary trading*, you know that these are serious questions, but you're not with your advisers who know how to balance what your supporters expect you to say with what you need to say to expand your appeal, so you just say it's not an issue relating to your office, you haven't investigated this issue fully yet, that both sides on the issue raise valid points, etc.  Politicians at all kinds of skill levels, when confronted with a confusing question, often just spew something they feel is generic and inoffensive.  In the case of 9/11 conspiracy, waffling and giving a non-answer isn't always the best.

She's a nutcase, but I don't think she's a truther.  Listening to the audio, she says one of the two most important elements of freedom is gun ownership (along with property ownership).  Gee, and I thought freedom of expression was generally important.

I mean, listen to the youtube video above.  What a horrible interview.  She doesn't go through the effort of providing a clear signal, it sounds like she's calling from a 1999 cell phone while riding a subway through an elevator.  She's stupid, but that's probably it.  She doesn't seem to understand issues beyond her platitudes, but that's nothing new.  Palin already endorsed Perry, and I'd bet Perry understand the issues the best of the three, but that's as tough as beating retards at speed chess, err, roping retarded cattle, um, square dancing.



* It's entirely possible that, to Medina, any question about something other than guns and property taxes, is as confusing to her as the new proprietary trading restrictions are to me.

[Lunar]

I should also add that that interview indicates one of two things:

1) Medina is likely on the stupid side of things and doesn't know what she's talking about
2) She's a crazy truther

I'd vote #1, especially considering how vehement of a denial her campaign issued of the trutherism charges in its press releases following the interview.  If she was smart, and a passionate believer in 9/11 conspiracy theories, she'd have either not said what she believes or said what she believes and stuck by it.  The fact that her campaign commented about how she was unprepared for the question but that she firmly believes the government had nothing to do with 9/11 makes me think that that is closest to the truth.  While on air, she might have been trying to think about what her nutcase supporters believe or something instead of her own beliefs or whatevsky, I'm really not sure.  The woman is clearly retarded, still struggling to find her public presence and not sure what she is doing along the way.

[Lunar]

I should also add that that interview indicates one of two things:

1) Medina is likely on the stupid side of things and doesn't know what she's talking about
2) She's a crazy truther

I'd vote #1, especially considering how vehement of a denial her campaign issued of the trutherism charges in its press releases following the interview.  If she was smart, and a passionate believer in 9/11 conspiracy theories, she'd have either not said what she believes or said what she believes and stuck by it.  The fact that her campaign commented about how she was unprepared for the question but that she firmly believes the government had nothing to do with 9/11 makes me think that that is closest to the truth.  While on air, she might have been trying to think about what her nutcase supporters believe or something instead of her own beliefs or whatevsky, I'm really not sure.  The woman is clearly retarded, still struggling to find her public presence and not sure what she is doing along the way.

I hate interviews that have me on the same side as Glenn Beck.

Seriously, though, I understand where you were coming from earlier, but listen to her!  How can you equivocate and fence-sit on 9/11?  EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY remembers 9/11, clear as day.  I don't care how stupid you are, it's hard to believe anyone could be stupid enough to not know that saying what she said on the air is a sure-fire career killer.

But, but, but, you're still stuck within two options:

1) She is smart enough to realize the implications of her statements when questioned, and believes in trutherism, but, yet, her campaign issued passionate rejections of the conspiracy theories immediately after this interview started to drag her down in the media...which means that she doesn't believe in 9/11 trutherism enough to back it in the face of controversy.  So..she's a truther who's too stupid to realize the political implications of being a truther, but enough of a political whore to completely refute what she believes in...or...

2) She's just so stupid that in her mind, she was trying to weigh the costs and benefits of issuing a strong statement on the manner that she ended up offending far more people than if she had directly denied it.  I mean, hell, it wouldn't surprise me if she was going over conspiratorial campaign staffers and donors while coming up with her retarded unfortunate answer

To assume she is anything but utterly stupid, you have to presume she knew the consequences of her actions, which then would be refuted by her utterly giving a 180 afterwards and rejecting other peoples' conclusions from her statements.

[Lunar]

I should also add that that interview indicates one of two things:

1) Medina is likely on the stupid side of things and doesn't know what she's talking about
2) She's a crazy truther

I'd vote #1, especially considering how vehement of a denial her campaign issued of the trutherism charges in its press releases following the interview.  If she was smart, and a passionate believer in 9/11 conspiracy theories, she'd have either not said what she believes or said what she believes and stuck by it.  The fact that her campaign commented about how she was unprepared for the question but that she firmly believes the government had nothing to do with 9/11 makes me think that that is closest to the truth.  While on air, she might have been trying to think about what her nutcase supporters believe or something instead of her own beliefs or whatevsky, I'm really not sure.  The woman is clearly retarded, still struggling to find her public presence and not sure what she is doing along the way.

Dude, she's a dyed-in-the-wool Ron Paulite.  Of course she believes in 9/11 conspiracy theories.  What I can't believe is that she was stupid enough to let the cat even partially out of the bag on the air.

Of course, maybe this stops Rand Paul from saying something similar in the future - I think he's smarter anyways.

While saying she believes Muslim terrorists did do 9/11 and the government didn't know about it ahead of time, she brought up Obama's Birth Certificate and continued to waffle (unlike the statements her staff puts out).

Okay, okay, she's a truther, I'm wrong.