Sarah Palin misled us on “bridge to nowhere”
This one is pretty bad. The McCain campaign and GOP activists who are starved for someone to add excitement to this campaign have been touting Sarah Palin as a “reformer.” In her speech introducing herself to America, she bragged about being against the infamous “bridge to nowhere,” the ultimate example of government waste and earmark abuse.
Well, it turns out that she was actually FOR the bridge to nowhere back in 2006 when she was running for governor. The Anchorage Daily News has the details:
When John McCain introduced Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate Friday, her reputation as a tough-minded budget-cutter was front and center.
“I told Congress, thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere,” Palin told the cheering McCain crowd, referring to Ketchikan’s Gravina Island bridge.
But Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.
The Alaska governor campaigned in 2006 on a build-the-bridge platform, telling Ketchikan residents she felt their pain when politicians called them “nowhere.” They’re still feeling pain today in Ketchikan, over Palin’s subsequent decision to use the bridge funds for other projects — and over the timing of her announcement, which they say came in a pre-dawn press release that seemed aimed at national news deadlines.
“I think that’s when the campaign for national office began,” said Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein on Saturday.
Meanwhile, Weinstein noted, the state is continuing to build a road on Gravina Island to an empty beach where the bridge would have gone — because federal money for the access road, unlike the bridge money, would have otherwise been returned to the federal government.
This stinks. I’m sure she’s done some good things in Alaska, but this makes her look like the poster child of cynical politics and political opportunism. Alaska is notorious for living off of money from the federal government because they have slimeballs like Senator Ted Stevens funneling money to the state. Sarah Palin was happy to get that money, and she was happy to make the bridge a campaign issue when she needed to get elected governor.
Now she’s trying to claim the opposite position while ruuning for national office, AND she’s using it as an example of her “integrity.”
It’s galling that she would do this, but it’s amazing that she thought she could make this ridiculous claim without getting called on it.
With an approval rating in the 90′s she’s the most popular public official in the USA. She’s actually accomplished things in office. She has a record of cutting 13% of the states buget, taking on big oil, establishing financial indepence for Alaska, and others. Her approval rating alone should be enough for Dems to back off.
It’s a loosing battle for Obama/Biden to fight her record. Obama has accomplished nothing but graduate from an Ivy League school; marry an angry femenist black woman, listen to the mad ravings of Rev wright for 20 years, give awards to people like Farakan; talk about how great China is despite their crimes against humanity and the environment. Oh, I’m sorry, he did do a lot of speeches to small groups of people when he was in Chicago.
Obama has accomplished nothing. Having opinions and speaking well doesn’t get him hired as a CEO let alone as president.
Her approval rating is currently at 65% after being battered by Troopergate and Gov Palin has come out today and confessed that her 17 year old daughter is currently unmarried and pregnant.
While I long for the days when a persons private life remained private, it was the GOP and their family values con that opened the door to attack persons based on details in their personal life. How is it that a 17 year old girl gets pregnant?? By having a family that do not openly teach her about all of her options, and pretend that virginity is the only answer. Is that what happened to this young lady, I don’t know but I do know one thing, she sure is pregnant.
Shameful!
I don’t think it’s a losing battle to go after her record. No one knows anything about her, so it’s appropriate to examine her record.
They touted her on the Bridge to Nowhere, and now we know that she was for it when she needed votes to become governor, and now she’s claiming to have been against it. That just doesn’t look good.
Say what you want about Obama, but he won the nomination after a tough 18-month battle with the Clintons. His positions and his record are well-known, and it’s appropriate to look at all of his record as well.
It’s clear McCain did very little vetting of this pick. Now all of us will examine her and we’ll see how she holds up. So far, I’m not impressed.