In Her Own Words: Palin's Support for Bridge to Nowhere

By now, most of you know about the new ad from the McCain/Palin campaign anointing themselves as "Original Mavericks."

The ad, widely ridiculed for its false claims, states that as governor, Sarah Palin stopped the "Bridge to Nowhere."

The Obama campaign says the ad is a blatant "lie," and FactCheck.org agrees.

So here - in her own words - is the truth about Sarah Palin's support for the Bridge To Nowhere.

Example #1:

In 2006, the Ketchikan Daily News quoted [Palin] expressing optimism and support for the bridge at a Ketchikan campaign stop.

Palin, 2006:
"People across the nation struggle with the idea of building a bridge
because they’ve been under these misperceptions about the bridge and
the purpose,” said Palin, who described the link as the Ketchikan
area’s potential for expansion and growth. … Palin said Alaska’s
congressional delegation worked hard to obtain funding for the bridge
as part of a package deal and that she “would not stand in the way of
the progress toward that bridge.”

Example #2 (from Factcheck.org):

Palin answered "yes" to an Anchorage Daily News poll question about whether she would continue to support state funding for the Gravina Island bridge if elected governor. "The window is now," she wrote, "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." It was only after she won the governorship that Palin shifted her
position. And even then, it’s inaccurate to say that she “told the
Congress ‘thanks, but no thanks.’” Palin accepted non-earmarked money
from Congress that could have been used for the bridge if she so
desired. That she opted to use it for other state transportation
purposes doesn’t qualify as standing up to Congress.

The Factcheck.org article continues, noting that the bridge flip-flop is not the only case where Sarah Palin's claims to be a government waste reformer do not match up with reality. Taxpayers for Common Sense reported that when she was mayor of the small town of Wasilia, AK, the town received more earmarks than ever before, hauling in$27 million under her leadership. What makes this all the more ironic, is the fact that John McCain has previously criticized several of those earmarks. This voter wants to know if the media will ask John McCain about his criticism of wasteful earmarks while Palin was mayor of Wasilia. Does he still think they were wasteful? If he says "yes," then how can he claim his running mate is the reformer she claims to be? If he says "no," then we must rightly ask, "Why then, Senator McCain, did you claim wasteful spending? Was it a political ploy, or is this another flip-flop?"

Wait, it doesn't stop there (link):

To help obtain these
earmarks, Palin had hired Steven Silver, the former chief of staff for
recently indicted Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, as Wasilla’s lobbyist.

And Palin continued to solicit federal funds as governor. A request form
on Stevens’ Web site shows that she requested $160.5 million in
earmarks for the state in 2008, and almost $198 million for 2009.

If you ask me, this whole thing is a political ploy. John McCain and Sarah Palin are in the pocket of lobbyists and "corporate suprematists."

They think reform is just a "brand," and its insulting for them to dress themselves up as reformers while at the same time promising a continuation of the corrupt, wasteful, and arrogant policies of the Bush & Cheney administration.