Friday, September 19, 2008

LA Times Confirms that Sarah Palin Indeed Said "Yes" to Bridge to Nowhere

Apparently, Sarah Palin's newly fitted persona as reformer of earmarks is being questioned by Alaskan leaders:
Since Palin was named the Republican vice presidential nominee two weeks ago, she has been boasting that she told Congress that Alaska didn't want the hundreds of millions that had been earmarked for the bridge.

But in 2006, Palin stood before residents in this region during her gubernatorial campaign and expressed support for the bridge. It became apparent after she was elected that the state's portion would be too costly, and Palin ordered transportation officials to abandon the project.

She held on to the $223 million in federally earmarked funds for other uses, such as the Gravina road, approved by her predecessor.

"Here's my question," said Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein. "If Sarah Palin is not being truthful on an issue like the Gravina bridge project, what else is she not being truthful about?" ....
"If the bridge was canceled, give the money back, or get the earmark removed, or redesign the road so it's better for development," he said. "Especially if you're opposed to earmarks, and now you're telling the world you're opposed to earmarks."

His frustration came to a head after he heard Republican presidential nominee John McCain and Palin tout her reputation as a reformer focused on saving taxpayer money. He didn't feel much better when a campaign ad called them "the original mavericks," and said: "She stopped the 'bridge to nowhere.'"

Weinstein need only glance across the salmon-rich waters separating his city from Gravina Island to see what he believes are millions of dollars being spent unnecessarily. Why, he asks, didn't she stop that?
Probably for the same reasons she won't stop lying about her opposition to the bridge now.

UPDATE: True lies to the latest Muppet Baby, Sean Hannity:

No comments:

Post a Comment