Hey, there! Log in / Register

Jeff Jacoby needs an editor

Jeff Jacoby repeats the canard about Sarah Palin that "she pulled the plug on her state's notorious $400 million 'bridge to nowhere.'" A few minutes of web research would have revealed that Palin was a big proponent and only reluctantly "pulled the plug" on state funding when it was clear the federal pork wasn't coming through.

Of course, now she's saying:

I championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress — I told Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said we'd build it ourselves.

That doesn't make her a maverick. That makes her a liar.

Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

...seeing as she's such a small-government proponent, when she says "build it ourselves," she presumably means that the private citizens of Alaska would get out their hacksaws and welding torches their own selves - possibly funded by bake sales and private donations.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm not the only one who thinks that Jacoby is given continued employment in the Globe only so that liberal readers can be reassured that conservatives are mendacious and/or stupid. I'm sure there's a competent conservative out there, but he's not it.

up
Voting closed 0

Also, one of the conditions of canceling the bridge to nowhere project was that Alaska got to keep the money for other highway projects. That seems like the real outrage to me.

up
Voting closed 0

There is no shortage of places to post political rants on the internet. Do you think you could take your bile somewhere else?

up
Voting closed 0

Timeline:

  • In 2005 Congress killed the earmarks for federal funding for the bridge but didn't reduce the federal funds sent to Alaska.

  • As a candidate for Governor, Palin said in May 2006 that it's hard to believe the bridge is the best use for all the money it will cost, but came out in favor of state tax increases on natural gas and cruise ship revenues if the project moves forward.

  • Then she said in August 2006 that she would love to see the Ketchikan bridge constructed, though she also acknowledged Alaskans need to be realistic about where the money would come from.

  • In October of 2006 Palin said that she supported the overall infrastructure projects going on in Alaska but warned that the flow of federal money is going to slow.

  • Palin assumed office in December 2006.

  • In February 2007 Palin's office announced that they had set aside no money in their budget for the bridge project.

  • In September 2007 upon the cancelation of the project, she said "Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer" and directed the state transportation department to find the most "fiscally responsible" alternative for access to the airport.

All of the above is from the Anchorage Daily News.
up
Voting closed 0

Palin for ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ before she was against it
By Tom Kizzia / McClatchy Newspapers
Sunday, August 31, 2008

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - When John McCain introduced Alaska 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 in Alaska.

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.
link

Comments on Palin's experience on other thread.

up
Voting closed 0

The biggest one ever - The Iraq War - soon please.

up
Voting closed 0

You mean the war that he keeps funding with his votes?

up
Voting closed 0

Yes that war.

As voters, we're left to choose between representatives and Senators who voted to fund the war even though they wanted to end it and representatives and Senators who want to continue to fund it and continue to wage it.

The initial invasion of Iraq was the stupidest strategic blunder of any country in the last 100 years. My desire to extricate the USA from the Iraq war is completely understandable. Our military presence in the middle east is turning moderate Muslims into America-haters when what we ought to be doing is turning moderate Muslims into Al Queada haters.

There was no al Qeada in Iraq until there was the US in Iraq. The sooner you understand that the better for all of us.

You can blame Democrats for not voting to withdraw funding but you can blame Bush and Cheney for lying us into it, and McCain for making it clear he'd wage it for another 100 years if that were the difference between "winning" and "losing". McCain doesn't understand that that the war has already been won or lost and the the elected, sovereign government would like us to leave in 16 months if that is feasible.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

Don't pick a candidate whose family and staff leaned on one of her direct reports to fire a guy who had a messy divorce with her sister, then fired the direct report and replaced him with a guy with a sexual harassment history who lasted only two weeks but got a nice severance.

Don't pick a candidate whose foreign policy experience is based on her state's proximity to Russia.

Don't pick a candidate to shore up your rapidly peeling-away base, the Beltway gasbags who enjoy nothing more than dramatic narratives, but who haven't had the country's best interests at heart since the Clinton impeachment drama.

Don't pick a candidate to enrapture the base of your party that's never fallen in love with you: the fundamentalist evangelicals who have captured your party and turned it into a voice for theocracy.

Don't pick a candidate as a cynical sexist ploy because you think her gender will make women who supported Hillary Clinton swoon, especially since Hillary's name still elicits boos at your own rallies. This will really bomb if your Veep's own views are antithetical to liberal progressive feminism -- a creationist who favors state-forced birth, is anti-gay and anti-environment, who may (?) favor The Surge and is pro-gun.

up
Voting closed 0

Don't anonymously paste in unattributed unaltered misleading crap from the lefty blog liarhogflake.

up
Voting closed 0

"The initial invasion of Iraq was the stupidest strategic blunder of any country in the last 100 years."
Huh? No it wasn't. Kinda got bogged down, but Gen Petraeus's command has had quite an effect. The war is essentially over, troop reductions based on winning, rather than losing, are in play. Sorry, anon, it seems the tired "lets cut and run" idea isn't working here.
"Don't pick a candidate ...country's best interests at heart since the Clinton impeachment drama."
Well, no Clintons this year. LOL. (I love using LOL outside of AOL...)
"Don't pick a candidate ...fundamentalist evangelicals who have captured your party and turned it into a voice for theocracy."
Ya, whatever. That's why Huckabee got the nod. Take your time, think it through.
"Don't pick a candidate as a cynical sexist ploy because you think her gender will make women who supported Hillary Clinton swoon, especially since Hillary's name still elicits boos at your own rallies. This will really bomb if your Veep's own views are antithetical to liberal progressive feminism -- a creationist who favors state-forced birth, is anti-gay and anti-environment, who may (?) favor The Surge and is pro-gun."
Entertain this thought: Lib Demmies are in a panic. In no particular order, the surge is working just fine (your terminology, but the tactic is working), it will run its' course and Iraq will be better for it. Her gender? It will appeal to impressionable girls (used in the youthful sense) as a role model. Good by me. Many Hillary supporters might see her as more their type, she's a real mom AND the administrator of a (not admittedly very blue) state. State-forced birth? Huh? Oh, ya. Kill them before they grow.
Not all women are leftist lesbian granny glass wearers. Most of the lesbians I know tend to the conservative side. They will settle for 'just being left alone'.
For the record, I support their rights, think it's a non-issue. Settled. They have rights. Period. We have bigger problems to solve. We've been sitting on the energy problem for thirty years. Time to actually do something about it.
So, the choice this November: McCain/Palin.
No contest.
Oh, and maybe Mr. Jacoby isn't the only one that needs an editor...
"a little advice for John McCane"...
LOL

up
Voting closed 0

Palin's Troopergate Scandal - Caught on Tape

Governor Palin has been accused of using her position to try to fire her ex brother-in-law, State Trooper Mike Wooten. From Electoral Vote:

Initially Palin denied having any of her staff try to pressure the Dept. to fire him, but then a police recording surfaced in which one of her staff was clearly putting on pressure to get Wooten fired, so she backtracked and said yes there was pressure but she didn't know her staff was doing this.

The full recording is available here. The first few minutes are about a different topic, not relevant to this discussion. Here is an edited version in which the irrelevant material has been deleted. This is indicated by a bleep sound 42 seconds into the call. Nothing else has been changed.

up
Voting closed 0

So someone threatens to put a bullet into your father, (on speakerphone, in front of witnesses),is driving a cruiser around drunk with a loaded gun and trying to stop him is abuse of power? What next? His four divorces were part of the vast right wing conspiracy? When people go nuclear this fast, it speaks volumes about their motives.

up
Voting closed 0

If yes, then her attempts to fire this guy are not an abuse of power.

If she didn't follow the rules, she is seriously abusing her authority no matter how justified.

Public officials in many other states are not appointed and do not serve at the whim of the governor like they do around here. The governor has no authority to order them around, much less order them to fire somebody when there are laws and procedures covering hiring and firing. You can't just say "but he's an asshole and I want him out because I'm the Gov" just because he's an asshole. She doesn't have that power, and usurping it is an abuse of her office no matter what her reasoning or motivation.

up
Voting closed 0

Gov. Sarah Palin and members of her staff pressured the Public Safety Commissioner to fire the state cop.

It has been said Palin did this because Palin's sister and the cop had a bitter divorce and a child custody dispute.

She used her office to subvert legal process; the adjudication of the divorce and custody; and the cops due process in responding to charges about his fitness for duty.

Palin fired the Safety Commissioner allegedly because he wouldn't fire the cop, even though the Safety Commissioner investigated ever single one of the claims against the cop's fitness for duty.

The bi-partisan state legislature authorized an investigation into the Governor actions.

Palin denied any involvement in the phone calls to the Safety Commissioner until the investigation advanced to the point where evidence appeared that she had personally made calls. Then she admitted it because she had to. This also demonstrates that she knew calling the Safety Commissionerwas at least unethical if not criminal.

We'll see as the investigation proceeds.

up
Voting closed 0