She mentioned the Juneau Rd project, which I didn’t discuss in depth, but mentioned that the cancellation of a segment of the series of roads underway shen she first got into office. After Ms. Epstein’s comment, I posted the info on that project from the linked articles in the post to clarify for the rest of you.

Ms. Epstein has never clarified just who entered into a contract with the company who built the Gravina Island road to where the bridge was supposed to go. Perhaps she doesn’t know, tho I asked. All press reports indicate that Murkowski was in a scramble to get that road and it’s funds under contract in the last days of his term before Palin took office. I have seen no press reports that indicate Palin awarded that contract after his exit. And highly unlikely in the wake of her transition team’s report.

And since Murkowski or family has some personal holdings on the Island, it’s certainly more to his benefit to get that contract awarded while the awarding was good. All news releases point that the “road to no where” was contracted out successfully before Palin took office, and the project was built per contract.

The ATPP has some interesting links that I’ve already gone thru somewhat. They are a group that promotes sensible spending in Alaskan transportation… a place where the continuous and discontinuous permafrost makes their 3500 miles of paved and gravel roads an annual event.

The ATPP has never supported the Gravina Bridge, but instead advocates for a ferry.

http://www.aktransportation.org/

BTW, Here’s another WSJ column for you Doug.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122100927525717663.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

The Palin family files formal complaints against Wooten with the AST. Grimes conducts an investigation and finds that he has a behavorial pattern of actions unbecoming an AST, and says if it happens again, he’ll be fired. And the union comes to his rescue as a witness for Wooten’s side at a divorce preceeding?

I don’t care what the judge said, Doug. That family, or any family, has every right to file any and all complaints against an officer. That the court would make an official comment on anyone following the official complaint process makes me believe two things… that not only is there a high degree of corruption that is tolerated in the enforcement there, but that the courts also have a high degree of corruption.

I would have taken that judge to task for even suggesting they had no rights to file complaints…. and had his ass on the chopping block with his superiors.

And how nice you are the judge, jury and executioner of Trooper’gate. You are behaving like a pompous ass, Doug. No doubt you were one of those who would have hung the Duke LaCross players too.

(Newsweek) An Anchorage judge three years ago warned Sarah Palin and members of her family to stop “disparaging” the reputation of Alaska State Trooper Michael Wooten, who at the time was undergoing a bitter separation and divorce from Palin’s sister Molly.

Allegations that Palin, her husband Todd, and at least one top gubernatorial aide continued to vilify Wooten—after Palin became Alaska’s governor and pressured state police officials to take action against him—are at the center of “Troopergate,” a political and ethical controversy which has embroiled Palin’s administration and is currently the subject of an official inquiry by a special investigator hired by the state legislature.

Court records obtained by NEWSWEEK show that during the course of divorce hearings three years ago, Judge John Suddock heard testimony from an official of the Alaska State Troopers’ union about how Sarah Palin—then a private citizen—and members of her family, including her father and daughter, lodged up to a dozen complaints against Wooten with the state police. The union official told the judge that he had never before been asked to appear as a divorce-case witness, that the union believed family complaints against Wooten were “not job-related,” and that Wooten was being “harassed” by Palin and other family members.

Court documents show that Judge Suddock was disturbed by the alleged attacks by Palin and her family members on Wooten’s behavior and character. “Disparaging will not be tolerated—it is a form of child abuse,” the judge told a settlement hearing in October 2005, according to typed notes of the proceedings. The judge added: “Relatives cannot disparage either. If occurs [sic] the parent needs to set boundaries for their relatives.”
…

Now MetaHarley can go post-”BS.”
Motive, opportunity, means. and even, now, evidence.

First of all the Congressional funds were controversial, and the funds removed as the bridge earmarks BEFORE Palin took office Dec 24, 2006.

From a WaPo article Nov 17, 2005… over a year before Palin took office, and almost a year before she started campaigning:

The $223 million span linking the small town of Ketchikan to sparsely populated Gravina Island and a second Alaskan bridge project have been stripped of their funding by congressional negotiators as they race to wrap up legislative business.

That decision reflects a growing unease among Republicans of criticism of runaway government spending in a transportation bill that includes 6,000-plus special projects for House members’ districts. But the maneuver is largely cosmetic and may only slow the bridge projects. As part of the deal, Alaska will get to keep the $454 million that Congress set aside for the two bridges, and technically the state can use the transportation funds for any project it chooses — including the bridges.

Point being, the money was stripped of mandates to use towards the Gravina bridge. However Congress did not redirect the cash, and instead directed it to Alaska to USE AS TRANSPORTATION FUNDS FOR ANY PROJECT IT CHOOSES…. including the bridges.

1: Palin’s campaign expressed doubt and skepticism before the election.
2: She did not set aside state funds to cover funding shortage… ie not planning on the bridge
3: Her transition team said bad juju budget decision
4: Palin killed the bridge idea, and they are working on other alternatives, at the state’s expense.

You cannot flip flop when you are not fully on board. She could not refuse funds that were passed to Alaska when Murkowski was Governor.

The “bridge to nowhere” is the “scandal to nowhere”. Period. Anyone who can’t get from A to B in thought patterns and timelines is just plain grasping at straws to misinform the electorate for political gain. Period.’

~~~

As far as “travel’gate”… did you naysayers even open the WaPo article linked in this post? Allow me to reiterate INRE what Palin was legal allowed for her travel expenses, and what she chose NOT to charge…. meaning, she actually claimed less expenses that what she was entitled to.

Palin, who earns $125,000 a year, claimed and received $16,951 as her allowance, which officials say was permitted because her official “duty station” is Juneau, according to an analysis of her travel documents by The Washington Post.

The governor’s daughters and husband charged the state $43,490 to travel, and many of the trips were between their house in Wasilla and Juneau, the capital city 600 miles away, the documents show.

Gubernatorial spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Monday that Palin’s expenses are not unusual and that, under state policy, the first family could have claimed per diem expenses for each child taken on official business but has not done so

~~~

Speaking from Palin’s Anchorage office, Leighow said Palin dealt with the plane and also trimmed other expenses, including forgoing a chef in the governor’s mansion because she preferred to cook for her family. The first family’s travel is an expected part of the job, she said.

“As a matter of protocol, the governor and the first family are expected to attend community events across the state,” she said. “It’s absolutely reasonable that the first family participates in community events.”

The state finance director, Kim Garnero, said Alaska law exempts the governor’s office from elaborate travel regulations. Said Leighow: “The governor is entitled to a per diem, and she claims it.”

The popular governor collected the per diem allowance from April 22, four days after the birth of her fifth child, until June 3, when she flew to Juneau for two days. Palin moved her family to the capital during the legislative session last year, but prefers to stay in Wasilla and drive 45 miles to Anchorage to a state office building where she conducts most of her business, aides have said.

Palin rarely sought reimbursement for meals while staying in Anchorage or Wasilla, the reports show.

~~~

Leighow noted that under state policy, all of the governor’s children are entitled to per diem expenses, even her infant son. “The first family declined the per diem [for] the children,” Leighow said. “The amount that they had declined was $4,461, as of August 5.”

~~~

Gov. Palin has spent far less on her personal travel than her predecessor: $93,000 on airfare in 2007, compared with $463,000 spent the year before by her predecessor, Frank Murkowski. He traveled often in an executive jet that Palin called an extravagance during her campaign. She sold it after she was sworn into office.

Leighow said that the governor’s staff has tallied the travel expenses charged by Murkowski’s wife: $35,675 in 2006, $43,659 in 2005, $13,607 in 2004 and $29,608 in 2003. Associates of Murkowski said the former governor was moose hunting and could not be reached to comment.

I’m sorry, but the woman claims less than the predecessor, and also doesn’t claim expenses she is entitled to. Another “scandal to nowhere”.

No, Doug

It’s not any of those things(which have all been refuted btw), it’s Palin herself. You libs just want her to just go away and you are trying your best to accomplish this. Sorry, Chump, she’s not going anywhere except to the WH.

Birds of a feather, don’t ya know.

h/t – NewsVine

Tracking Down the Palin Bridge to No Where Flip Flop
News Type: Event — Sun Sep 7, 2008 7:28 PM EDT
politics, election-2008, sarah-palin, alaska-politics
space guy

Since there are so many lies going around right now, both here on the vine and elsewhere about the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, I thought I would do a little research on one of the stories. The story is that Sarah Palin was for the so called “bridge to no where” during here campaign for governor but against it afterward when she supposedly used it as a way to break into the national scene (she foresaw being picked by McCain I guess).

Here is what I have been able to find:

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/view.bg?articleid=1116208&srvc=home&position=emailed

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.

Next

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901

When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term “bridge to nowhere,” according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin’s campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.

Next

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-31-palin-bridge_N.htm

“We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge, and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,” Palin said in August 2006, according to the Ketchikan Daily News.

The Anchorage Daily News quoted her in October 2006 as saying she would continue state funding for the bridge. “The window is now, while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist,” she said.

Ok I found the article, but not what is quoted above:

As for the infamous “bridges to nowhere,” MacDonald asked if the candidates would forge ahead with the proposed Knik Arm crossing between Anchorage and Point MacKenzie and Ketchikan’s Gravina Island bridge. Each has received more than $90 million in federal funding and drew nationwide attacks as being unnecessary and expensive. He also asked if they support building an access road from Juneau toward — but not completely connecting to — Skagway and Haines.

“I do support the infrastructure projects that are on tap here in the state of Alaska that our congressional delegations worked hard for,” Palin said. She said the projects link communities and create jobs.

I have searched hi and low for this August 2006 quote by here in the Ketchikan Daily News and it is just not there. However, I did find this gem:

EDITOR, Daily News: I met Sarah Palin, a gubernatorial candidate for the State of Alaska, on several occasions, and recently I researched her background and experience from her Web site and from other sources as well. She appears to me an ambitious and articulate young woman. Ms. Palin was a mayor of Wasilla with population of 5,000 residents. She unsuccessfully campaigned for the office of lieutenant governor in 2002, and Gov. Murkowski appointed her to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in 2003. I also hear from Ms. Palin and her supporters that she is an honest individual. Nevertheless, I question whether these qualifications are sufficient for the position of the chief executive of the state. There are great challenges ahead of us in Alaska. To face these challenges, Alaskans need to chose the chief executive who has broad business experience in Alaska, exemplary leadership skills, long history of public service in…

From reading a lot of the summaries from that paper, it looks like this area has never been Sarah Palin country. I can see where the national dems get their meme for her supposed lack of experience.

Now links to articles where she was either not for it or neutral.

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/ap_alaska/story/511232.html

McAllister, who was a reporter for Anchorage television station KTUU during the 2006 campaign, said he remembers well Palin’s position on the bridge project. She was lukewarm as a candidate and cooled to it as governor, he said.

In the same article the price tag had risen from the original $223 million to $400 million

In her acceptance speech Friday, Palin described herself as a champion reformer who put a stop to the $400 million bridge project in Alaska in her effort to “end the abuses” of earmark spending in Congress.

In further Research for the source I looked in the Ketchikan Daily News Archive and found this:

State: Juneau road will cost more 9/7/2006
Republican candidate Sarah Palin favors improved access to the state capital but has questions about the road cost and its risks to drivers and passengers, because it will run through a series of avalanche chutes, said Curtis Smith, spokesman for the Palin campaign.

As far as I can find from a detailed search of the Ketchikan Daily News archives, there is no such article as is claimed in the first links above.

There is another part of the story that did not make sense to me. Many articles have stated that the money for the bridge was passed by congress and that the money made it to Alaska and was spent on other projects. My research is that there was an earlier $90 million earmark that was actually talked about that was for multiple bridge projects. It seems that only $38M of that money was for the highway going to the bridge (which could also be used for a ferry service). Here is from the Ketchikan Daily news

In addition, the administration announced that the state will make the approximately $38 million in remaining federal money for the bridge available for transportation projects in other parts of Alaska.

So this is either lazy or just inaccurate reporting to say that the bridge to nowhere earmark actually made it to the state (it did not).

To summarize

It looks like Sarah Palin did make positive statements about getting money for the bridge (10/26/06) but that she was concerned about the cost. When the cost ballooned from $223 million to over $400 million she put a stop to it. She may have slightly overstated the aversion to earmarks things but that is just a bit of theatrics that underlies her consistently killing overbudget items as well as a general attitude of reining in spending.

As for the money. There was an earlier earmark for $90 million that is partially being used to build an approach road to the bridge site. This approach road could easily be used for a ferry, which is one of the alternatives that is being explored. There is zero evidence that the $223 million that was removed from the earmark process made it to Alaska. This is just common sense in that if the money is removed, it is removed and it is just sloppy journalism for the main stream media to confuse the two.

It also looks like the mayor of Ketchikan has an axe to grind against Sarah Palin. It is obvious that if the bridge was built, whatever land and or businesses that he owns would be more valuable so that has to be considered.

All in all there was no flip flop. She originally stated, when running for governor that she was concerned about possible cost increases (the state would have had to cover the overruns). When the cost increases materialized, she killed it. The earmark main earmark money never came to Alaska and the money that did come was from an earlier earmark from before she became governor.

As the Mythbusters would say

Busted

Wall Street Journal Headline: “Record Contradicts Palin’s ‘Bridge’ Claims.” “The Bridge to Nowhere argument isn’t going much of anywhere. Despite significant evidence to the contrary, the McCain campaign continues to assert that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told the federal government ‘thanks but no thanks’ to the now-famous bridge to an island in her home state… But Gov. Palin’s claim comes with a serious caveat. She endorsed the multimillion dollar project during her gubernatorial race in 2006. And while she did take part in stopping the project after it became a national scandal, she did not return the federal money. She just allocated it elsewhere.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/9/08]

Chicago Tribune Blog: “The McCain-Palin Campaign Keeps Up the Misleading Line That She Was the Main Palyer in Taking Out the Bridge.” “Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin keeps saying she stopped the infamous ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ in an attempt to burnish her credentials as a pork-fighting reformer. And reporters keep pointing out that her claim is exaggerated. Still, the McCain-Palin campaign keeps up the misleading line that she was the main player in taking out the bridge. And still reporters keep shedding light on the inexactness, to put it politely, of that claim. One of the latest journalistic efforts to separate fact from fiction comes from PolitFact, a service of the St. Pete Times and CQ. Yet, the McCain campaign has cut a TV ad that pushes the line that Palin stopped the bridge. It’s as if they’ve decided to go with that first two parts of that famous Lincoln quote: ‘You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time…’” [Chicago Tribune Blog, 9/9/08]

Factcheck.org…: Congress Had All But Killed Bridge to Nowhere When Palin Killed It, Was Sharp Turnaround From Position During Gubernatorial Campaign. “Palin may have said “Thanks, but no thanks” on the Bridge to Nowhere, though not until Congress had pretty much killed it already. But that was a sharp turnaround from the position she took during her gubernatorial campaign, and the town where she was mayor received lots of earmarks during her tenure.” [Factcheck.org..., 9/4/08]

Politifact: Palin’s Stance On “The Bridge To Nowhere” Is “A Full Flop.” Politfact, a service of CQ and the St. Petersburg Times wrote, “McCain said Palin has ’stopped government from wasting taxpayers’ money on things they don’t want or need. And when we in Congress decided to build a bridge in Alaska to nowhere for $233-million of yours, she said, we don’t want it. If we need it, we’ll build our own in Alaska. She’s the one that stood up to them.’ Nevermind that Alaska didn’t give the money back. It spent the money on other transportation projects. The context of Palin’s and McCain’s recent statements suggest Palin flagged the so-called Bridge to Nowhere project as wasteful spending. But that’s not the tune she was singing when she was running for governor, particularly not when she was standing before the Ketchikan Chamber of Commerce asking for their vote. And so, we rate Palin’s position a Full Flop.” [Politifact]

AP FACT CHECK: Palin’s Broader Story on the Bridge to Nowhere is “Misleading,” Her Self-Description as a Champion of Earmark Reform “Is Harder to Square With the Facts.” “Palin did abandon plans to build the nearly $400 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport. But she made her decision after the project had become an embarrassment to the state, after federal dollars for the project were pulled back and diverted to other uses in Alaska, and after she had appeared to support the bridge during her campaign for governor. McCain and Palin together have told a broader story about the bridge that is misleading. She is portrayed as a crusader for the thrifty use of tax dollars who turned down an offer from Washington to build an expensive bridge of little value to the state. ‘I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere,’ she said in her convention speech last week. That’s not what she told Alaskans when she announced a year ago that she was ordering state transportation officials to ditch the project. Her explanation then was that it would be fruitless to try to persuade Congress to come up with the money… Her self-description as a leader who ‘championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress’ is harder to square with the facts.” [AP, 9/8/08]

USA Today Adwatch Headline: “A Disconnect on Palin’s Bridge Claim.”"It’s the claim that Palin ’stopped the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ that sparked the dispute. The reference is to a proposed bridge to a remote Alaskan community that would have cost the U.S. government more than $200 million. Palin has said repeatedly that she told the federal government: ‘Thanks, but no thanks.’ As a candidate for governor, however, Palin supported the bridge.” [USA Today, 9/8/08]

Anchorage Daily News Headline: “Palin Touts Stance on ‘Bridge to Nowhere,’ Doesn’t Note Flip Flop.” “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.” [Anchorage Daily News, 8/31/08]

Daily News Miner: Palin Supported Bridge to Nowhere, Later Kept the Money – “That Was Hardly ‘Thanks, But No Thanks.’ ” “In her introductory speech Friday as McCain’s running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin picked up on the Ketchikan bridge that was never built as a symbol of bad federal policy… That is not how Palin described her position on the Gravina Island bridge when she ran for governor in 2006. On Oct. 22, 2006, the Anchorage Daily News asked Palin and the other candidates, ‘Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?’ Her response: ‘Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now — while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.’ Palin’s support of the earmark for the bridge was applauded by the late Lew Williams Jr., the retired Ketchikan Daily News publisher who wrote columns on the topic… The money was not sent back to the federal government, but spent on other projects. That was hardly ‘Thanks but no thanks.’” [Daily News Miner, 8/31/08]

TIME: “Palin Has Continued to Repeat the Already Exposed Lie” About Her Opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere. “Palin has continued to repeat the already exposed lie that she said, ‘No, thanks,’ to the famous ‘bridge to nowhere’ (McCain’s favorite example of wasteful federal spending). In fact, she said, ‘Yes, please,’ until this project became a symbol and political albatross.” [Time Magazine, 9/9/08]

AP: Palin Supported Bridge, Later Abandoned Project But Used the Federal Money for Other Alaska Projects. “Palin voiced support for the bridge during her campaign to become Alaska’s governor, although she was critical of the size, and later abandoned plans for the project. She used the federal dollars for other projects in Alaska.” [AP, 9/9/08]

Washington Post’s Kurtz: Palin’s Assertion on Bridge to Nowhere a “Whopper.” “The senator from Arizona has made a crusade of battling pork-barrel ‘earmarks,’ but the whopper here is the assertion that Palin opposed her state’s notorious Bridge to Nowhere. She endorsed the remote project while running for governor in 2006, claimed to be an opponent only after Congress killed its funding the next year, and has used the $223 million provided for it for other state ventures.” [Washington Post, Kurtz Column, 9/9/08]

When She Ran for Governor, Palin Was for the Bridge…

Palin Was for the Bridge to Nowhere Before She Was Against It. In 2006, Palin was asked, “Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?” She responded, “Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now–while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.” [Anchorage Daily News, 10/22/06, republished 08/29/08]

• 2006: Palin: Don’t Allow “Spinmeisters” To Turn Bridge To Nowhere Project “Into Something That’s So Negative.” “Part of my agenda is making sure that Southeast is heard. That your projects are important. That we go to bat for Southeast when we’re up against federal influences that aren’t in the best interest of Southeast.’ She cited the widespread negative attention focused on the Gravina Island crossing project. ‘We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,’ Palin said.” [Ketchikan Daily News, 10/2/06]

• 2006: Palin On Bridge To Nowhere: “Would Not Stand In The Way Of The Progress Toward That Bridge.” According to the Ketchikan Daily News, “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.’” [Ketchikan Daily News, http://archive.ketchikandailynews.com/archive_results.php, 8/9/06, accessed 8/29/08]

• 2006: Palin Said People Across the Nation Were “Under These Misperceptions About the Bridge and its Purpose.” According to the Ketchikan Daily News in 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. The Ketchikan community now needs to have a strong, unified effort to say whether it wants the bridge or not. ‘And if you want the thing, there needs to be good justification,’ she said. ‘There needs to be the reasonableness that the rest of Alaska and the rest of the United States wants to see.’ She said that reasonableness could include a compromise in design and cost, such as limiting the link to a single span instead of the two-span Revilla-Pennock-Gravina route. ‘It’s pretty grandiose here, what is proposed,’ she said. 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.’” [Ketchikan Daily News, 8/9/06]

Palin’s Spokesman Said She Supported the Bridge to Nowhere. “Republican Sarah Palin’s spokesman, Curtis Smith, said Palin supports the Ketchikan bridge project, but had no immediate response to Murkowski’s plans.” [Ketchikan Daily News, 11/21/06]

As Governor Palin Turned Against It, But Kept the Money for Other Alaska Projects

In September, 2007, Palin Cancelled The Ketchikan Bridge Project Citing A Lack Of Federal Funding And Faltering Public Opinion – Redirected $36 Million in Federal Funds Already Secured for the Project to Other Road-Building Priorities in Alaska. In a press release from the governor’s office, Palin is cited as saying, “Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer. Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island. Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.” [Governor Palin Press Release, 9/21/07]

• CBS NEWS REALITY CHECK: Alaska Still Got Full $233 Million for Bridge to Nowhere, Used It on Other Transportation Projects. “Congress killed off the earmark well before Gov. Palin formally abandoned it. And while the bridge is in fact a dead project, the state still kept the money — all $233 million in federal funds — for other transportation needs.” [CBS News, 9/2/08]

• Politifact Noted That Palin Did Not Say “No Thanks” to the Money, She Just Spent it on Other Projects. “Today, when Palin says ‘I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that Bridge to Nowhere,’ it implies Congress said, ‘Here’s a check for that bridge’ and she responded, ‘No thanks, that’s wasteful spending; here’s your money back.’ That’s not what happened. Fact is, Alaska took the bridge money, and then just spent it on other projects. Palin did make the final call to kill plans for the bridge, but by the time she did it was no longer a politically viable project. We rule Palin’s claim is Half True.’ [Politifact, 9/3/08]

troppergate is nothing, if your look into it Palin did nothing wrong at all, and her sister’s ex-husband wasnever fired. On one said that Palin triedto forceanyoneto fire him. Shedid put it up on ebay, but it neversold on ebay

As I have been saying if thisis all you got on Palin, you are in bigtrouble.

Just look herefor all the debunked rumors about Palin.
http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/2008/09/06/palin-rumors/

it is niceto see that Obama supporters are consistent, going after Hillary and Palin with the same gusto.

Keep grasping. It surely resonates with the left, but freshman Senator Obama, and all his vast experience (as well as his arrogance and Bush foreign policy), is flailing among independents and DINOs; the people who decide the election in the last 50 days or so.

Travel expenses…no big deal

bridge…did the will of the people, did VETO it, and both Obama and Biden voted for that pork
….from your own link, “…it’s true that Palin formally put an end to the project…”

the road?

Troopergate? C’mon. Nothing there except partisan hackery that Democrats whined so strongly about when Bill Clinton was in power.

You might as well complain about her daughter’s pregnancy

If Obama loses, it won’t be because of Sarah Palin-at least not in large part. It’ll be because of his arrogance, and the lie that his foreign policy is some sort of change from Bush’s. The only Sarah Palin factor is that the more she’s attacked by the left, the more independents and Democrats who see the Democratic Party as being controlled by the extreme will all repel against Obama’s ability to give a good speech w-w-w-w-w-w-with a tele, uh, uh, uh, uh prompter.

“John McCain’s 6 percentage-point bounce in voter support spanning the Republican National Convention is largely explained by political independents shifting to him in fairly big numbers, from 40% pre-convention to 52% post-convention in Gallup Poll Daily tracking.
By contrast, Democrats’ support for McCain rose 5 percentage points over the GOP convention period, from 9% to 14%, while Republicans’ already-high support stayed about the same.
The surge in political independents who favor McCain for president marks the first time since Gallup began tracking voters’ general-election preferences in March that a majority of independents have sided with either of the two major-party candidates. Prior to now, McCain had received no better than 48% of the independent vote and Obama no better than 46%, making the race for the political middle highly competitive.”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110137/McCain-Now-Winning-Majority-Independents.aspx

It’s not just the WP story, Scott. It’s the bridge, the road, the travel, the troopergate, the plane, and all the other stories that when contrasted with the ‘outsider’ DC image magnified by her own repetition of being outside it all that I believe will start to tarnish now.

She is working this image as being above it all, it’s now her public identity. …very dangerous:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/obama-hits-mcca.html

Nope. No legs to the story. Too small an amount. I think the money has to be frozen, marked FBI bills, transferred by an undercover FBI agent on video, and at least…I dunno…$60k in amount. After that…maybe it’d have legs.