Technology with attitude

Palin Continues To Push "Bridge To Nowhere" Lie

0

She just can’t admit that she’s not being honest…

Here’s the truth…

Actually, Congress put the kibosh on the Bridge to Nowhere back in November 2005. Since Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was then head of the Senate Appropriations Committee he was able to force a compromise in which the earmark for the bridge was killed but Alaska got to hold on to the money — some $442 million of federal tax dollars.

Fast forward to November 2006. That’s when Sarah Palin was running as a staunch supporter of the Bridge to Nowhere — that is, after the feds had themselves already said ‘No Thanks.’

In 2006, the Democrats took over both houses of Congress. So by the time Palin got into office it was clear that not only was the first Bridge earmark killed but that Congress was not going to be ponying up any more money. That meant that Alaska was going to have to pick up the tab all on its own. So since she couldn’t pay for it with the federal pork barrel, in September 2007, Palin officially halted the project which was then a state project since Congress had said ‘Thanks. But no thanks’ two years earlier.

She couldn’t say ‘No Thanks’ because Congress had already said ‘Forget It’.

Listen, I have absolutely NO problem that Palin wanted the bridge. For me, pork is a necessary evil and if those folks thought they needed a bridge, then that’s their business. In fact, it’s common knowledge know that they still took the money to put towards their infrastructure needs.

However, I have a HUGE problem that she has been consistently misrepresenting herself as some sort of tireless, earmark-killing gladiator. Especially when her state was #1 in earmarks per capita.

And, by the way, she has been lying A LOT about this…

Do note that last line, “If our state wanted a bridge, we were going to build it ourselves.”

Folks, even after the project had been killed she still wanted the American taxpayers to build it. That’s a fact. There’s no getting around that.

Thanks, but no thanks for that explanation Sarah.