About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

WSJ reported that Palin "highlighted her opposition" to "that bridge to nowhere" -- but not her previous reported support for it

August 29, 2008 8:55 pm ET
image

SUMMARY: A Wall Street Journal article asserted that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin "highlighted her opposition to a much-derided congressional earmark for her state," uncritically quoting her assertion, "I told Congress 'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere." In fact, Palin reportedly had supported the project for the proposed bridge between Ketchikan, Alaska, and Gravina Island and suggested that Alaska's congressional delegation should continue to try to procure funding for it.

48 Comments

An August 29 article posted on the Wall Street Journal's website asserted that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin "highlighted her opposition to a much-derided congressional earmark for her state" and uncritically quoted her assertion, "I told Congress 'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere." In fact, during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign, Palin, whom Sen. John McCain has chosen as his running mate, reportedly supported the project for a proposed bridge between Ketchikan, Alaska, and Gravina Island and suggested that Alaska's congressional delegation should continue to try to procure funding -- which was authorized by the federal government in 2005, but never appropriated -- for the project.

As governor, Palin in September 2007 "directed the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to look for the most fiscally responsible alternative for access to the Ketchikan airport and Gravina Island instead of proceeding any further with the proposed $398 million bridge," but in a questionnaire published in the October 22, 2006, Anchorage Daily News (accessed from the Nexis database), then-gubernatorial candidate Palin answered the question, "Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?" by writing: "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."

Similarly, according to an October 5, 2006, Anchorage Daily News article, Palin supported the bridge project during a 2006 gubernatorial debate:

As for the infamous "bridges to nowhere," [debate moderator Steve] 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.

Still, Palin warned that the flow of federal money into the state for such projects is going to slow.

Further, an October 20, 2006, Associated Press article (accessed from the Nexis database), reported that "Republican Sarah Palin's spokesman, Curtis Smith, said Palin supports the Ketchikan bridge project."

Additionally, a September 21, 2007, press release announcing that she had "directed the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to look for the most fiscally responsible alternative for access to the Ketchikan airport and Gravina Island" also included the following comment from Palin:

"Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer," said Governor Palin. "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," Governor Palin added. "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."

From the August 29 Wall Street Journal article:

She called herself an "average hockey mom," and introduced her husband, Todd, and spoke of her five children. That includes her oldest son, Track, who is about to deploy to Iraq. "Todd and I are so proud of him and all the fine men and women serving this country in uniform," she said. The crowd replied with chants of, "USA! USA!"

She also noted her efforts to fight corruption and highlighted her opposition to a much-derided congressional earmark for her state that Sen. McCain loves to hate as well. "I told Congress 'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere," she said. Gov. Palin also took on her state's political establishment that had been rocked by an FBI corruption investigation.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Craig (August 29, 2008 9:00 pm ET)
         
      Hey, she is a Maverick!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DAWUSS (August 29, 2008 9:05 pm ET)
           

        So we have Maverick the POW and Maverick the Hockey Mom...

         

        "Maverick and Maverick" sounds like a FOX TV series. Maybe have it at 10pm eastern on Sundays...

        Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (August 29, 2008 9:55 pm ET)
           

        No, she's unqualified. 

        Why isn't anyone-- any Dem-- saying this? Repeat after me:

        THIS PERSON IS NOT QUALIFIED ! 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by T-Hone (August 30, 2008 9:22 am ET)
             
          I don't find the vague notion of qualifications to be very important when choosing a president.  What matters to me is their positions on the issues.  In my opinion the only reason Palin's qualifications are relevant is because McCain was harping on Obama about his lack of experience. 
          Report Abuse
        • Author by dexteritas0071418 (August 30, 2008 11:35 am ET)
             
          Unqualified relative to whom? The top of the democratic ticket?
          Report Abuse
      • Author by see it real (August 29, 2008 10:30 pm ET)
           

        The corporatist conservative Republican Party controlled new media wants Liar McCain to be elected, and they want Liar Palin to be the vice-president.

        You should have seen the pro-Republican grin that GOP-GE-NBC's/MSNBC's Republican David Gregory showed every time he mentioned this far right wing homophobic fascist racist hate hag's name. 

        David Gregory wants McCain to be elected to because he is a right wing Republican himself, anming one reason. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by dexteritas0071418 (August 30, 2008 11:36 am ET)
             

          Wow, racist hate hag.

          Besides offering some firm examples of why you chose the words you did, care to explain why it's ok to use sexist terms against a GOP woman?

          Report Abuse
        • Author by proudconservative (August 31, 2008 12:39 pm ET)
             

          Seeing it real myself, I think she is no maverick.  She is nothing but a self-loathing auntie Tom!  A republican hack!  A female sellout!

          How dare she call herself a 'woman' when she is a hunter of furry little creatures, refuses to have a feminizing abortion to avoid a needless pregnancy and is proud of her faith, which by the way, isn't wiccen nor islam, the only two acceptable religions of a true 21st century american woman!

          All the 'real' pro-female women are of course allowed to call her the most vile names because she claims to speak for women.  Why rather than destroy the girls who are attacking her man, she actually stands up for an abused woman and removes her perpetrator from the state police!  What kind of a supposed woman would actually protect a victim from the tormentor without regard to her own political gain?

          And most disgusting of all, she has done this without growing cankles!

          Let's us all move forward to attack her on being a weak representative of her gender, without regard for the quality of her character, shall we?

          Seeing it for real,

          Juan Williams

          Report Abuse
    • Author by mefirst (August 29, 2008 9:07 pm ET)
         
      actually, she really did not "oppose" it in the 2007 press release.  she basically said it's "not the answer" because they couldn't get the congressional funding. 
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Craig (August 29, 2008 9:19 pm ET)
           
        Did she ever oppose it? Or is she just claiming she did?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by see it real (August 29, 2008 10:34 pm ET)
             

          Claiming sounds right.  Or hate hag Palin flip-flopped.

          Either one fits.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by mefirst (August 30, 2008 6:49 pm ET)
             
          it doesn't really sound like she ever opposed it.  it just sounds like she said it wouldn't get built because the federal money was not there.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by annes10 (August 29, 2008 9:24 pm ET)
         

      She was for it before she was against it?

      OK.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by DAWUSS (August 29, 2008 9:56 pm ET)
           

        Whichever promotes her current agenda. Kinda like how JC is doing on his radio show in regards to Hillary, Obama, and Palin

        Report Abuse
    • Author by dexteritas0071418 (August 29, 2008 9:54 pm ET)
         

      This is easy.

      She didn't oppose the bridge all in all, she just opposed taxpayers in Mississippi having their dollars go to it. You should appreciate her unwillingness to take pork barrel money.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (August 29, 2008 9:56 pm ET)
           

        She made a remark about great earmarks are and how Alaska should get more of them. Even worse,

        SHE IS NOT QUALIFIED !

        Dems-- start saying this! Over and over again. Or else. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DAWUSS (August 29, 2008 10:01 pm ET)
             

          If she's more qualified than Obama, then how come HE'S running for POTUS and SHE'S running for VPOTUS?

           

          Just a thought...

          Report Abuse
          • Author by doggone-ga (August 29, 2008 10:04 pm ET)
               

            "If she's more qualified than Obama"

            Except she isn't more qalified.  And he's running because his party nominated him.  Her's didn't nominate her.  What part of the "democratic process" don't you understand? 

            Report Abuse
            • Author by DAWUSS (August 29, 2008 10:08 pm ET)
                 

              That was sort of my whole point. It was me "accepting the GOP premise" then questioning the scenario under which it happened.

               

              IF was the key word.

               

               

              To me, experience isn't an issue with Obama or Palin. A rookie can be just as effective as a tested veteran IMO.

               

              And while we're at it, if she was running for POTUS, would she have gotten the GOP nomination instead of McYoda?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by doggone-ga (August 29, 2008 10:27 pm ET)
                   

                "And while we're at it, if she was running for POTUS, would she have gotten the GOP nomination instead of McYoda?"

                Speaking as a "not a Republican" - I'd say the best answer to that is that neither she nor ANY OTHER woman even TRIED to seriously run for the R nomination.  Surely they know their own party better than I do.

                Report Abuse
        • Author by see it real (August 29, 2008 10:27 pm ET)
             

          I have no problem saying it at all:

          RIGHT WING REPUBLICAN HATE HAG LIAR SARAH PALIN IS NOT QUALIFED TO BE THE VICE-PRESIDENT, AND IS ABSOLUTELY UNQUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT!

          Any person in this country who votes for McCain-Palin is even LESS qualified to vote for ANY candidate for AN office in the United States of America!

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Cheney2012 (August 30, 2008 12:24 am ET)
               

            I'll give you the answer the MMFA hacks give about Obama's complete lack of experience:

            Sarah Palin has reached her 35th birthday and is a natural-born U.S. Citizen.  She therefore is qualified under the U.S. Constitution to be President of the United States.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Brabantio (August 30, 2008 12:36 am ET)
                 

              There's something to that, which is why talking about how she's not "qualified" is the wrong tack.  If anyone's going to say that she's not qualified, while Obama is, they're drawing a pretty thin line.  It won't play well, and will come off as hypocritical.  The real point is that McCain's the one who's been talking so much about "experience", and this pick makes him look hypocritical.

              Carlile and SeeItReal are volunteering to turn McCain's hypocrisy back around on Democrats.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by pete592 (August 30, 2008 1:14 am ET)
                 

              You're talking about two different things: Constitutional qualification and experience.

              Palin and Obama are both Constitutionally qualified.

              But by picking Palin, McCain has completely undermined a pillar in his campaign against Obama: EXPERIENCE.  McCain has taken his favorite attack line and rendered it null and void. 

              Report Abuse
      • Author by Craig (August 29, 2008 10:08 pm ET)
           
        Where did you hear that, Dex? From the quotes here it seems she was anxious to get the bridge built before federal funds dried up.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by see it real (August 29, 2008 10:32 pm ET)
         

      If you saw the look on Liar McCain's face, it's obvious to the non-Republican partisans and the hateful DINO PUMA Republicans that he never even HEARD of Sarah Palin before today.

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Brabantio (August 29, 2008 10:54 pm ET)
         

      I heard this one tonight on Hannity and Colmes as well.  My favorite line of the night was about how McCain reached out to the West - way out west - with this pick, which is important to Republicans.

      Are these people serious?  As if he had picked Pawlenty, they would have been at risk of losing Alaska's three electoral votes, and people in Montana and Idaho and Wyoming would have revolted.  And McCain is from Arizona, in case nobody noticed, which was a western state the last time I checked.

      This is not going to work.  He gains nothing by picking someone from Alaska.  Two of the primary criticisms of Obama is that he's "radical" and "inexperienced".  Picking someone who supports Creationism in schools and whose primary experience is as a small-town mayor severely undercuts those criticisms.  The day after Obama says he'll get in a debate about who has the judgment to lead this country, McCain makes an announcement that puts his own judgment in serious question.

      The only positive here is that he has a hope of drawing more women voters.  The problem is that it's so damn obvious that this is the purpose of the choice, it's going to be viewed as cynical and manipulative.  Obama has a strong argument that this is actually insulting to women, just because McCain expects women are not bright enough to see the obvious nature of this pick.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Governor (August 29, 2008 11:14 pm ET)
           
        You hit that out of the park.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Brabantio (August 29, 2008 11:51 pm ET)
             
          Thanks!  To be fair, it was an underhanded pitch (double-meaning intended).
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (August 30, 2008 1:10 am ET)
             
          Second that, Brab. I seriously don't even understand the concept of a potential Hillary Clinton voter going over to Grampy out of spite for Obama. Even more crazy is that same voter voting GOP because they found a shrill fetus-fetish PTA mom to liven up McCain's "Weekend at Bernie's" style campaign.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Craig (August 30, 2008 1:41 am ET)
               
            This is pretty disturbing.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (August 30, 2008 3:50 am ET)
                 

              Craig, that is bizarre. It looks like a bunch of freepers going into full method-actor angry Hillary-supporter mode.

              There have been a few posters here with that same vibe--Never posted as HRC supporters, but showed up after Obama's nomination, with all of the misspelling and fury of the far right wingnuts.

              Are they actually creating entire websites for their little puppet shows?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (August 30, 2008 3:53 am ET)
                   
                And, BTW, Craig, thanks for linking in a new window. It's a little thing, but I appreciate it.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by open_mind (August 30, 2008 11:15 am ET)
                     

                  Col,

                  Just a tip, but if you hold down the "shift" key while left-clicking on a link, it will open up in a new window regardless whether it is programmed to do so (at least on a PC using MS internet explorer).

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Brabantio (August 30, 2008 11:33 am ET)
                       
                    And on Firefox you can right-click the link, which will give the option to open in a new window or a new tab.
                    Report Abuse
      • Author by annes10 (August 30, 2008 12:01 am ET)
           

        Plus, Palin is in the midst of an "abuse of power" investigation which is no small thing, and otherwise has an extremely poor record as an Alaskan mayor/governor, according to some of the links posted over at kos.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Brabantio (August 30, 2008 12:21 am ET)
             

          I also heard that while she praised Hillary today, she previously referred to her as a "whiner".  So if that is the primary purpose of the choice (and I'm sure not seeing any other purpose), all Obama has to do is point that out.  I'm envisioning it coming up in the debates, where Palin compares herself to Hillary and Biden points out that she called her a "whiner", having an effect like the famous "you're no Jack Kennedy" line (and I know Quayle became VP, but Bush 43 doesn't have Reagan's coattails, and Obama is not Dukakis either).

          I haven't caught up on her full history yet, but I really don't think her effectiveness as Governor makes much of a difference.  If she's not effective, then that's obviously bad for her.  If she's good at the job, then it makes McCain look like an ass for questioning Obama's experience.  Palin is intelligent, so she can learn - well, Obama is intelligent, so he can learn.  She was a small-town mayor and became a good Governor - Obama is a U.S. Senator and can become a good President.  Anything that can be said about her potential or abilities can be applied to Obama, which makes any argument about experience worthless.

          Has the McCain campaign really not thought about this at all, or what? 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by annes10 (August 30, 2008 12:35 am ET)
               

            Well, Brabantino, you're the soul of kindness.

            It is true that Obama can learn. I believe we've watched him learn throughout the primary season; clearly he's always been capable of learning but my point is, now I'm convinced of it.

            But Palin was not vetted in the primary season ... she's been snuck in under the radar. We don't know if she can learn, we don't know anything about her except that Rush likes her looks. You do her a great favor by putting her on the same level as Obama and assuming she can learn, but before you apply any more generosity in your decision-making process, you really otta check out some of the posts over at kos, coming from some not-to-impressed constituents out of Alaska and her home town.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Brabantio (August 30, 2008 12:41 am ET)
                 
              I'm not being generous to her at all.  I'm just saying that any argument that McCain or other Republicans make in her defense can be applied to Obama's amount of experience as well.  It's about how "if she's a good Governor" that it doesn't help McCain anyway.
              Report Abuse
    • Author by Cheney2012 (August 29, 2008 11:48 pm ET)
         
      QUESTION:  Where are the Democrats who oppose a bridge to nowhere? IN fact, where are the Democrats who oppose ANY bridge to ANYWHERE?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by annes10 (August 30, 2008 12:09 am ET)
           

        You seem puzzled by the existence of fiscally-conservative democrats. Well, we've always been right here. Right here.

        Those spend-thrift republicans you are used to associating with, however, can be found at St Paul by Monday. You need to get moving up that way yourself, soon too, or you'll miss your share of the KoolAid.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Cheney2012 (August 30, 2008 12:28 am ET)
             

          "fiscally-conservative democrats"

          That line sure sounds like you've been drinking the Kool-Aid in Denver for the past 4 nights.

          "fiscally-conservative democrats"

          Name ONE currently in office.  I can think of a few who are long gone:  Daniel Patrick Moynihan might be one.

          I guess if it comes to national defense than yes the Democrats are downright miserly.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by annes10 (August 30, 2008 12:39 am ET)
               

            Hah! First, you name me a fiscally-conservative republican!

            Toodle along, you'll lose your place in line for the Kool-Aid!

            Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (August 30, 2008 1:18 am ET)
               

            I guess if it comes to national defense than yes the Democrats are downright miserly.- noleftturns

            NoLeft, the most horrible attack on U'S' soil in our History happened on a Republican's watch.The Republican in the White House was explicitly warned of this and failed to defend the country.

            What's your point, that Republicans spend more and do a worse job than Democrats in this area? I'd agree. It's true in a lot of other areas too. 

            Report Abuse
    • Author by mtobias (August 30, 2008 1:03 pm ET)
         

      Great reporting.

      You are indispensible to the safety of Democracy.

       

      Thank you for what you do.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Indy (August 30, 2008 1:20 pm ET)
         

      Come on people this isn’t a beauty contest it’s for the future of our country. She was what?  OK it is.  I forgot this is the era when before long the only newspaper left that can afford to do anything close to what was once called investigative reporting will be the National Inquire.  Great.... I hope Biden can swing a baton.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.