Media outlets scrutinizing Palin's "Bridge to Nowhere" statement haven't noted her claim that "I told the Congress 'Thanks, but no thanks' " is a lie
SUMMARY: While media outlets reporting Gov. Sarah Palin's claim that "I told the Congress 'Thanks, but no thanks' on that 'Bridge to Nowhere' " have noted that Palin had previously supported the bridge, or that Palin did not refuse the funds previously allocated for the bridge or reimburse the federal government, they did not report that Palin's claim is false, because Congress abdicated responsibility for determining how the money would be spent a year before Palin was elected governor.
In reports over the last 10 days, the Associated Press, The Washington Post, ABC, and CNN have repeatedly reported all or part of Palin's repeated false claim, "I told the Congress 'Thanks, but no thanks' on that 'Bridge to Nowhere.' " But while those reports noted that Palin had previously supported the bridge, or that Palin did not refuse the funds previously allocated for the bridge or reimburse the federal government, they did not report that Palin's claim that she "told the Congress 'Thanks, but no thanks' on that 'Bridge to Nowhere' " is false. As Media Matters for America previously noted, Palin was not in a position to tell Congress " '[T]hanks, but no thanks' on that 'Bridge to Nowhere,' " as she has repeatedly claimed. As The Daily Howler's Bob Somerby noted, a year before Palin was elected governor, Congress abdicated responsibility for determining how the money would be spent. After authorizing funds to be spent specifically on the bridge project in August 2005, in an appropriations bill in November 2005, Congress earmarked the money for Alaska, but specified that it did not have to be spent on the bridge. Somerby wrote, "[N]o one had to 'tell Congress' anything about the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' because Congress had removed itself from decision-making about the project."
From the September 2 Washington Post article:
But McCain's enthusiasm for Palin sometimes leads to embellishment. For instance, Palin's rise in Alaska politics was fostered by the political culture that she turned against and eventually battled for control of state government. And she and McCain never fail to mention that as governor she opposed a federal earmark for a bridge to a sparsely populated island that became a symbol of pork barrel politics.
As a senator, "I tried to stop the $233 million 'bridge to nowhere' in Alaska," McCain said. "She got it done."
Palin said she told the federal government, "Thanks but no thanks."
But she does not mention that she endorsed the bridge when she was a candidate for governor. And the money did not go back to Washington. It stayed in Alaska for a different road project.
From the September 8 AP article:
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.
"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said then.
Palin indicated during her 2006 campaign for governor that she supported the bridge, but was wishy-washy about it. She told local officials that money appropriated for the bridge "should remain available for a link, an access process as we continue to evaluate the scope and just how best to just get this done."
She vowed to defend 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" something that McCain was busy doing at the time, as a fierce critic of the bridge.
Even so, she called the bridge design "grandiose" during her campaign and said something more modest might be appropriate.
Palin's reputation for standing up to entrenched interests in Alaska is genuine. 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.
The governor has cut back on pork-barrel project requests, but in her two years in office, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. And as mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million.
From the September 4 AP article:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
From the September 3 AP article:
At the same time, Palin's campaign trail braggadocio last week that she told Washington "'thanks but no thanks' on that 'Bridge to Nowhere' " didn't tell the whole story.
In fact, Palin was for the infamous $398 million bridge to connect the town of Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport on it before she was against it, speaking in favor of it during her 2006 race for governor.
From the September 9 edition of CNN's American Morning:
PALIN [video clip]: I told the Congress "Thanks, but no thanks on that 'Bridge to Nowhere.' " If our state wanted to build a bridge, we were going to build it ourselves.
JESSICA YELLIN (Capitol Hill correspondent): It's a big applause line, but before she became governor, Palin was for the "Bridge to Nowhere." After being elected, she was against it, saying it was too expensive. But Alaska kept the more than $100 million Congress gave for the bridge.
Palin has used her line-item veto to cut funds for special interest programs called earmarks, but Democrats criticize her for slashing programs even for people with disabilities, a group she's vowed to defend. Her Democratic critics complain she has the wrong priorities.
From the September 8 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
WOLF BLITZER (host): Governor Palin fired up the crowd by echoing statements she's been making about herself. Listen to this.
PALIN [video clip]: So as mayor, I took a voluntary pay cut, which didn't really thrill my husband. And then as governor, I cut the personal chef position from the budget, which didn't really thrill my kids. And then I put the state's -- our government's state checkbook, I put it online for all the world to see. You're going to see every penny that we spend up there. So -- doing that, though, of course, I didn't thrill all the bureaucrats. But, OK. And then the luxury jet. It came with the office, but I put it on eBay.
So, I came to office promising to control spending, by request if possible, but by veto if necessary. Today, our state budget is under control. We have a surplus. I have put the veto pen to nearly half a billion dollars in wasteful spending. We suspended the state fuel tax. And now that we have a surplus, I'm returning a chunk of that surplus straight back to the people because they can spend it better than government can spend it for them. We gave their money back to the hard-working Alaskans. And in these tough times, I'm ready to help John McCain bring tax relief to all Americans. To all of you.
I championed earmark reform -- you're going to hear about this from the senator -- to stop Congress from wasting public money on things that don't serve the public interest. I told Congress "Thanks, but no thanks for that 'Bridge to Nowhere.' " If our state wanted to build a bridge, we would build it ourselves.
Just the other day, our opponent brought up earmarks. And, frankly, I was surprised that he would even raise the subject at all. I thought he wouldn't want to go there. In just three years, our opponent has requested nearly $1 billion in earmarks. That's about a million dollars for every working day.
So we've reformed the abuses of earmarks in our state. And I'm ready to help President John McCain end these corrupt practices once and for all.
BLITZER: All right, Governor Palin speaking earlier today. Meanwhile, Senator Obama has not requested any earmarks this year, that according to the Associated Press. Last year, he did ask for some $311 million in earmarks. The AP says that's about $25 for every Illinois resident.
But under Governor Palin, Alaska has asked for almost $200 million in earmarks, the AP saying that's almost $300 for every person in Alaska. The AP says Alaska is by far the biggest recipient of these federal pet project spending per capita.
From the September 7 edition of ABC's Good Morning America:
BILL WEIR (co-anchor): Well, let's talk a little bit about federal dollars despite all that oil wealth. They still lead the nation receiving federal aid, like the much-ballyhooed "Bridge to Nowhere," $223 million. The governor has said she killed that project. What does the record show?
LISA FLETCHER (ABC News correspondent): Well, in her stump speech -- and her acceptance speech, she said "Thanks, but no thanks." But when you look back, there is some indication that she supported it. And then once she got into office, she did kill the project, but she kept the $223 million here in the state of Alaska to use for other state projects.
From the September 5 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:
RANDI KAYE (correspondent): And where did she really stand on the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere"? A $330 million project, a symbol of Alaska's dependence on federal handouts.
PALIN [video clip]: I told the Congress "Thanks, but no thanks for that 'Bridge to Nowhere.' " If our state wanted to build a bridge, we would build it ourselves.
KAYE: She takes credit for having killed the "Bridge to Nowhere" project. Is that fair?
LYDA GREEN (president, Alaska Senate): That was after she supported it in her campaign.
KAYE: And Green says even though the bridge project was canceled, the federal money was not, but directed to other Alaska projects. Come Election Day, how much will her record matter? Well, here in Alaska, many predict voters will choose style over substance.
From the September 5 edition of CNN's American Morning:
DEBORAH FEYERICK (CNN correspondent): That famous $398 million "Bridge to Nowhere"?
PALIN [video clip]: I told the Congress "Thanks, but no thanks."
FEYERICK: In fact, Alaska got that money but it was used for other projects. Steven Ellis is with an advocacy group that tracks public spending.
STEVE ELLIS (Taxpayers for Common Sense Action): Certainly she has got Wasilla into the earmarks game. She, you know, worked the system and was able to bring home earmarks and then certainly has been part of the earmark system in Alaska. And so, it's just something that is interesting to juxtapose with Senator McCain's position, which has been stalwart no earmarks ever.
From the September 4 edition of ABC's Good Morning America:
DIANE SAWYER (co-host): There are going to be more fact checks of the speech. And here's one line from it. I know that you were listening to it carefully last night.
PALIN [video clip]: I told the Congress "Thanks, but no thanks on that 'Bridge to Nowhere.' " If our state wanted to build a bridge, we were gonna build it ourselves.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS (host, This Week): Governor Palin put her own record front and center last night on that "Bridge to Nowhere." The story is a little more complicated. When she was campaigning for governor in -- in 2006, she was actually for the bridge. She opposed it when she got elected, after Congress had already taken away the earmark for the "Bridge to Nowhere." And as we've reported before, when she was mayor of Wasilla, she did seek $27 million in earmarks --
DIANE SAWYER: Earmarks.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: -- and also as governor. So one thing that is gonna happen, I think, will continue to happen, more scrutiny of her record, even -- despite this performance last night.
From the September 3 edition of American Morning:
KYRA PHILLIPS (correspondent): And then there's the controversial "Bridge to Nowhere." A favorite target of Senator John McCain because of the enormous cost of building a bridge to a remote Alaskan community.
McCAIN [video clip]: The next vice president of the United States --
PHILLIPS: But when John McCain introduced Palin to America last week ...
PALIN [video clip]: I told Congress "Thanks, but no thanks" on that "Bridge to Nowhere."
PHILLIPS: While running for governor, Palin supported the bridge, saying it was essential for local prosperity. But in office she spiked it, citing rising costs and the needs of other projects. A longtime opponent of Palin accuses her of a flip-flop.
ANDREW HALCRO (former gubernatorial candidate): It was a bridge to somewhere. And then when she got elected and the political winds had changed, it became a "Bridge to Nowhere."
From the September 2 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
PHILLIPS: Speaking of earmarks, running for governor, Palin supported the "Bridge to Nowhere" -- now known as the poster child for government pork projects.
MCCAIN: The next vice president --
PHILLIPS: But when John McCain introduced Palin to America last week ...
PALIN: I told Congress "Thanks, but no thanks" on that "Bridge to Nowhere."
PHILLIPS: A long-time opponent of Palin's accuses her of a flip-flop.
HALCRO: It was a bridge to somewhere. And then when she got elected and the political winds had changed, it became a "Bridge to Nowhere."
I agree with this MMFA article.
Her shifting positions doesn't make her statement only a half-lie.
The fact that Sarah Palin never told Congress not to give Alaska money for the bridge makes her statement a complete lie.
And lemme guess, people don't like Barack because he's black.
Are the American people really that shallow where the only thing they think about is a black President or a female Vice President?
This women is enduring more hate than any other poltical figure who has ran for VP. It is quite amazing how much her enemies hate her because she is a woman.
Wrong, Bob. I guess you're not old enough to remember the battles that took place between the American People and GOP VP candidates Spiro Agnew and Dan Quayle.
And I don't believe that anyone here "hates" Caribou Barbie per se. We oppose her because she's a liar who is putting her personal ambition ahead of the needs of her children - especially her newborn with Down's syndrome.
Bob,
You are making quite a strong charge here. Where is the "hate" for Palin that you reference? It seems to me that examining her statements on the bridge to nowhere are what we are supposed to do while evaluating a candidate. Could you show me what you mean by "hate?"
hate seems to be all over especially from certain blogs like the Daily Kos.
Its disgraceful.
Grand Old Perverts
by georgia10
Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:24:33 PM PDT
In liveblogging Sarah Palin's acceptance speech, I noted that the ideal Republican candidate is someone who has the ability to lie without shame. Sarah Palin proved within minutes of her speech that she was well-qualified in that regard. The latest McCain-Palin ad reaffirms that the modern Republican Party, barren of ideas and solutions, will effortlessly and shamelessly resort to depraved lies to win.
The latest barrel-scrapping effort from John McCain is an ad which states that Barack Obama wants to teach kindergartners about sex before they can read (see details and discussion here).
Barack Obama's response:
It is indeed a remarkably dishonorable act for John McCain to "approve this message." There is no Vietnam scar deep enough and no POW flag large enough to mask the brazen ugliness of this unprincipled and deliberate lie. John McCain has used his five and half years in a cell three decades ago to shield off criticism of years' worth of typical Republican politics. No mantle of honor, though, can hide the hideousness of McCain's latest attack.
It is not so much that the ad is a lie. Lies, after all, are the campaign currency of Pinocchio Palin and Mendacious MccCain, used to buy a news cycle there or low-information vote there. It is the type of lie that is presented that speaks more to John McCain's character than five years in a prison cell ever did.
The ad accuses Barack Obama, a father of two young girls, of voting to teach kindergartners about sex. In shorthand, it paints Obama as a sexual deviant, one who thinks it is entirely appropriate to teach your doe-eyed toddler about condoms and contraceptives. The legislation was aimed at teaching children how to avoid sexual predators, but as this campaign season has proven time and time again, a well-sourced fact will wither in the face of an oft-repeated lie that is coddled by the media and echoed on the airwaves as truth.
So, welcome to today's Republican Party, where facts are treated like an Rorschach inkblot test. Where the benign is viewed as perverse and the perverse is viewed as benign.
Through the prism of this inverted ethical philosophy, it's completely acceptable to laud a presidential candidate who thinks rape is just hilarious and to cheer on a vice-presidential candidate who was mayor of a town that charged victims for rape kits. It's a party where a congressman can state that naked prisoners stacked in a pyramid and tortured is nothing more than "hazing", where Senators on a D.C. madam's list still are welcomed into the GOP with open arms, and where Representatives soliciting 16 year old boys are allowed to resign rather than be kicked out of the party altogether. What turns the stomach of normal society is not merely tolerated here in the confines of Pervert Central, but it is fully accepted in this circus. Here, above all, the abnormal is normal in the caucus of freaks.
But oh, the indignation! When a Democrat tries to protect children from a world of Mark Foleys, he is painted as a sex-obsessed deviant. When a party seeks to preserve choice, it's portrayed as wanting a society of one-night stands. When rational science supports a vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, the GOP sees a potion for whores.
Yes, folks, it is Democrats who are obsessed with sex and who are insisting on reaching into your bedrooms and your bodies. The Republicans? This Grand Old Party of pervert-protectors and sex monitors? This cadre of prudes who would rather have uninformed toddlers be molested, clueless teens knocked up, and uneducated Americans spreading STDs like fleas? Clearly, they are the honorable ones--the moral compass of our nation. They are nothing more than a parade of faux-Puritans marching back in time, waving banners of lies and singing smear chants along the way, twisting facts in the hot air that billows from their mouths, grinning stupidly from ear to ear, and reveling in their singular ability to beat the low drums of deceit without shame, day after day, until Election Day dawns.
Bob,
Earlier you wrote this: "It is quite amazing how much her enemies hate her because she is a woman." Then you linked a Kos post that doesn't reference Palin's gender once. What are you trying to prove?
Did you go to the thinkprogress link about McCain joking about rape? No mention of Palin. Did you go to the hazing link? No mention of Palin. If you disagree with Kos, that's one thing, but you said that Palin was hated because she is a woman and have provided no evidence to support your theory.
Bob wrote:
>>hate seems to be all over especially from certain blogs like the Daily Kos.
God this is stupid! You are supposed to be showing that "hate for Palin." You linked to a blog that talks about McCain! Did you think if you included a long link no one would read it and we would just think that you had offered real proof.
Really, Bob?
This women is enduring more hate than any other poltical figure who has ran for VP. It is quite amazing how much her enemies hate her because she is a woman. - Bobthep
Crap. She's been dishonest and a few people are calling her on it. Not many, and not enough, but some--and she DID lie about the Bridge to Nowhere. It is sexist to assume that any criticism of Palin is because she is a woman; it is, in fact, sexist to treat her any differently than we would any other candidate.
You mean by treating her like this?
Scathing attack on Palin by Dem chair
I don't think this is the way to win....
So a Democratic state chairperson made the point that the main reason Palin was chosen was her anti-choice position. I tend to agree with that idea, though gender was also a big factor. No man with her resume would have been chosen. There was no personal attack of Palin in her words.
You might also notice, that Democratic chair apologized for the phrasing of her criticism.
I don't like her because she repeats a false meme over and over and over about being against earmarks when she requested and received more earmarks per capita than any other state as governor and hired a lobbyist as a mayor. I don't like her touting her fiscal conservatism when she rang up a huge debt for Wasila. I don't like her touting ethics reform when she is in the middle of an ethics investigation that she misled her state about. I don't like claiming she's a maverick and trying to interfere with that same investigation. I don't like that she is against abortion for rape and incest even though Alaska is often near the top in rapes per capita:
http://www.hss.state.ak.us/dph/ipems/injury_prevention/akfvpp/bkgnd.htm
I don't like her because when she was mayor of Wasila, she thought it was ok to charge rape victims for their forensic exams:
http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2000/05/23/news.txt
I don't like her because she thinks Iraq is a quest from God. I don't like her because she slashed funding for teenage pregnancy. I don't like her because she belittled community organizers. I don't like her because while she charged windfall taxes against the oil companies in Alaska, she won't suggest it to McCain. I don't like her because she compared herself to Hillary Clinton yet has nothing but her gender in common with her. I don't like her because she said her daughter "chose" to have a baby when she won't let other women the same option.
What do any of those things have to do with her being a woman?
Wrong Bob, very wrong, I do not hate her but I oppose her.
Bob,
You have made three posts now claiming that Palin is hated so severely because of her gender and not provided any evidence of that. Yesterday, you posted a link saying that McCain was different than Bush and referenced the smear campaign in 2000 in South Carolina without noting that McCain hired the same people he blamed for the campaign merely weeks ago. I would be careful calling anyone an "idiot" unless your points get much, much stronger.
I was extremely surprised that on the Today show this morning, Andrea Mitchell (sp?) did point out that Palin supported the Bridge to Nowhere before it became a political liability. She didn't come out and say that Palin lied, but at least showed both sides of the flip-floppery.
And, somewhat off-topic but relevant to the Today show this morning, the hosts did not seem to be buying the spin that the lipsticked-pig comment was sexist -- going so far as to show McCain using the same saying.
That sounds like what David Gergen said. It was somehow a mistake on Obama's part because his critics are shamelessly dishonest or drooling idiots.
What was really odd about it was that Halperin (as noted here) dismissed it all as ridiculous. Also noted here, World Net Daily gave a more balanced, sensible poll than MSNBC. What the hell? Halperin has a sketchy history regarding right-wing bias, and WND doesn't even merit comment. It's almost as if the more mainstream sources are saying things just because they think they're supposed to say them, while more biased sources are saying even they're not buying this garbage.
Actually, Col., what I'm mostly seeing is people referring to people referring to the whole thing that way -- dishonest, but as a win for McCain.
I don't have access to cable news networks here at home, and only happened to catch the Today show because I overslept a bit, and our local affiliate of NBC has the best weather forcasts, in my opinion. Need to know where Ike's going...
I watch local news for just that, local news, and catch most real news online. Now and then I go watch some CNN or MSNBC with my parents so we can all yell at the TV, if I'm going by their house after work. :')
What I've seen is that anybody halfway credible has to admit that the McCain camp is full of crap, but they're all scoring it as a "political win" for McCain - Col. Harlan Sanders
Picture this ad: A quick set of clips of media figures describing this as a win for McCain. A voice-over saying something to the effect that "Have we actually sunk so low that a blatant lie is a political win? Let's hope not." Perhaps some scold of the media could be inserted.
The Obama would never even have to broadcast the ad. If they simply put in on their website the news shows would jump all over it broadcasting it. They wouldn't be able to resist that little bit of self-focus and self-analysis. Meanwhile, Obama's point about this phony issue would get free publicity and his point would be made.
Or maybe I'm being politically naive.
Well, Governor Palin, since you were against the 'Bridge to Nowhere', I guess you'll have no problem refunding the taxpayers' money for the project.
No?
That's what I thought. Palin was worthless as mayor, sucks as Governor and, IMHO, will ruin this country when Grampy McCain croaks while in office. This is, to me, the biggest reason to vote Obama/Biden '08!
Right now we are just being ripped off and ignored. Someone in office doing "God's" work and paying a lot of attention to us could be disasterous.
Maybe Palin will be the one to finally make use of the FEMA terrorist pins that have been constructed during the war. An empty pin is a worthless pin.
what did THEY do, when they had the chance? Voted for eskimo comfort and against homeless Katrina victims?
http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/
Have Obama and Biden lied about their votes, PC?
PC wrote:
>>Voted for eskimo comfort and against homeless Katrina victims?
You ought to be a bit more careful when you post. You linked to a right leaning blogger from the Chicago newspaper who said this:
Though Gov. Palin originally supported the earmark spending on the Ketchikan bridge (“to nowhere), she eventually killed the project, chosing to spend Federal money on other infrasturcture prog
Wow! Talk about dishonest. Why did Palin kill the project? Because congress didn't give her enough money to complete it! In a press statement, she lamented that she could not build the bridge, and criticized those outside of Alaska who demonized the project.
So let's sum this up: When the project was derided as pork waste, Palin was running for governor. She was in no position to tell congress no. What did she do instead? She voiced her support *for* it. This was after it was nationally derided. Then, when congress wouldn't completely fund the bridge, she lamented that it could not be built and criticized outsiders. She wasn't against it before, she wasn't against it after. But she is now running around the country trying to portray herself as some kind of reformer who refused federal money.
She is lying through her teeth.
Keep trying to dig up dirt on this amazing woman. She will not be affected by it. This is more proof that the Democrats are scared and don't know what to do about Palin. She represents everything "progressives" want for women but they can't stand the fact that she's a Republican who didn't literally trash her unborn baby in a way that would make Obama proud.