Obama/Biden portray Palin as flip-flopper

The NY Daily News has the details.

(I’d say something about the pot, the kettle, and black, but I’m sure someone would screech I’m being racist again.)

The article talks about Governor Sarah Palin supporting the “Bridge to Nowhere” until it became obvious the bridge was an unpopular example of pork-barrel spending. Then she decided against it. An Obama add accuses Palin of lying about her record. Not true. Palin did say no to the bridge. Reading “the writing on the wall” is exactly what a politician SHOULD be doing. To ignore the graffiti is to ignore an important measuring tool.

Leadership demands a fluid response to important issues. Palin showed political skill by stopping the bridge.


  1. Yes, Palin did the right thing by refusing all that money. Or not.

  2. Two things you’re not considering here. First, in her speeches she tacitly implies that she was always against the Bridge to Nowhere. The truth is that she sought out earmarks of this type and had even hired a lobbying firm to get them. Secondly, she kept that earmark money for the Bridge to Nowhere and used some of it to build the road leading to the Bridge to Nowhere. That road now leads Nowhere. If she was serious about his disdain for earmarks, why did she not simply return the money? That would be saying “Thanks but no thanks”. In essence, she said to the American taxpayers “Thanks suckers – I’m keeping your money”.

  3. hoggernick says:

    The original poster of this thread says “Not true. Palin did say no to the bridge.”

    How do you sleep at night? You know this is very misleading. Do you people mislead yourself into all your decisions, or just your political decisions?

    1. she lobbied for the bridge
    2. her connection, Ted Stevens, got the bridge inserted into a bill as an earmark
    3. she got the $223 million for the bridge
    4. The shit hit the fan in the US Senate over the bridge
    5. The bridge project got canceled
    6. she KEPT the $223 million of taxpayer dollars, that were paid in by residents of all 50 states, not just Alaska
    7. people like you prop up all of the above as evidence that she’s a real fiscal change agent

    What am I missing here?

  4. Larry Knetzger says:

    First of all , you have to understand Alaskan Politics, roads in Alaska are built this way because of the strong Maritime Union that want’s no roads. Now if you can’t understand that then you won’t understand the bridge to now where and the highway to no where. That is how roads get built in Alaska. They also work in the rain up there because of all the bad weather they have. The Maritime Union is death to roads because it will kill their hauling business on the high seas. End of Story, Palin is very smart and has done the right thing for Alaska. Just getting the funding is a challenge much less getting it built.

  5. Larry — that’s fine and dandy. I’m sure Alaska’s infrastructure needs are different that those of the lower 48 and Hawaii. That’s not the issue here though, you’re deflecting away from the real issue — dishonesty. It’s dishonest to imply that you consistently were against something, that you were actually in support of until it became unpopular to support this thing. It’s also dishonest to imply that you’re a fiscal change agent, when you kept the $223 million anyway. Great for the income of Alaska, terrible for the expense on the Federal government of all 50 states.

  6. Folkbum, how like you to point to another Democrats editorial opinion as gospel.

  7. I wasn’t misleading at all. She didn’t build the bridge. I have heard she kept the money, but have not been able to document that fact or how it was used.

    You didn’t exactly document anything either, John and hoggernick.

  8. Cindy, you can and should make any relevant comment that you want about Obama or anyone else. Yes, the Obama followers will yell that you’re a racist if you say anything negative about him. They have no other defense on these issues. For you to state something that is racist, you have to be stating something or making your opinion based on his race rather than on facts. His own supporters make most of the racist comments that I see. Most of comments are accusations that someone else is a racist because he/she does not support Obama. I also hear many who have been stating that they support and will vote for Obama because he is black. That is racist.

    Now for a question for all readers to judge. This statement is from the book, “From Dreams of My Father”. It states, “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”

    See this and other raciest comments from Barack Obama’s books at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ownwords.asp. Go to this link, it’s a good read and everyone needs to take a look maybe then they will understand what racist comments are.

  9. I’m sure glad Comrade Barrack and Uncle Joe Biden both voted for the bridge and didn’t flip-flop.

  10. Larry Knetzger says:

    Hoggernick, there was no dishonesty on the part of Palin and the bridge. The maritime union is a lot like the Democrats, they want everyone beholding to them and kiss there feet for a job. Really some of the strongest lobbyists of all. Will do anything to keep highways out of Alaska. She did the right thing , fight fire with fire. The maritime union stinks out loud up there. I have a friend who is now retiered from the Alaska Highway Commission and he has stated in no uncertain terms to me that what she did was a pure miricle, no way dishonest. My friend worked up there for over 30 years and what she has done in the two years she has been there in it self for positive results is getting rave reviews by her population. She has the savy to be able to get something done over all the moldy oldies in office with a strong eye on getting rid of the dirt. Alaska gets very little of the federal dollars for roads because of the Mritime Union. There citizens deserve the cash flow that was generated by her sucess in smoking the Maritime Union. Go Palin, Go. She is a real scraper in the corners like all good hockey players. She can take a hit and come out with the puck and forget about retaliation and go for the goal, name of the game.

  11. JeffN – The Politics of Pigment. It’s a shame for one’s positions to be based on pigment. We all have a different shade from light to dark. Too bad MLK’s words about character over pigment are not heeded.

  12. I haven’t seen any actual evidence that Palin lobbied for the bridge. She really wasn’t in the position to, being Mayor at the time. Yes, I’ve seen comments that she was “for the bridge (as Mayor) before she was against the bridge (as Governor) and at least to some extent, that appears true. Ted Stevens got the earmark, then it basically got handed to Palin after she became Governor. Show me a politician that hasn’t accepted money one tosses in their lap.

    Yes, the poop hit the rotating device..in the same house (Senate) that authorized the earmark in the first place. What was Biden’s vote on the spending bill (Obama was nowhere D.C. at the time, so that record doesn’t exist)?

    Though the “Bridge to Nowhere” seems like such a blasphemously improper use of funds, it does appear things (road building) are done a bit different in Alaska. Why would it even be on Ted Steven’s agenda? I think that’s worth some review.

    John McCain has long denounced earmark spending which is typically used to buy votes to an overall spending bill. I’d love to see a line-item veto power for the Prez, but the Constitution would have to be modified to allow it.

    I really think the Republicans missed that opportunity as well as others when they had the “Contract with America”. Reagan championed the idea and it went nowhere. The more recent Rep controlled Congress/Senate have acted like kids in a candystore under GW.

  13. Leapin – yes, Biden and Obama, and every other of the 100 Senators voted for the bill, with the exception of one — Evan Bayh (D). It was the 2005 transportation bill, and without its passage, transportation funding stops. That’s why earmarks are so despised, because they tack bad things onto really big good things in an attempt to sneak them through the process. Those that tout “Biden and Obama voted for it!” are either completely politically ignorant, or they’re knowingly being disingenuos and biased.

    The issue is not that Senators pass big transportation bills that have earmarks. When senators such as Ted Stevens quit inserting earmarks into big bills, the problem will be much closer to solved.

    To John McCain’s credit, I don’t think he’s been very big on earmarks. He criticized that Alaskan governor at the time, if I recall correctly. Her name escapes me.

  14. I may have goofed on my timeline above (no way to edit)

    Gotta go, so feel free to flame me….or gently correct me. 😉

  15. Cindy, how about Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal? “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.”

  16. a lot of hores pucky says:

    Dang its all about money and screw those right or wrong. Lets win, win, and win at what ever the cost of the fools, let it happen. Shame on you good right wingers and blind followers of the great illusion. The wheel will turn and you might get to feel it’s full impact. Besides, it’s “ok” to lie at what ever cost. Any way God told me it was his will. Good God, what people to justify there need to fill there desires of power and greed. You will need more than God’s help if McCain is elected. Pallin is a token.

  17. Yes it’s all about money and power. For all 545 people who have control in Washington. I just don’t think the solution is electing a socialist. You can read B.O.’s own book , his own words, to know how deep his ties to socialism are. Maybe he has never studied history, probably due to our poor educational system and those with agendas to rewrite and to downplay America’s positives. Just look at his eductaion in geography, another neglected area (i.e. “the 57 states”, “New Pennsylvania”).

  18. Jeff N. – thanks!

    I read Obama’s first book a couple of months ago and put excerpts on this blog. Frankly I was appalled by how racist Obama writes in that book.

    I agree with you completely.

  19. hoggernick says:

    Leapin – I think it’s 535, not 545. We have 100 senators, two from each state. We have 435 congressmen/women, apportioned based upon population (I believe). I assume that you probably just made a simple error in recollection. If you really didn’t know how many representatives we have in the legislative branch, that’s not really a big deal either. It’s not like people are dying because of a little mistake like 545 vs. 535.

    Anyway, about your concluding point, Obama’s “57 states” confusion. Now THAT’S a big deal. A harvard law grad, president of the harvard law review, constitutional law professor at Univ. of Chicago, for him not to know there’s 50 states, we really need to dig into that. Put the fully-conscious lies that Palin and McCain repeatedly say aside, and lets got to the bottom of this. Somebody needs to ask Obama how many states he REALLY thinks there are. Don’t let him count the other territories in which he campaigned and participated in primaries in, because that surely wasn’t what he was thinking.

    It’s amazing how you people won’t deal with event he smallest factual detail of your precious republican candidates, yet you’ll clinch onto minute and clearly irrelevant details surrounding non-republicans.

    Regarding this thread, she’s a “flip flopper”. Period. And you know it. She’s claiming that she’s a reformer, because of the bridge, yet she supported it, wanted it, and kept our money for it. As if you’ll even acknowledge it.

  20. hoggernick – Dude I think if you add in the supreme court you will be close. For a historical context of the double standartd on nitpicking. See Quayle, Dan.

  21. hoggernick says:

    Leapin – ok. Add nine more. You can call it 600, I don’t care. It’s not anything worth nitpicking. Nor is the spelling of tomoato(e). I wasn’t in on the Quayle bashing. I voted for the guy. I voted for republicans almost exclusively back when they were the party that was able to scrap together a somewhat coherent argument that they were the party for fiscal responsibility.

    I also believed in Santa and the tooth fairy at one time. I grew out of it though. I saw the err of my ways. I admitted to my friends and family that I was an idiot in November 2000 when I voted for GWB. Give it a few years, you may come to your senses too. Don’t say you weren’t warned though. My friends warned me in 2000 — I now refer to them as “my smarter friends.”

  22. hoggernick says:

    Cindy — I’ve never gotten around to this, but I’ve been meaning to. Thanks for the site. I found it when poking around for Anne Kilkenny, and am glad I did. It seems to have a broad mix of participants, and doesn’t seem to apply censorship to opposing views. It’s much more educational and fun than posting on sites that censor, or are near-100% liberal.

  23. How about fully-unconscious lies. B.O. says he wanted to join the military. I wonder if he ever wanted to be an Alaskan woman?

  24. hoggernick – thanks. I’ve even been letting some language slip through in the comments rather than pull them. I have pulled a couple of pingbacks this week because I couldn’t verify them, but that’s about it.

    We need to talk this stuff out. It would be swell if we could get to some truth. Maybe we need to start a page of FC resolutions – stuff we all agree upon once we hash it out!

  25. Leapin – that reminds me. Do you think that military statement was B.O.’s jump over the shark? I’ve never heard anything so pathetic!

  26. hoggernick says:

    Next bullet-point on the “distractions from Palin’s lies” — Obama’s military ponderings as a 17yr old boy.

    What 17yr old boy doesn’t consider the military, what with recruiters visiting high schools? I considered it, and quickly decided “screw that! I’m going to college.” Maybe I’m missing something, but did he lie about something? Did he not consider the military? Is it bad that he didn’t go into the military, and went to college and became civil-rights expert instead? Is becoming as educated as possible on the constitution of our country an unpatriotic endeavor now?

    In case nobody mentioned it, Palin is creating a lie of omission when she solely implies that she’s been against the $223M bridge to an island that benefits 50 Alaskans, paid for by the taxpayers of all 50 states. It’s only $223M though, chump change for you rich republicans. You ARE all rich, right? Surely it’s not one of those “top 1% of the economic class yanks 50% of the country’s chains based on wedge issues” kinda deals, is it?

  27. Cindy – I would say it an obvious attempt to “be like John S McCain”. Notice he implies that he wanted to go into combat because he says he saw no reason to join after the conflict was over. Therefore, no way he could also be a POW (g). Of course, there was also an outpouring of support for the troops this week. And although it won’t be reported a lot of those troops have spent too much blood, sweat, and tears for it to be wasted on the defeat strategy that he is associated with and are not happy. He is really going to have to jump a giant shark in the coming weeks to overcome his socialist connections and Biden’s negative, for America, foreign policy record.

  28. hoggernick – I agree. I have never said that GWB is fiscally responsible. He isn’t by ANY measure. He is also not a conservative in my book for this and other reasons. The current financial situation of the country is very scary. It calls for a spending scrutiny that hasn’t been seen in decades. If B.O. is elected he will be my president and I will support him if he uses his gifts to do good things for America. But those are big ifs.

  29. Hoggernick says:

    Fair enough Leapin. I think we’ve found common ground – America’s finances are in a shambles.

  30. Hoggernick – you’ll need to prove that there were 50 residents who would benefit. My research showed 14,000.

  31. Cindy,

    Here’s a recent study that surveys the locals as to Gravina Island access.

    Note: it doens’t account for tourists…just locals.

    I think what one can see, is Gravina Island/Ketchikan/Airport access is still an issue. The debate is, the best way to solve it.

    I don’t know the details, but Palin “chose” to improve ferry service over building the bridge.

  32. Ah, I see. I was using an article that combined the borough and the city.

  33. I’m not aware the study mentions population.

    At the end, there’s a link to Alask DOT relating specifically to Gravina Island Access. As you can see…this isn’t a “done deal”. Theyre looking at this issue pretty hard.


    BTW…I don’t see this new road to the bridge to nowhere which some insist Palin had built/is building. Any info to that request has not been forthcoming.

    Hey, if nothing else, we’ll know a lot more about Alaska, eh?

  34. I did read where the road was being completed because it provides access to new development opportunities. (And we all know how important more consumption is to our economy!)