Seriously, How Can You Guys Continue To Ignore the McCain/Palin BLATANT LIES?

[Brassmask]

Cantor Defends McCain’s Lie By Lying: Palin ‘Rejected The Monies’ For The Bridge To Nowhere

On MSNBC today, Norah O’Donnell asked Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) if Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was misspeaking or distorting the facts when he falsely claimed on “The View” today that Sarah Palin never asked for an earmark as the governor of Alaska. “The proof is in the pudding,” replied Cantor. “And the fact is Sarah Palin, when she was governor of Alaska, rejected the monies that came from Washington to construct the Bridge to Nowhere.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hR35jiRDjg

Cantor also claimed that “Palin rejected the earmarking that went on here in Washington,” but, as ThinkProgress noted earlier today, in her two years as governor, Palin “requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation.”

Transcript:

    O’DONNELL: Let me ask you about, John McCain was on “The View” today with the ladies of “The View” in New York, also along with his wife, Cindy McCain. McCain said in that interview that Sarah Palin, his running mate, the governor of Alaska, has never asked for lawmakers pet projects as governor. But in fact as governor she requested $200 million in earmarks. Did he misspeak or did he distort?

    CANTOR: No, you know, I think the proof, the proof is in the pudding, and the fact is that Sarah Palin, when she was governor of Alaska, rejected the monies that came from Washington to construct the Bridge to Nowhere. She has said repeatedly that Alaska did not need that money, they did not that bridge, and if they ever need that bridge, they will build it themselves.

    O’DONNELL: Congressman, are you saying that she sent the money back to Washington? Is that what you’re saying?

    CANTOR: No, I think Sarah Palin has said that she does not think it appropriate for federal tax payer dollars to be used to construct a Bridge to Nowhere.

    O’DONNELL: I just want to be clear on that because she did initially support the Bridge to Nowhere then she said the bridge was not a good idea. But she did not send the money back to Washington, so I just want to be clear on that.

    CANTOR: Well, again, transportation dollars flow to the states and are then allocated according to state formulas, state priorities. I believe and do not know, though, that the Bridge to Nowhere was not a priority for the Alaskan people and therefore I don’t know how Alaska then distributes it’s money. But I think it’s very clear that Governor Palin rejected the earmarking that went on here in Washington, which really did not reflect the will of the Alaskan people.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/12/cantor-palin-bridge/





On ‘The View,’ McCain Falsely Claims Palin Never Requested Earmarks As Governor Of Alaska»

Appearing on “The View” today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) falsely claimed that Sarah Palin never requested earmarks as the governor of Alaska. “Not as governor she didn’t,” McCain told Barbara Walters after she noted Palin “took some earmarks”:

    WALTERS: What is she going to reform specifically, senator?

    MCCAIN: Well, first of all, earmark spending, which she vetoed a half a billion dollars worth in the state of Alaska.

    WALTERS: She also took some earmarks there.

    BEHAR: A lot.

    MCCAIN: No, not as governor she didn’t, she vetoed…

    WALTERS: As Mayor.

    MCCAIN: Well, look, the fact is that she was a reform governor.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc10INQmBwQ


McCain’s claim that Palin never accepted earmarks as the governor of Alaska is divorced from reality. In fact, she actively sought them:

    – Though Palin did reduce Alaska’s earmark requests, “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.”

    – In March 2008, Palin wrote an op-ed in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, saying that her “role at the federal level is simply to submit the most well-conceived earmark requests we can” and that her reduction of requests was a response “to the changing circumstances in Congress.”

    – In February 2008, Palin’s office sent Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) “a 70-page memo outlining almost $200 million worth of new funding requests for the state.”

    – In her most recent earmark requests, “Palin requested millions of federal dollars for everything from improving recreational halibut fishing to studying the mating habits of crabs and the DNA of harbor seals.”

As ThinkProgress has noted, Palin has requested earmarks of the very type that McCain routinely mocks while on the campaign trail. As Walters pointed out, Palin was also a big fan of congressional pork as the Mayor of Wasilla, even hiring a lobbyist to help secure them.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/12/mccain-palin-view/

[BT]

So where is the lie?

The bridge isn't built.

It wasn't built on her watch.

The monies were diverted.

Besides when did you dems get all uppity about earmarks?

Obama voted against anti-earmark legislation.

[sirs]

So where is the lie?

Really.  If its so "blatant", where the hell is it??

[Brassmask]

You guys are way out there now.

[BT]

You guys are way out there now.

That is a non answer.

[sirs]

Now, "57 states" was pretty blatant

[Brassmask]

Palin "bridge to nowhere" line angers many Alaskans


ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain's vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called "bridge to nowhere" has upset many Alaskans.

During her first speech after being named as McCain's surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress "'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere."

In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere," political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska's Congressional delegation during her run for governor.

The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians' pet projects.

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.

"People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I'm for this' ... and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting," Weinstein said.

Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment.

National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.

Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.

The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.

In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.

"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.

Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, a Republican who represented the Kenai Peninsula city of Homer, is also critical about Palin's reversal on the bridge issue.

"You don't tell a group of Alaskans you support something and then go to someplace else and say you oppose it," said Phillips, who supported Palin's opponent, Democrat Tony Knowles, in the 2006 gubernatorial race.

A press release issued by the governor on September 21, 2007 said she decided to cancel state work on the project because of rising cost estimates.

"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said in the news release. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here."

(Editing by Daisuke Wakabayashi and Sandra Maler)


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN3125537020080901?sp=true

[Brassmask]

You guys are totally in support of Strategy over Substance.

McCain/Palin is blatant lying to your faces and calling bullshit "ice cream" and you guys are polishing your spoons in anticipation of the next bowl.

It's really pathetic.

And every response to this post so far as been a diversion or an attempt to change the subject.

Enough is fucking enough, guys.

[sirs]

So we've gone from an accusation of "blatant lie" to an op-ed about some people's anger.  We ever going to see this "blatant lie"??

[BT]

Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation.

Stopped the bridge to nowhere. Where's the lie again?

[Brassmask]

Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation.

Stopped the bridge to nowhere. Where's the lie again?

You've all become obsequious caricatures of yourselves.

She "stopped the bridge" but took the money.  AK ranks Number One with a bullet in earmarks, some of which Palin herself hired a lobbyist to go and get for her.

She's a liar, so is McCain, so was Bush and so are all of you.

It has gone so far beyond tragic and funny that I'm thinking we need a whole new word for what you guys are now.  Pathetic doesn't even touch it anymore.  Its like Bush has weened you on lies, dodges and obfuscation so much that you can only feed now on those very things only.

[BT]

So are you saying earmarks are a good or bad thing?

[Brassmask]

So are you saying earmarks are a good or bad thing?

Did Palin support the bridge to nowhere or not?

[fatman]

AK ranks Number One with a bullet in earmarks

Alaska ranks number in earmarks per capita.  A lot of this is probably due to it having the smallest population of any state, even smaller than Rhode Island, and yet it is by far the largest state in the nation in landmass.  Small states don't need as much federal money due to both existing infrastructure and the smaller geographic area, large, rural states such as Alaska are bound to need more.  I detest earmarks and am certain that there is a better system out there, but to misrepresent the earmark/federal money issue to make a political point for your chosen candidate is dishonest.

[Brassmask]

AK ranks Number One with a bullet in earmarks

Alaska ranks number in earmarks per capita.  A lot of this is probably due to it having the smallest population of any state, even smaller than Rhode Island, and yet it is by far the largest state in the nation in landmass.  Small states don't need as much federal money due to both existing infrastructure and the smaller geographic area, large, rural states such as Alaska are bound to need more.  I detest earmarks and am certain that there is a better system out there, but to misrepresent the earmark/federal money issue to make a political point for your chosen candidate is dishonest.

I definitely disagree that its dishonest.

Is Alaska number one in earmarks per capita?   Yes.  I agree.  It is.  It is number one.

What is dishonest is how McCain/Palin are painting themselves as the holy rollers of reform when Palin has been nothing but supportive of her earmarks and has actively lobbied for them.  If you want to talk about dishonesty.  Let's talk about it but at the very least, could you on the right try to have the common courtesy of having a passing acknowledgment of reality?

That'd be a good place to kick things off.