Comments on: This is not a political post about Sarah Palin

By: Scroop Moth

Scroop Moth — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:00:39 +0000

Even after she cancelled the Bridge to Nowhere, Palin defended the project as worthwhile and denied it was pork. She blamed the cancellation on “inaccurate portrayals” of the project and false “perceptions” of Alaska. In other words, she still didn’t get it that the bridge was a bridge to pork.

Report comment to moderator

By: Scroop Moth

Scroop Moth — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 19:53:06 +0000

When she became governor and the question of earmarks became an acute national issue, she saw that Alaska was in a wrong, embarassing position and changed her view.

That’s not a reformer, it’s an opportunist. The mountain moved Mohammed.

She formally turned down the Bridge to Nowhere .

She cancelled the bridge after it became a subject of scorn (and after spending money on prep work), but kept the federal money anyway.

You in a rather typically crude way may call this a “lie;” I should say it’s a valid point of view.

The lie — the campaign’s and yours — is the claim that Palin cancelled the bridge because she had been against earmarks and pork. The lie is the effort to turn her hypocrisy into a virtue. The fact that everything in politics can be stated otherwise doesn’t cure your claims of cynical deceit.

Report comment to moderator

By: Anlir

Anlir — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:35:58 +0000

It is entirely laughable to claim that Obama hasn’t been or isn’t currently being “checked out”!! First of all, the McCain/Palin campaign has a full-time “war room” that is going through his life with a fine-toothed comb for even a hint of wrong doing. Second, there’s also all of the “under-cover” RNC groups that are checking him out. Thirdly, one can find information posted on here daily about every facet of his life (good and bad).

Gov. Palin, on the other hand, is being hid from the media and the vetting of the American people.

Report comment to moderator

By: God

God — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:02:15 +0000

She changed her mind, [her spokesman] said, when “she saw that Alaska was being perceived as taking from the country and not giving, and that impression bothered her and she wants to change it. … I think that Sarah Palin is someone who has the courage to reevaluate situations as they developed.”…

So you would characterize her as a flip-flopper? She voted for it before she voted against it? In 2008 is it good or bad to be a flip-flopper? I always forget which years it is bad.

Report comment to moderator

By: donna j

donna j — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 02:28:09 +0000

Kwerna (#167): Yes, hobbies and decaf!

Playing fetch with border collies always makes the world seem a lot better to me. That and knowing that God still reigns, no matter who wins or loses this election.

Rejoice.

Report comment to moderator

By: Peter Leavitt

Peter Leavitt — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:33:10 +0000

Moth, when she was the mayor of Wasilla and a candidate for governor she felt and argued that it was in the town’s and state’s interest to take advantage of earmarks. When she became governor and the question of earmarks became an acute national issue, she saw that Alaska was in a wrong, embarassing position and changed her view. She formally turned down the Bridge to Nowhere and took severe criticism from the Alaskan political establishment for this. She changed her view well before McCain took an interest in her.

The Hot Air blog put the matter as follows:

McAlister said he was unaware of the details of Wasilla’s earmarks. But, he added, “As mayor of the city, her charge was very different than it is now. She’s obviously taking a much broader look at things as governor.”

You in a rather typically crude way may call this a “lie;” I should say it’s a valid point of view. Another of your risible crudities is the Nixon with lipstick bit. I know it’s difficult to find your gaseous and thinly accomplished candidate under effectively withering criticism from this able lady, though you would do well to get a grip on the reality that she has energized the conservative base in this campaign and bids fair to swing a plethora of independent voters to McCain. The polls are already making this clear.

Report comment to moderator

By: NJLawyer

NJLawyer — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:05:11 +0000

Anlir wrote of Palin: “Second of all, there are many questionable things in her life that are actively being discussed and checked out as we speak.”

There are many questionable things in Obama’s life and no one checking them out. The MSM already knows them and is keeping them on the QT.

Report comment to moderator

By: NJLawyer

NJLawyer — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:02:13 +0000

Scroopy wrote: “I happen to think that unfair scrutiny is better for democracy than no scrutiny.”

So, one wonders why we hear all the objections to scrutinizing Obama!

He also writes: “As I predicted above, Richard M. Nixon in lipstick will go up before the formidable Charlie Gibson. How terrified the McCain campaign must be!”

You know, you are the same guys who mocked this woman before her speech and she prevailed there, so I don’t think we’re all that terrified.

Report comment to moderator

By: Kwerna

Kwerna — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:29:31 +0000

Some of you people seriously need to get a hobby.

Report comment to moderator

By: Scroop Moth

Scroop Moth — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 23:59:27 +0000

Palin sold the plane at a loss, with questionable financial benefit to Alaska. A loss is not technically the same as a profit, pumpkin. Alaska used the plane heavily to transport “outsourced” prisoners to the lower 48, and still needs to pay for aircraft flight hours.

Unfortunately, PUMPKIN, your deceitful misdirection about the bridge to nowhere amounts to lying. Gov. Palin thought she was doing a good job when she was getting pork for Alaska. She tried to get as much as she could while Republicans controlled Congress. In Sept. 2006 she went to Nowhere and smilingly held up a sweatshirt that said “NOWHERE ALASKA 99901″ and told a forum there: “OK, you’ve got Valley trash [herself] standing here in the middle of nowhere. I think we’re going to make a good team as we progress that bridge project.” Running for governor she bragged about her support forall of the proposed bridges to nowheres in Alaska (there were two others besides). Palin cancelled the Ketchikan bridge in late 2007 after Congress had turned the earmark into a joke. Nevertheless, she kept the money and persisted in defending the justification for the bridge against “inaccurate portrayals of the projects here.” Her office said she cancelled the bridge because of “perceptions” that Alaska was piggy for pork. Those are not the words of a budget hawk she falsely portrays herself to be.

Up until the forced cancellation, Sarah Palin did her best to out-pig anyone else in the porkiest state of the union.

You’re lying, Peter.

Report comment to moderator