THE LIE TO SOMEWHERE! Sarah Palin told Congress nothing. Today, she tells voters a lie: // link // print // previous // next //
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2008
THE LIE TO SOMEWHERE: Even after all these years, its maddening to watch the career liberal world try to debunk blatant deceptions by conservatives and GOP pols. Could liberal and Dem leaders be more inept? Frankly, its hard to imagine.
We refer to Sarah Plains recent claims about her vast political greatnessabout the way she told the Congress to take that bridge and shove it. Because our side is so inept, Palin has felt free to offer variants of this statement in her appearances with McCain:
From that statement, citizens get the idea that Palin high-mindedly told Congress to pull the plug on that much-derided bridge projectto stop wasting all that tax-payer money. That isnT close to what actually happened. But your career liberal player are simply too dumbtoo undisciplinedto explain it. And so far, the mainstream press hasnt done better.
Duh. Palin was elected governor in November 2006. One year earlier, in November 2005, the bridge to nowhere earmark ceased to exist. The New York Times ran a news report by Carl Hulse under the headline, Two 'Bridges to Nowhere' Tumble Down in Congress. (There had actually been two bridges to nowhere, though one had gotten the bulk of the mocking publicity). Heres how Hulse began:
Palin had nothing to do with this act by the Congress, which occurred thirteen months before she took office. (Palin was elected in November 2006, took office the following month.) But this congressional action, in November 2005, cancelled the original earmark, which had directed the state of Alaska to use those particular federal funds to build that particular bridge. Under the terms of this new act, the state would still receive the fundsbut the state could now use the money as it pleased. It could use the money to build the bridges. Or it could spend it on something else.
Again, this all happened thirteen months before Palin became governor. And lets make it very, very clear: Congress stopped playing a role in this matter that day, in November 2005. From that point on, no one had to tell Congress anything about the Bridge to Nowhere, because Congress had removed itself from decision-making about the project. Congress had stopped directing how those funds should be used. In November 2005.
Two years later, in September 2007, Palin finally decided to use those funds for other state projects, not for the Bridges to Nowhere. But this had absolutely nothing to do with telling Congress anything. With her baldly deceptive, self-glorying statement, Palin is making voters think that she somehow stood up to the Congressput a stop to their wasteful spending, told them to take their bridge and shove it. In fact, she did nothing of the kind. As best, shes baldly misleading the public. At worst, shes lying through her teeth.
Sorry, but Palin told Congress nothing at all about the Bridge to Nowhere. Today, shes telling the public a lie, about her own moral greatness. But this is the way our brightest liberal site explained this latest act of deception. The post came complete with a snarky headlineand with a bungled explanatio0n of the way this story works.
Go aheadreview the ineptitude shown in that piece. Multiply that by sixteen years, and youll know why its been so easy to lie about Democratic candidates why it has been so easy, for all those years, to disinform regular voters.
THE TIMES BUNGLES TOO: Speaking of those mainstream journalists, the New York Time tries to untangle this story today, in a news report by David Kirkpatrick. Unsurprisingly, the Times bungles too.
Account of a Bridges Death Slightly Exaggerated, says the headline in our biggest, dumbest newspaper (our emphasis). But Palins account isnt slightly exaggerated. Her account is simply wrong on its basic claimthe claim that Palin told Congress what it could do with the Bridge to Nowhere.
Lets review: In the key part of Palins self-glorying statement, she pictures herself telling Congress thanks but no thanks about the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, she did nothing of the kind. Kirkpatrick includes some minor details which seem to highlight Palins disingenuity on this matter, right through her gubernatorial race, when the best way to spend those federal funds had become a state-level issue. But in this passage, he fails to grasp the key fact which drives this whole storythe key fact which makes Palins claim an act of deception, not a slight exaggeration:
But there was no Bridge to Nowhere earmark in October 2006, when Palin was campaigning for governor. As Hulse explained in real time, the earmarkthe direction to spend federal money to build the bridgehad been already cancelled. The state of Alaska still had a big pot of federal moneymoney it could spend as it pleased. But the earmark for the bridge had been killedmeaning that no one, including Palin, had to tell Congress anything.
Sarah Palin told Congress nothing. Today, shes telling the public a lie. But the liberal world is too dumb to explain this. And the mainstream press? Readers! Must you ask?years?