AP: We will get Palin, oh yes, even if we have to make stuff up

AP ( Jennifer Loven):

FAIRFAX, Va. – Republican presidential nominee John McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, equated lawmakers’ requests for funding for special projects with corruption on Wednesday even though Palin herself has requested nearly $200 million in so-called “earmarks” this year.

Palin has sought $197 million worth of earmarks for 2009, down about 25 percent from the $256 million she sought in the 2008 budget year.

A fantastic response from E D Kain::

This ignores two facts. First of all, she’s not the only one in Alaska requesting Federal funds. Other politicians there, just like everywhere else, request them as well. In my home state of Arizona, I know for a fact that our current Republican Congressman Rick Renzi was quite good at the earmark game–and his ability to get Federal dollars would never be accredited to our Democratic Governor. Renzi is a cheat and a fraud and is likely going to jail soon for his corrupt dealings–should that be pawned off on our Governor as well?

And second, Governor Palin has indeed cut back Federal funds and earmarks for her State.* In 2005, Alaska received $705 million dollars in earmarks, according to the Federal Government Office of Management and Budget. As the article quoted above clearly states, in 2009 Alaska is only requesting a total of $197 million in earmarks, while in 2008 they received a whopping $256 million.* According to Government statistics, this puts it pretty close to many other States, far below some like California or New York or a number of others, though certainly above others.

The important thing to note is how dramatically the number has fallen since Palin took office.

So let’s see, in 2005 Alaska was receiving $508 million dollars more in earmarks than it will be in 2009 under Governor Palin–and she’s not even working for the Federal Government! Her job is to get money for her State–it’s the job of Congress to cut wasteful Federal spending. Yet even so, she has cut Alaska’s earmarks into less than a third as many.

AP Continues:

As mayor of tiny Wasilla, Alaska, she hired a lobbyist to seek federal money for special projects. Wasilla obtained 14 earmarks, totaling $27 million, between 2000-2003, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

I’ll just let ABC debunk that one.

Palin routinely claims to have put an end to Alaska’s infamous “bridge to nowhere,” even though she supported the project during her gubernatorial campaign and turned against it only when it became a national embarrassment and Congress threatened to cut its funding.

Bottom line, she put an end to it. Congress never threatened to cut the funding, they threatened (and ultimately followed through) not to earmark it for the bridge. In the end, Congress appropriated the money for her to use the money as she saw fit and she CHOSE not to use it for the bridge. So the statement “I killed the bridge to nowhere” is 100% true. Even the Democrats admitted it.

Palin has claimed that she put the governor’s jet on the Internet auction site eBay, and McCain has said it was sold at a profit. However, the jet was never sold via eBay.

Wow, wow, wow. What an intentionally misleading statement. Gov. Palin said she PUT IT on Ebay, which is true. She never said (or implied) that it sold on Ebay, because as she was very aware, it didn’t. It ended up being sold to a private individual. McCain mistakenly thought that it had sold on Ebay and said so. But how does this qualify as joining “other statements by the vice presidential nominee that have been widely debunked”?

Palin says she eliminated the governor’s chef from the state budget, yet she gave the person another job in state government.

Unbelievable, completely unbelievable. Palin said that the position of chef to the governor (herself) was unnecessary, so she cut it. The chef ended up at the legislature, where a chef is necessary and useful (instead of serving 7 people, she serves hundreds). In addition, that position does not benefit the governor and is paid for from the legislature budget, not the governor’s. She serves there at the behest of the legislature. So as is obvious to any impartial observer, Sarah Palin cut a perk that she could’ve rightfully kept to save the taxpayers of Alaska money.

By the way Gov. Palin never said that “she eliminated the governor’s chef from the state budget”. Here’s the quote from the convention speech “And I thought we could muddle through without the governor’s personal chef – although I’ve got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her.” Which part of that statement is incorrect?

Ms. Loven, you are entitled to your opinions, but please don’t report them as facts.