Literally the only thing bad about Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech was her assertion that “when the Federal government offered her the money. she said, “[T]hanks but no thanks.” Quite frankly, that is not true.Literally every newspaper and magazine article I have read points out the fact that Governor palin was “before it before she was against it.” Moreover, most of them not that she did not return the money. Consider the following article from the 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.
“We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge,” Gov. Palin said in August 2006, according to the local newspaper, “and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative.” The bridge would have linked Ketchikan to the airport on Gravina Island. Travelers from Ketchikan (pop. 7,500) now rely on ferries.
Again, this is from the Wall Street Journal, not exactly a member of the Leftist “Mainstream Media” that we all are so rightly up in arms about for being in the tank for Barack Obama.
But what really upsets me is not that Governor Palin said she was against the bridge in her acceptance speech. I still would welcome a fight between Obama and McCain on earmarks — even a debate between McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden — but let’s be honest about all of this. What I don’t understand is why she and McCain keep repeating it on the stump and even in their advertisements. Again, that claim is false. Why give the Obama campaign — and the press, but I repeat myself — to call them liars?
On the issue of reform, “change” and even earmarks, the McCain/Palin ticket still wins but sorry but on the “Sarah Palin and the Bridge to Nowhere” debate, they lose.