Is Sarah Palin lying when she says she turned down the Bridge to Nowhere? Or is this person lying about lying?
It's a fact that no one thought to deny that Palin killed the Bridge to Nowhere--including the Alaska Democrat Party--until she became a vice presidential candidate. In other words, there was consensus that she killed the Bridge to Nowhere.
In this post, John Hinderaker quotes the Anchorage Daily News from March 12, 2008:
Palin ruffled feathers when she announced - without giving the delegation advance notice - that the state was killing the Ketchikan bridge to Gravina Island, site of the airport and a few dozen residents.
Was the newspaper lying as well when it described Palin as having killed the Bridge to Nowhere?
Worse yet, both Obama and Biden voted for the bridge rather than give the money to hurricane relief (see this Powerline post).
This lying is getting more and more common on liberal blogs as they get more desperate. The Delaware Liberal post I linked to gets worse:
Obama has not asked for any earmarks this year, while Palin’s government has asked for $197 million for 31 projects. That is down from previous years — last year she asked for $254 million (and this does not count any of the earmarks asked for directly by Alaska communities or organizations, which she has no veto power over), a 22% reduction. But this still leaves Alaska at the top of the earmark heap, per person (approaching $300/person) vs. Illinois (who got $25 in earmarks per person).
First, Obama hasn't spent enough time in the Senate this year to ask for any earmarks, since he's been running for president for 19 months. But before that, Obama has requested $740 million in earmarks for Illinois, including $1 million for the hospital where Michelle Obama works. Those glass house dwellers should stop throwing stones.
Second, while the author argues that "per person" expenditures is a standard measurement for determining which state gets the most, it is a particularly disingenuous measurement considering the population of Alaska (670,000) versus Illinois (12,831,970). A more accurate measure would be which of Obama's fundraisers got the taxpayer money.
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama tried to direct more than $3 million in taxpayer funds to a Chicago museum whose chairman is one of the Illinois senator's largest campaign fundraisers...
The planetarium's chairman, then and still, is Frank Clark, chief executive of ComEd, a unit of Chicago-based Exelon Energy. He has pledged to raise more than $200,000 for Mr. Obama's run for the White House.
I enjoyed reading Delaware Liberal for some time, but as the election has tightened, the posts have gotten more shrill (The kicker for me was their series of strawmen posts analogizing 9/11 with various scenarios. The finale was so insulting that it gives "nutroots" new meaning). I expect more of the "she's a liar!" attacks, but even the sites they link to no longer favor Obama. The shine is off that Obamessiah for sure.