The campaign, surrogates and blogosphere are all screwing up the Bridge to Nowhere Story

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

The fact that Palin was "before it before she was against it" is not of much interest.

This is the typical tit-for-tat, day late dollar short Dem idea of "fighting back." (We internalize everything Republicans do and treat it is magic... they said that about Kerry, so it must be a devastating line of attack!)

The reason the public has a problem with the Bridge to Nowhere is that it represented federal taxpayer's MONEY.

Palin says "We said thanks but no thanks for the bridge to nowhere. If Alaska wants a bridge we will build it ourselves."

The unmistakable implication is she declined to accept a certain parcel of federal taxpayer financed MONEY. (And that if she "stopped the bridge to nowhere" that stopping it somehow benefited federal taxpayers... that we spent less money as a result.)

The myth being spun is that Palin is like some Gary Cooper character, too proud and self-reliant to take federal charity/pork and who would pay for the bridge with her own money if she wanted a bridge. The implied act of declining cash is what is recognized as principled. Nobody ever turns down money! That would represent an amazing commitment to fiscal austerity if Alaska had actually said "thanks but not thanks" to the MONEY.

Declining money is an ACTION. That's what makes it such a potent political symbol.

But it never happened. She never declined any money.

So the outrage in her statement is not that a politician might have changed her position.

The outrage is that Alaska kept every penny of the bridge to nowhere money.

Federal tax payers did not save one penny. That's a FACT. Every cent of the Bridge to Nowhere money was taken by Alaska and spent on other stuff.

As a matter of practical politics that is the damning element of the issue.

[geek tragedy]

1. It undermines her credibility.

Take away her credibility from the get-go, and there's nothing.

Besides, Democrats won't have much success running against federal spending.

[OneGrassRoot]

2. Yep. That's what's most damning. K&R n/t

[imax2268]

3. some chick...

that looks like a Q-tip is blabbering about the bridge now on MSNBC...Nancy something...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

23. !

[NatBurner]

4. I noticed that this morning- "she kept all of the money" should be the

exclamation point, the coup de gras, so to speak-

no one is using it

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

6. As was famously said in another context, "Follow the Money"

[Pacifist Patriot]

5. Could not agree with you more. So she's a liar. Most people will shrug and say...

"aren't they all."

Follow it up with, "and then she takes our tax money and runs" is what makes an impact.

[Teaser]

7. I think you're phrasing is *better* but I dont think

that Dem phrasing is "fuck up". It's just not as sharp as it could be.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

9. Repeating the "for it before she was against it" line is an error, not just in-artful.

I think is actually hurts... it reintroduces the atmospherics of the bummer election of 2004 and carries the implication that "everyone does it."

If "everyone does it" then why vote for Obama?

And in the public mind (which does keep close track of who said what about whom), isn't Obama saying that the essense of the "old politics"? (Everyone knows that line is typical politics because they heard it word for word a thousand times in 2004.)

It's a kind of attack that knocks as much chrome off of the attacker as the recipient.

[Zenlitened]

12. Excellent OP and follow-up post here. - n/t

:dem:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

19. Thanks. "Palin is as bad as John Kerry" is just not a winning argument.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

24. dupe n/t

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. PS: In light of your comment I changed "fuck" to the somewhat less inflamatory "screw"

Mentioned in case any later reader noted the mismatch.

[ErinBerin84]

8. agree.

[kernelfarmer]

10. Agree 100% (nt)

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

13. This also ties in nicely with the chef she claimed to fire who was just reassigned

also resulting in NO NET SAVINGS.

Also, where's her credibility when she bills per diems for nights spent in her own house at her own choice. She could be living in the Governor's mansion (I think - need to check that point)

She left her formerly solvent town 22 million in debt and without basic services like sewer system, etc.

She also obtained the biggest amount of pork per capita in the country for Wasilla while she was mayor.


Anyone seeing a picture here? I am and it has nothing to do with saving either Alaska or federal taxpayers a dime.


This whole image is a house of cards. I think all these points could be tied together in one ad.

[Shanti Mama]

14. This is exactly what has been bugging me since she began her

"I said no" barrage. She KEPT THE MONEY. Your and my hard-earned tax dollars.

[Overseas]

15. So when she was governor, she didn't build the bridge but she kept all the money?

The oil rich state kept all the Bridge to Nowhere money when other states needed it so much more?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. Yup.

[SeaLyons]

16. EXACTLY....

I've been screaming at the tv for days now saying "SHE KEPT THE MONEY"

[Buck Rabbit]

17. You are correct. I keep hearing the "flip/flop" instead of "she kept the money."

[Window]

18. K/R.

:kick:

[Skwmom]

20. And according to K.O. spent some of it on the road to nowhere.

[AuntPatsy]

22. Its just so easy to turn the table on their faux outrage...I just wish it was as easy to ensure

the media was fair and balanced more than for one moment each day..

[depakid]

25. The story is PLAIN AND SIMPLE -she's a liar

and used her 1st opportunity in front of the American people to tell a whopper.

[sandnsea]

26. Yep Yep.

They're both outrageous. But the fact that she pretends to turn down federal money, when she doesn't, has always been the story. And the fact that she actually kept that bridge money is even worse than flip-flopping on it.

I do have to say I said this all along. :)

[kennetha]

27. I'm sorry this is a total loser for us. I can't see the point

She did axe the bridge, because it was going to cost her state - of which she is the Chief Executive -- too much money. Congress offered her a pig in a poke. She turned it down eventually. Who wouldn't want a governor to do that?

Are we arguing that she was bad as a governor, a bad stewart of her State's finances because she refused to accept what turned out to be a federal pig in a poke?

Are we arguing that she was bad as a governor because she took the Fed's money and used it for something more productive? Is our argument that states should never receive any kind of assistance from the Feds? THat would be pretty astounding.

I think we're going for a quick hit here and losing sight of larger issues. This isn't going to damage her or McCain.

Keep the focus on the real things that will decide the election. Not this kind of silly stuff.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

28. We are arguing that the central predicate of her candidacy is a flat lie

[ObamanationYes1]

29. I agree with you

but I got blasted on another thread. There is so much more to cover. Plus Obama and Biden voted for this, so I would rather just LEAVE IT ALONE!

[amborin]

30. but the central theme of the Bush admin is LIES, LIES, LIES

rethugs don't care

exposing the Palin lies may not be enough

the rethugs just view it as bashing their girl

we need to go after both McCain and Palin

expose their true policies, their corruption, lies, and show the implications for ordinary americans

we need to show how UNDEMOCRATIC they are

[Blue Diadem]

31. Is it legal to accept federal money designated for one project and use it for

something else? Does anyone know? It seems money approved for a project and not used should have been returned to the federal government.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

32. Yes, it was legal. After the bridge died the same earmarked money was appropriated as discretionary

Yes, it was legal. After the bridge died the same earmarked money was appropriated as discretionary hwy funding.

The point, message-wise, isn't that she did something illegal.

It is that she did the opposite of what her catch-phrase implies.

It's like if your parents offered to buy you a car and you said, "screw that, I want the cash instead." And then went around bragging about how you had saved your parents money.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

33. UPDATE: David Schuster got it just right. Actual Dem surrogates should follow suit

In a fact check story he emphasized that Alaska took all the money, and mentioned it twice.