Posted on 01/16/2007 9:35:04 AM PST by Hildy
I'm saying report the truth. The bridge was being talked about for a long time. It didn't come out of Harry Reid's imagination.
How was your 15 minutes of fame?
Then pay for it yourself.
Hannity has been known to stretch things. But don't blame it on Fox News in general. I doubt seriously if Roger Ailes personally approved the reporting.
I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. My point was not about the pork, which I have been against from day one. I let everyone here know about it when it first happened and said it was wrong for any local projects to be in that bill. So why can't they report it like that? Why do they have to report it like politicians are stuffing their pockets with imaginary projects. I don't like any news media lying about something to back up their agenda. Fox News is guilty on that end.
Reid also stands to directly benefit financially from the bridge, since he owns land on the other side. The Dems had no problem saying that Denny Hastert was going to benefit from Illinois Highway dollars. So this is just a dose of their own medicine.
As others have said, if the bridge is that vital, states can come up with the funding.
I agree with you 100%. It was the way it was reported that was wrong. That's all I'm saying.
If it is so wonderful why pay with federal dollars?
Why bury it in the bottom of a must pass bill?
Fox News isn't the only one reporting this angle:
Will the pork stop here? Reid pledges change, but he pushed funding that may benefit him.
By Chuck Neubauer and Tom Hamburger, Times Staff Writers November 13, 2006
WASHINGTON Incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vows to make reform of congressional earmarks a priority of his tenure, arguing that members need to be more transparent when they load pet projects for their districts into federal spending bills.
But last year's huge $286-billion federal transportation bill included a little-noticed slice of pork pushed by Reid that provided benefits not only for the casino town of Laughlin, Nev., but also, possibly, for the senator himself.
Reid called funding for construction of a bridge over the Colorado River, among other projects, "incredibly good news for Nevada" in a news release after passage of the 2005 transportation bill. He didn't mention, though, that just across the river in Arizona, he owns 160 acres of land several miles from proposed bridge sites and that the bridge could add value to his real estate investment.
-snip-
But some Bullhead City property owners and local officials say a new bridge will undoubtedly hike land values in an already-booming commuter town, where speculators are snapping up undeveloped land for housing developments and other projects. Experts on congressional spending say Reid's earmark provides yet another sign of the need for reform.
And there is the issue in a nutshell. Regardless of what FNC or anybody else says, these people really start to sweat when the $$$$ is threatened.
During the Hannity piece, they showed a reporter driving the highway to the "gridlocked" bridge during "rush hour". It appeared almost deserted. Maybe a relief bridge could help on Sunday afternoon to accomodate the tourists crossing from AZ to the NV casinos, but other than that, there doesn't appear to be any great need.
No,,,,It was Hannity.....
He is always over the top on a lot of issues, and FOX is not responsible for his flawed analysis, any more than CNN. This is how Hannity gets his audience.
Let Hannity explain himself.
"Stop it all then."
AMEN!!! AMEN!!!Stopping all pork barrel spending is fine with me as well. I live in Tucson Arizona and we just spent 32 million dollars on a bridge that rips the undercarriage off your car when you go over it. The schmucks that built it used a little 2 foot wide pile of asphalt to ramp cars up and down onto the bridge. Put another way. The bridge is 4-6 inches higher than the pavement leading up to it. Hitting the bridge at 40 miles an hour will jar the teeth right out of your head and scare the sh*t out of you. 32 million dollars? Please. I think I've had my fill of bridges. As with the NEA's (both of them), Post Office, BATF, DEA and all other bureaucratic sinkholes I'm tired of having my money removed from my possession when I have no say in how it's spent.
Defend our borders and nation. After than leave all spending to local and state governments.
JMHO
Supposedly the camera was there during "rush hour" and it did show a nearly empty bridge.
Here in NM some of us are fighting the same battle of our tax dollars being spent unwisely -- Bill Richardson is spending 390 million plus for a railroad to do what the adjacent interstate does. The interstate is clogged at times but instead of widening the four-lane highway built in the 1960's with a speed limit of 65-75 mph, he's spending big bucks for the RR that maybe a couple of thousand or so will use each day and they still have to transfer to buses to get to their destination and will take longer than driving by car, even with "gridlock". Special projects for special people paid for by all of us.
I have said this before. WE ALL FEED AT THE GOVERNMENT TROUTH. Those so-called conservatives that want their wallets and no government involvement don't really want that. They really want what "they" determine to be fair expenditures of tax dollars.
"Build it yourself..."
It may be apocryphal but I was told that the first bridge was paid for by Don Laughlin. True or not?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.