Ask Lesko!
Posted on 09/04/2008 4:35:59 PM PDT by Pharmer
It was a Speech to Nowhere when Palin said that "I told the Congress 'Thanks but no thanks' on that Bridge to Nowhere, because that was a lie, and the worst kind of lie in American politics, a blatant falsehood that showed utter contempt for the American people that Palin pledged to serve, assuming we are too stupid to look up or know that truth, that she pushed for those funds in Congress and while she got great political mileage out of announcing that she was killing the project, she still has not returned the funds to American people.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
I guess the author would prefer Obama’s “Bridge To Marxism”
The reporter is a lying sack of s*** - no money ever sent, nothing to give back.
Hold still, Mr. Bunch, while I wipe your chin.
Poignant question you raise ... my guess is that if DC did have such an office, it would have been raided dry within 2 seconds of said 'funds' being parked there
Hold on...dig far enough into the pile...you find a nigget of truth...
“National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.”
CONGRESS STILL SENT TH MONEY...
Hell...she be doing a diservice to alskans citizens not to take it for something besides the bridge..
Ask Lesko!
In other words “Thanks” for the money, “ but no thanks” to actually building the bridge to nowhere.
Hope this helps:
In opposing Senator Coburn’s amendment to defund the bridge, one prominent Senator told a closed-door meeting of conservatives that the plan was simply impractical. Many of the earmarks, he claimed, are counted towards a state’s equity bonus and thus are part of the state-by-state allocation formula. Defunding the bridge, he said, would direct at most $75 million to Louisiana, with the remaining $148 million returning to Alaska as money the state could use at its discretion for road projects.
Never mind that the Senator seems to view $75 million in taxpayers’ dollars as a sum of little consequence; what the Senator sees as a problem in fact would be a considerable benefit to Alaska. Assuming the Senator’s numbers are right, Alaska’s Department of Transportation would gain $148 million in money it could spend on the state’s transportation priorities instead of a useless bridge that would serve a tiny fraction of the state’s citizens.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm889.cfm
Before I flipped over to the full article, I knew that I would be seeing a furry faced, lib journalist.
I feel completely stupid but what is the bridge are they talking about. If I dont know what it is the normal John and Jane Doe wont know.
Come on......reporters these days are not expected to do any actual research! That might interrupt their time hanging out at the local coffee shop discussing who in town REALLY makes the best caramel macchiato.....
Sure, but the bigger issue here is did she use the grant to buy those hoop earrings?
Well said.
Will Panties-in-a-Bunch is more like it.
Hey Will! Put some ice on it.
Sarah: “I told the Congress ‘Thanks but no thanks’ on that Bridge to Nowhere”
Will Bunch: “...that was a lie, and the worst kind of lie in American politics, a blatant falsehood”
If she is lying I would like the Philly Daily News to publish a photo of the bridge - and I bet Obama would appreciate it.
If there is no bridge (and we know there isn’t) then they are lying.
We need to revive the old term “Yellow Journalism”.
Is that Olbermann?
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.