Again, the point is that Palin was supportive of the bridge—in fact, she probably still supports the idea of linking the two points; she was not campaigning to get federal funds for the project. When it was clear that the state could not fund the project without state funds, she cancelled it. I don’t see that position as flip-flopping, contradictory, hypocritical, or anything of the sort.
I agree - she probably did want to see improved access to the airport located on the island, but with respect to the bridge plan offered up by Ted Stevens, she evaluated the project, considered the costs and potential funding sources, realized it was WAY too expensive, and made a reasonable, fiscally-conservative decision to kill the project. Ted Stevens’ comments in the WAPO article I cited support this conclusion as well.
I would like to see Sarah deal with this issue directly, though, and hopefully soon...it has legs on the blogosphere and I’d love to see her lay the smack down on the frenzied smear merchants about this.