Sarah Palin, John McCain, Earmarks and "The Bridge To NoWhere".
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
United States
September 2, 2008 10:48am CST
One of the reasons John McCain claims he picked Sarah Palin, as his Vice Presidential running mate, was because Sarah Palin had opposed the building of the "Bridge To Nowhere" in Alaska.
Dubbed the “Bridge to Nowhere,” the bridge in Alaska would connect the town of Ketchikan (population 8,900) with its airport on the Island of Gravina (population 50) at a cost to federal taxpayers of $320 million, by way of three separate earmarks in the recent highway bill.
Well it turns out that Sarah Pulin wanted that bridge built and she did not oppose the building that bridge!
While running for governor in 2006 Sarah Palin backed federal funding for the infamous "BRIDGE TO NOWHERE". The Anchorage Daily News quoted Sarah Palin in October 2006 as saying she would continue state funding for the bridge. "The window is now, while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist," Sarah Palin said.
Sarah Palin also hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, known as "Earmarks", according to public spending records compiled by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste and lobbying documents. John McCain has said time and time again how much he opposed earmarks.
In my opinion these revelations show that John McCain didn't do a very good job checking into Sarah Palin's backround. It also shows that John McCain is not very good at managing his campaign.
If you look at the facts, it would seem that John McCain would oppose Sarah Palin.
It makes me wonder what was the real reason he chose Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate.
Lloyd
7 people like this
17 responses
@stibigirl (291)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Yes please everyone do your research and get the facts, don't forget about the huge McCain blunders and the big rip off of the Keating Five Scandal, they were five US senators accused of corruption as part of the bigger Savings and Loan scandal in 1989. One of these senators is John McCain. Don't put it past him to rip off Americans again, or his wife Cindy, her and her father invested with Keating and I doubt their money got ripped.
If Sarah Palin thinks that she can get the hearts of hard working pro-choice, religiously tolerant Hillary voters, especially here in California, then it is easy to see why she would fund a bridge to nowhere, she lives in la la land.
2 people like this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The five senators, Alan Cranston (D-CA), Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ), John Glenn (D-OH), John McCain (R-AZ), and Donald W. Riegle (D-MI), were accused of improperly aiding Charles H. Keating, Jr., chairman of the failed Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which was the target of an investigation by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB).
After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings. Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised "poor judgment".
John McCain may have been cleared, but he sure didn't come out smelling like a rose.
Lloyd
2 people like this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I believe that John McCain's POW status helped him get out of being prosecuted along with the other three.
If it were anyone else there would have been serious repurcusions.
All we have to do is look at the facts of the case and you'll see that John McCain wasn't an innocent bystander.
He was involved.
Lloyd
3 people like this
@stibigirl (291)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I have done my research and it does not change the fact that he was accused, or that his wife Cindy Hensley McCain and her father were invested with Charles Keating in the S&L scandal, sorry but it doesn't, please do more research, just because he got away with it doesn't mean he didn't do anything. I tend to not believe people who can't get their facts straight and flip back and forth on issues like McCain so often does.
Like this video, everybody has an opinion
http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/39179-mccain-s-youtube-problem-just-became-a-nightmare
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
2 Sep 08
LOL Yes it would be very interesting to know wouldn't it?
2 people like this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I've read that John McCain really wanted either Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge as his Vice Presidential choice but that Republican
pundits had been vocal in urging the presumptive presidential nominee not to pick a running mate who supports abortion rights.
This may have led to John McCain choosing Sarah Palin. If this was the case, then it shows who really runs the GOP.
Lloyd
2 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I have to disagree, lloyd. The reason McCain chose Palin is because I was PRAYING he would choose a conservative, pro life running mate and God heard my prayers. I guess that proves who is really running the GOP.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I read that as well. I have been doing a lot of reading on Sarah Palin since the conservatives are under the impression that she is just like McCain and walks on water. It is all very interesting, and maybe this will lead up to the "October Surprise" Guess we will see next month.
2 people like this
@mtdewgurl74 (18151)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I think he was to hasty in his decision, and if elected I hope that America doesn't have to shoulder the consequences of his actions.
2 people like this
@mtdewgurl74 (18151)
• United States
2 Sep 08
That's why you have to thoroughly do a good job so things doesn't come back and bite you on the butt
1 person likes this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
That's why I'm so impressed with Barack Obama's organization. They took their time and came up with a excellent choice.
Obama had a three-person team managing the vetting process that includes one-time first daughter Caroline Kennedy, former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder and Jim Johnson, the former CEO of mortgage lender Fannie Mae.
The vetters held meetings with several Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill to get their input.
There was little to no controversy after his selection. Everything went smooth.
In my opinion, Barack Obama is just the better candidate overall.
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@jillmalitz (5131)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I agree with James Carville. "How do you pick a running mate in a 15 minute phone call?". I am sorry, but I can't help but get irritated at all the "love" given to Mrs. Palin just because she is a mother with 5 children, one with Down's Syndrome and the other pregnant. I don't think she is qualified. Regardless of her family issues, what has she done on the national stage? Just think, we could have her as President. I find it funny how the Republicans are spinning her. Then again I saw a comment on Larry King saying she could be the first woman VP to be in prison. I don't see that happening but she does seem to have a "my way or highway" attitude. Where have we seen that before?
1 person likes this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
A series of disclosures about Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Sen. John McCain's choice as running mate, called into question how thoroughly McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.
Yesterday Palin and her husband, Todd, said their 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant and intended to marry the father.
Now we've learned that Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state's public safety commissioner.
She was also a member, for two years in the 1990s, of the Alaska Independence Party, which sought a vote on whether the state should secede.
Also. her husband, Todd Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.
Aides to McCain said they have a team on the ground in Alaska, "now", to look more thoroughly into Palin's background.
They "now" have a team on the ground! What are they going to do if they find some more dirt on Mrs. Palin? Would they dare remove her from the ticket?
In my opinion, this shows me that John McCain is not up to the task of being the next President of the United States of America.
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@jillmalitz (5131)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Yup! It smacks of a lot of questionable decisions of not only the people doing the background checks and hypocrisy of beliefs within the party itself. Open mouth, insert foot.
1 person likes this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I do hope you'll do as Obama said and leave the daughter out of discussions. That was the first smart thing Obama has said. Now if only people will listen.
Governor Palin has much more experience in leading than Obama does. There's no need to "spin" that. Being a mayor of a small town is not an easy task. (I followed one FL small town mayor around for a few weeks and found that out.) And leading a state - one with as many "foreign" issues (oil) as Alaska has - is also something far more impressive than Obama's "community organizing."
@rodney850 (2145)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Lloydanthony,
You are absolutely right that she did, in fact, tout the bridge in one of her campaign speeches for governor but not quite as emphatically as you would like people to believe. When she was elected governor she then was able to examine what building the bridge entailed. It was then she came to the conclusion that there had to be a more fiscally responsible way to connect the two communities. To this day there is 60+ million dollars set aside for just that project but these things take time and much, much research. This is something that your candidate, BHO, will learn IF he becomes president. Some things you think are perfectly clear to your mind from the outside looking in become very different from the perspective of the "man/woman in charge"! I hope you and all of the other Obamites aren't too disapointed when you realize that BHO isn't the "changemaster" you all thought he was(that is IF he gets elected)!
1 person likes this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I not sure who BHO is, but the candidate I support, Barack Obama has shown good judgement not after the facts, but before supporting something that is wrong, just as he did in oppossing the war in Iraq. He was right then and he was right now.
Here's what Barack Obama had to say in the year 2002.
"Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.
I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Queda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars."
I agreed with him then and I agree with him now.
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@rodney850 (2145)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Lloydanthony,
First; BHO= Barack Hussein Obama!
Next; BHO was a spectator in 2002 not a US senator! Yes, he may have been an Illinois senator but in the perspective of being "in the know" about what was happening in Iraq and the intel which caused the congress to overwhelmingly vote to authorize force he was in fact just like you and me, basically, a nobody! For BHO to (and I type BHO not to irritate you but as a timesaver)arbritrarily say "I was against the war" without FIRST being in the position of actually making the decision to vote yea or nay(something I might add he has a habit of avoiding by just pressing present)is simply ludicrous! I would venture to assume that he would have either voted on the intel which would have told him force was needed or he would have been true to form and just voted present! That is just as correct as for BHO to say he was against the war without ANY information but what he could read in the papers or see on TV!
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Regardless if Barack Obama was a Illinois Senator or a United States Senator, he was right opposing the war in Iraq. The majority of the American people and people throughout the world agree with him.
And he has been right on many of the other issues facing the American people.
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@savypat (20216)
• United States
2 Sep 08
One does wonder what McCain invisions Sarah Palin's position in his administration, Usually, not recently, the VP doesn't have much influance in
the administration. Maybe McCain just wanted someone too inexperienced to
get into trouble in Washington DC and yet has enough backbone to stand up for herself. If things work out time will tell.
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
The Vice President has played a more important role during the last 2 administrations.
So the choice of a Vice Presidential candidate is becoming more important.
If I'm not wrong, I also believe that the Vice President has the deciding vote if there is a tie amongst all the Senators.
You maybe right though. He may have thought that since she has no Washington connections, it may have been a safe choice.
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Personally, I think it's about time we have someone in a position like this who HAS NOT been Washingtonized. And whose only real interaction with Washington has been to go up agains the good ol' boys - fighting.
@rogue13xmen13 (14403)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I see McCain and Palin's campaign as "The Bridge to Nowhere". He chose her without even really knowing her. He really did not think things through when he picked her for a running mate.
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
2 Sep 08
I suppose it was not only that she had experience as a governor but she was a rare bird, a woman who is not pro-abortion, but pro-life. So you want someone who does not object to the killing of babies inside the womb? I guess I know where you stand. As for that Bridge to Nowhere, did Sarah Palin know that the bridge was going to be no good or did the one who proposed it fool her as well?
I would think that John McCain did not have much choice, he had to do something unusual in choosing a vice=President.
Obama was the first part white part black running for president. And for him it was easy to choose a vice-president, someone who was pro-abortion like him.
McCain did something unusual, he could have chosen Huckabee, but as you know, when one thinks of pro-life one thinks of men because they do not bear babies, but women they do. So he chose Sarah Palin.
@mcat19 (1357)
• United States
3 Sep 08
I know it is very hard for you to understand and probably comes as a complete shock to you, but no one is "pro-abortion." What we are is pro-choice. We care who makes this intimate, personal choice for us. We don't want it to be government bureaucrats; we want it to be the woman, her family, her doctor and her G-d, not John McCain nor Sarah Palin. I can't believe you are so foolish to believe that any woman takes the decision to abort a fetus frivolously; it is not an easy decision at all.
John McCain has said that he likes to make decisions quickly. Even if the decisions are wrong, he will stick by them and deal with the consequences. Didn't we do this already with "the decider;" twice is more than enough.
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
2 Sep 08
McCain said in a recent interview that he's been watching her career for years and that he's admired her for a long time.
So what does THAT say? I think that says he lied on purpose, instead of a mistake like most people who like him will say.
_ I agree though, I don't think he has a particular talent for managing his campaign. And you know, people who look at the facts about him and what he does often make this comparison: "It's McCain vs. McCain"
1 person likes this
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
2 Sep 08
^_^
I don't know, its hard to say what this choice will do for him. I think it does have the potential to make or break his campaign, but its rather hard for Palin to work that well for him without him coming off as totally fake...or despertate for Hillary supporters.
@revdauphinee (5703)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Q) the real reason he chose Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate
A) she is female !He feels this will sway the hillary vote ! senator MC Clain this woman is no Hillary Clinton
1 person likes this
@revdauphinee (5703)
• United States
2 Sep 08
well this is one woman who wont be voting for him!
2 people like this
@revdauphinee (5703)
• United States
2 Sep 08
kenzie45230 (then hon don't bother cause my vote canceled out yours )and there are thousands just like me if you want more of the same vote for mc Cain (NOT ME!)
2 people like this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
2 Sep 08
That's doubtful that he thought she would grab the Hilary votes. Actually, from the reports I've read, both parties have been worried about a faction that they don't usually worry about at all. The group I'm in. 50ish women. They don't have to worry anymore. McCain/Palin is my choice.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
2 Sep 08
I'm so glad you started this discussion highlighting Palin's stance on the "Bridge to Nowhere" and earmarks because while it's been brought up in some other discussions it's been totally ignored or overlooked by the right here. There's one thing for sure these two have in common which their supporters sure won't own up to and that's being flip-floppers! It's incredible that, as you've stated, McCain could make a decision such as who to be his VP, who could become President at any given moment with the likelihood here much great than usual given McCain's age and cancer history, based on one meeting and apparently with very little vetting. They're in Alaska NOW, is that a hoot or what???
Do you recall as I do during all the hoopla leading up to Obama's VP announcement how many times it was said by various commentators and pundits that this would be Obama's first major decision and how it would be an indication of his judgment capabilities?I think Obama passed that "test" with flying colors but it's McCain that, in my opinion, deserves either an "F" or an "Incomplete". I think McCain's real reason for choosing Palin was as my brother said - he wanted to pick a woman, ANY woman, and it had to be an anti-choice woman as dictated by the far right who still do and I suspect always will run the party.
Of course, I know this will be seen as an attack against Palin and there will probably be accusations of sexism, but in truth I almost feel sorry for her because she's simply being used by McCain as a token, a symbol of, "See, we're the ones to put a woman on our ticket".
Annie
1 person likes this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
3 Sep 08
As you know it's impossible to accept such a high position and not be investigated. You may have pulled one on John McCain but she didn't fool the rest of us.
Of course they are going to ignore it or overlook the facts because they can't deny them.
I've listened to many conservatives who believed John McCain made a bad decision. His choice of Sarah Palin indicates his judgement capabilities. Many Republicans wanted Tom Ridge, Joe Lieberman or Mitt Romney.
I can't wait to hear them spin their way out of this one.
Lloyd
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Perhaps Mrs. Palin opposed the bridge at first and then later decided it would be a good thing for her state and supported it. Everyone hopes their governor will be doing what is best for their state and she had an 85% approval rating from Alaskans as their governor so most of them must have been in favor of the bridge. Building a bridge anywhere else in the USA would not be questioned with so much scrutiny. Additionally, I think it would impossible to find a running mate with whom one had been in agreement 100% of the time on all issues. The news I have been reading on the vetting of Sarah Palin for McCain's campaign indicates that he sent a team of lawyers and other officials into Alaska some time ago and they quietly investigated her, her family and her politics before McCain chose her to run on his ticket. Palin served six years as mayor of her city and two years as governor of her state, and was on the city council for two years prior to her tenure as mayor. That is 10 years of government experience, 8 of which were served in executive capacities.
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Building a bridge connecting a town (population 8,900) with its airport and and island (population 50) at a cost to federal taxpayers of $320 million, would have been under intense scrutiny.
Could you imagine if a democrat politician had proposed something like this?
Take a look at this video to see how rediculous this proposal was.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6q__0-krUo
Once again, in my personal opinion, John McCain didn't do a very good job in vetting Mrs. Palin. No matter how anyone tries to put a spin on this, Mrs. Palin wanted that "Bridge to Nowhere".
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Sarah Palin was very much for the bridge and insisted that Alaska had to act quickly—the party of Ted Stevens and Don Young might soon lose its majority, after all.
By that point, the project was endangered for reasons that had nothing to do with Palin. The bridge had become a national laughingstock, Congress had stripped away the offending earmark, shifting the money back to the state's general fund, and future federal support seemed unlikely.
True, after Palin was sworn into office that fall, her first budget didn't allocate any money for the bridge. But when she was asked on December 16, 2006, if she now opposed the project, Palin demurred and said she was just trying to figure out where the bridge fit on the state's list of transportation priorities, given the lack of support from Congress.
Finally, on September 19, 2007, she decided to redirect funds away from the project altogether with this sorry-sounding statement.
Lloyd
2 people like this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
2 Sep 08
You do know, Lloyd, that it was her predecessor who tried to arranged for this bridge, right? The one she went after for being corrupt?
1 person likes this
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
2 Sep 08
It seems that there are a lot of skeletons in Sarah Palin's closet, lloydanthony, but they are being revealed one by one. My thought is that McCain might possibly come to regret his choice for a running mate if things continue to go the way in which they are going. Mrs. Palin may be qualified to be the head of a state government, but I think she falls far short of being qualified for the second in command.
1 person likes this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
There are more skeletons than I could have ever imagined. And it does seem as if they are being revealed bit by bit.
I say John McCain on the news today and he seemed very frustrated when questioned about his VP choice.
This was his first major decision and it seems as if he screwed up.
Only time will tell.
Lloyd
1 person likes this
@suruchi86 (1873)
• India
3 Sep 08
Sorry, I am not able to comment on this issue, as I am from India. But I can assess from your argument that one thing for sure, politicians are politicians everywhere in the world. Whatever language they are speaking, whatever getup they are wearing, whatever actions they are taking, everything is for achieving their personal goals only, be it at the cost of taxpayers or sometimes even at the cost of nation. Still you are lucky to be a resident of America. We, Indians, are suffering lot more in the hands of these mean politicians.
1 person likes this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
2 Sep 08
The decision to ask Governor Palin (her correct title) was not done in the last few days. I heard that she was a possibility almost 3 months ago and started researching her then myself. Yesterday, I ran across a blogger who mentioned her as being a possibility as far back as last November.
In my research - of newspaper articles and interviews - it's been reported that she said no thanks to federal money and that if Alaska needed a bridge, they'd pay for it themselves. The idea of a bridge is not a bad one (I had a friend in Ketchikan who said they really need it...no matter how few people there are), but the original design and amount of money needed from the federal government were not what she thought Alaska needed.
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
If Governor Palin was being considered almost 3 months ago, then why are so many people on the Republican side saying that wasn't the case.
If she was being considered that long ago, maybe he should have had her by his side instead of Joe Lieberman. Why so secretive?
You'll never convince me that the "Bridge to Nowhere" is needed. That money can be better put to use repairing bridges that are falling apart all over the United States, just like the one that fell down in Minnesota.
Lloyd
2 people like this
@baileycows (3665)
• United States
2 Sep 08
Well I dont know much about her but it doesnt take much to beat Obama. So McCain nor Palin could be as bad as him so who cares?
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
3 Sep 08
Why do you say that? Please be more specific. Do you really feel that John McCain will beat Barack Obama so easily?
Many people do care. The last 8 years have been nothing less than a disaster for the American people.
I care.
Lloyd
@tamarafireheart (15384)
•
2 Sep 08
Hi lloydanthony,
Well now, I am at lost with all that, I don't really understand the US politics so I cannot coment on it, sorry,
Tamara
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
2 Sep 08
The political season here in the U.S. can be very complex. We are about to make one of the most important decisions in our lifetimes.
It's important that we get all the issues facing both candidates out in the open so that we can make the best choice.
Lloyd
2 people like this
