Captain Earmark: Palin can’t just reinvent herself on earmarks
posted at 4:30 pm on September 8, 2008 by Allahpundit
I’m at a loss, and not just because I already wrote about this on Saturday. Not only does this tool inexplicably insist on stoking the inexperience comparisons to Palin by attacking the bottom of the ticket; not only is he hopelessly compromised on this subject, in stark contrast to McCain; but he also cynically “reinvented” himself a few months ago as an earmark reformer after spending years carving off chunks of pork for his buddies and moneymen. What’s next? A press conference with Wright and Pfleger at Trinity to knock Palin’s church for being “eccentric”?
Well, how about Gov. Palin? She’s you know, an up and comer from Alaska. She – they’re starting to run an ad now saying she opposed the bridge to nowhere. Well now, let’s get the facts clear here. When she was mayor, she hired a Washington lobbyist to get earmarks – pork barrel spending – all the things that John McCain says is bad, she lobbied to get! And got a whole lot of it. When it came to the bridge to nowhere, she was for it until everybody started raising a fuss about it and she started running for governor and then suddenly she was against it!
You remember that? For it before you were against it? I mean you can’t just make stuff up. You can’t just recreate yourself. You can’t just reinvent yourself. The American people aren’t stupid.
So saith The One, after having spent the better part of three months recreating and reinventing himself on issues great and small. Exit question one: If the Democrats think Palin’s record on the bridge to nowhere is a winner, how come they’re flushing webpages about it down the toilet? And exit question two: What’s with the patronizing “up and comer” language? That’s the second time he’s tried to diminish her in a week.
Update: I linked this in a previous post too but it bears repeating: Which party’s ticket can boast not one but two people who supported the bridge to nowhere? Hint: Not the GOP’s.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
{But I can!}
{But I can!}
{But I can!}
{But I am! Uh… No… Wait… Uh… As I’ve always said…}
Loxodonta on September 8, 2008 at 5:43 PM
Well, Barry, from where I stand, she’s a “here and stayer” and you’re a “down and leaver.”
rrpjr on September 8, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Obama’s 2006 earmarks also included $1.2 million to ACCESS Community Health Networks for mental health services in the “underserved” minority areas of Chicago. ACCESS is a partner in the Urban Health Initiative with University of Chicago MC.
MonicaZ on September 8, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Young Barry O’Bama is simply proving the truth of his resume, in front of our eyes, day after day: he’s a rookie who is in over his head. He might have made a nice VEEP choice for Hillary, and maybe that’s how it was “supposed” to go.
As much as I dislike him, I can honestly imagine him running as Hillary’s VEEP and maybe even doing OK. Maybe he can too, and that’s why he keeps running against Sarah Palin.
labwriter on September 8, 2008 at 5:50 PM
From today’s Wall Street Journal:
“But Gov. Palin’s claim comes with a serious caveat. She endorsed the multimillion dollar project during her gubernatorial race in 2006. And while she did take part in stopping the project after it became a national scandal, she did not return the federal money. She just allocated it elsewhere.
“We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge,” Gov. Palin said in August 2006, according to the local newspaper, “and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative.” The bridge would have linked Ketchikan to the airport on Gravina Island. Travelers from Ketchikan (pop. 7,500) now rely on ferries.
A year ago, the governor issued a press release that the money for the project was being “redirected.”
Why is this one issue such a big deal? Sen. McCain’s anti-earmarks stance has been paramount to his campaign. The Arizona senator has blamed everything from the Minneapolis bridge collapse to Hurricane Katrina on Congress’s willingness to stuff bills full of pork barrel spending.
As such, Gov. Palin’s image as a “reformer” is part of the storyline the McCain campaign needs to compliment the top of its ticket. Her quip about passing on the bridge and “building it ourselves” has been a staple of her stump.
……
At a rally today, Sen. McCain again asserted that Sen. Obama has requested nearly a billion in earmarks. In fact, the Illinois senator requested $311 million last year, according to the Associated Press, and none this year. In comparison, Gov. Palin has requested $750 million in her two years as governor — which the AP says is the largest per-capita request in the nation.
jim m on September 8, 2008 at 5:51 PM
I sense his cockiness is waivering.
TheSitRep on September 8, 2008 at 5:52 PM
Who is handling this guy, this is like Christmas everyday. Under our tree is a little package…we open it and out pops a little gift.
This is a guy who had earmarks of $1 million per day he has been in the senate…$1 million per day.
Thank you DNC for giving us Obama…the candidate to nowhere.
right2bright on September 8, 2008 at 5:52 PM
Exactly Barry.
You’ve been asking for and receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks in your brief Senate career. Last year alone, you requested nearly a third of a Billion dollars in earmarks. But suddenly (now that you’re running for President), “you’re the champion anti-earmark person,” saying that you will not ask for earmarks in 2009, and saying the earmark system needs to be reformed.
That’s not change. Come on!
AZCoyote on September 8, 2008 at 5:53 PM
What’s with this ear-mark/capita garbage? As if individual citizens of a state received proportionate amounts of state project money.
Aylios on September 8, 2008 at 5:57 PM
No need to remind Yankee fans of those dark days.
DeweyWins on September 8, 2008 at 6:08 PM
Is the old saying “the pot calling the kettle black” racist? Just wondering.
jjjen on September 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM
From another thread, on the way Drudge put it – hilarious
Entelechy on September 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM
Well, in O’s defense, the Dem’s aren’t running against McCain; they already had him beat. Now they have to run against Palin and it has them all cluster-#$@*ed.
trailboss on September 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM
EVERY SINGLE SMALL MUNICIPALITY IN THE U.S. (INCLUDING SUBURBS)are forced to pursue earmarks (i.e. federal $$ in the form of matching funds, etc.) Every municipality (including Wasilla, Alaska, when Sarah was mayor) have personnel devoted to pursuing these types of revenues. Why has this become necessary/obligatory? Because our municipalities and suburbs send FAR MORE tax collars to Washington, D.C. than they ever get back. The vast majority of these tax dollars go to the big urban areas. Hence it’s a constant battle for survival, literally.
Don’t believe me? Call ANY mayor’s office of any small/medium size city ANYWHERE in the U.S. and he/she will confirm actively pursuing (begging for) federal $$ has become absolutely essential.
alwyr on September 8, 2008 at 6:16 PM
As a Govener Palin’s role was different. She had no power to give herself earmarks, only congress could do that. So if she asked for federal money that is a bit different than underhandedly sliding it into unexamined legislation. That’s what Obama actually did was sneak money from the Taxpayers for his own political advancement.
And once again Obama is running as Vice-President. So I say let the left have two Vice-Presidents. We’ll take one of each thanks.
petunia on September 8, 2008 at 6:16 PM
One question I keep asking myself watching Obama hit the earmark talking points relating to Sarah Palin…. Isn’t she supposed to be supporting earmarks for her state as the chief executive of that state? I mean, as Governor, her one and only constituency is Alaska… so one would think that the more she can haul in for her only constituency, the better. The problem with folks in federal government doing the earmark dance is that they not only serve the constituency in their districts, but are part of a larger body tasked with representing the whole country.
It seems to me the more Obama snipes about the Alaskan Governor doing the job she was elected to do in that office, the more experience he thrusts in her lap… while simultaneously trying to argue that she lacks experience.
Texas Rainmaker on September 8, 2008 at 6:23 PM
“the up and comer” term refers to how hype and publicity makes a politician important
whereas in previous days it was actually doing something worthwhile politically that made one politically important
i didnt read the comments sorry if this was already hit upon
saL on September 8, 2008 at 6:34 PM
ok, the bring to nowhere. what actually happened?
Mercy4Me on September 8, 2008 at 6:35 PM
the bridge to nowhere?
Mercy4Me on September 8, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Oh laudy, I hope we have this on video. I wonder if Obama is paid by the McCain campaign just to say stuff that they can use in every ad from here to November.
BKennedy on September 8, 2008 at 6:37 PM
Hello?
FISA
Cheney energy bill?
drjohn on September 8, 2008 at 6:49 PM
http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/08/31/palins-bridge-to-nowhere-fiscally-responsible-or-politically-expedient/
Found the answer
Mercy4Me on September 8, 2008 at 6:56 PM
At that point, Palin was still allowing design and feasibility to still go forward. So where are we now:
She inherited the controversial project, knowing there was a need.
The transition team’s reports showed the that project, plus another, were not fiscally responsible and the federal funding came no where close to paying for the bridge.
She did not allocate any State monies for go ahead with the expensive bridge
Many Alaskans, including those in Ketchikan, were also opposed to the bridge at that expense
They were considering alternative methods.
Between the fiscal analyses, plus dissenting voices protesting the expense it would lay upon the taxpayers, is it any wonder that by September 2007, Palin officially canned the Bridge to Nowhere project, to the criticism of it’s advocates.
Mercy4Me on September 8, 2008 at 7:03 PM
As a Mayor, how would Sarah have been able to stop “the bridge to nowhere?”
But, she sure as hell COULD, and DID, as Governor.
So, the idea, “she was for it, before she was against it” doesn’t hold water.
franksalterego on September 8, 2008 at 7:24 PM
I care less about Osama Obama’s constant lies about his opponents than I do about Ayers, Dohrn, Rezko, Wright, Kilpatrick, a history full of missing documents, funneling government money to his wife, and other issues about which he either lies or draws a veil of secrecy.
MrScribbler on September 8, 2008 at 7:47 PM
At a rally today, Sen. McCain again asserted that Sen. Obama has requested nearly a billion in earmarks. In fact, the Illinois senator requested $311 million last year, according to the Associated Press, and none this year. In comparison, Gov. Palin has requested $750 million in her two years as governor — which the AP says is the largest per-capita request in the nation.
jim m on September 8, 2008 at 5:51 PM
——————————————————-
Ah Jim, you do realize the difference is that Obama could actually help to pass his own earmarks, and Palin ould only request them?
And Obama could hardly reuest or vote for earmarks this year when he hasn’t been there.
Not a bad try though. Keep working at it and you might actually come up with something. LOL
Deanna on September 8, 2008 at 7:48 PM
Palin could have decided not to use the money for the bridge, rather than deciding to use it elsewhere in Alaska, though.
She was too cute by half with her explanation.
jim m on September 8, 2008 at 8:05 PM
If it worth while, its worth a vote!!!
allrsn on September 8, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Apparently Sen. Obama is hoping the American people are too stupid to know what a hypocrite he is on this matter… and a host of others.
Yakko77 on September 8, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Ah Jim, you do realize the difference is that Obama could actually help to pass his own earmarks, and Palin ould only request them?
And Obama could hardly request or vote for earmarks this year when he hasn’t been there.
Not a bad try though. Keep working at it and you might actually come up with something. LOL
Deanna on September 8, 2008 at 7:48 PM
Reminds me of an old Cheech and Chong bit…”Bailiff, whack his peepee!”
SKYFOX on September 9, 2008 at 4:43 AM
allahpundit:
all federal spending requests are NOT earmarks.
earmarks are a privilege among congressman – senators and house members.
a governor cannot put in an earmark.
a governor can request federal spending in her/his state.
the conflation of earmarks with federal spending is a deliberate ploy of the dems/left.
don’t fall for the conflation fallacy; don’t be a dupe.
governors ask for all kinds of federal spending.
not all is pork.
not all is by earmarks.
spending requests have to be examined on a case by case basis/
reliapundit on September 9, 2008 at 9:33 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2