SORRY RACHEAL!

Sarah said 'I am a reformer. I killed the bridge to nowhere.'

The facts have demonstrated that the bridge was dead before she jumped on its carcass. She was one of those PROMOTING the bridge, visiting Ketchikan, telling the people there it was OFFENSIVE to call their pet project the 'bridge to nowhere'. She even got the G.D. T-shirt !

So, you know how many points she gets as a reformer? ZERO.

You know how many points she gets for telling the truth the first time she was introduced as John McCain's pick for VP? ZERO.

You know how many points she gets for being a bald faced hypocrite? 100 points. Which she can share with a certain participant in the XX Factor that is willing to call it the way it isn't, all because of the thick, GOP tinted glasses through which she views the world.

The only thing Sarah Palin 'reformed' was her own history.

I read Palin's quote in the Ketchikan newpaper regarding the bridge and it was very professional and very neutral. She vowed to continue to look into better access for the community but did not specifically claim that the bridge would be built. To claim that she was lying is very much twisting events to suit a political agenda.

Talk about contorting facts to suit a political agenda...or I guess in your case, ignoring them, lubbesuh. She was for the bridge before she received so much heat for it. Either that or her own communications director is a liar.

<link>

Or how about this link to the Wall Street Journal? Hardly a bastion of liberal bias...

<link>

Oh wait and one more...how about her own words?

<link>

I saw two clips of her speaking about the Bridge to Nowhere. She fully supported it and stated that it should be built while the federal funds (i.e. earmarks) were still available. After the bridge was de-authorized by the federal government, then she stated that she opposed it but kept all the federal money and ended up financing a road that led to where the bridge was initially supposed to be built.

I don't think this is a huge issue in of itself, however, it continues the narrative of allowing a candidate to have a "free pass" from the media. She is allowed to lie about her record -- to fit a story about her as a "maverick" -- with impunity. She needs to be questioned -- repeatedly from many sources and in great detail -- about her potential abuses of executive power in compelling the firing of a trooper, about her use of earmarks in Alaska, about her views on global warming (she says that global warming is not the result of human activity!), about her abysmal environmental record, about further incidents of a dictatorial leadership style when she attempted to ban books at her public library. I could go on and on. She has not answered basic questions about her competence, past, and policy positions.