McCain and Graham Repeat False Claim That Palin Opposed The ‘Bridge To Nowhere’

This is unbelievable. How much did McCain actually vet this woman, because here we see McCain and Graham punt what they imagine to be her greatest selling point only to have Stephanopoulos pull the rug from under Graham's feet.

Supposedly, according to McCain and Graham, what they love about Sarah Palin is that she was against the so called "bridge to nowhere".

As she accepted the VP nomination she claimed:

"I have championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress," Palin said in her vice presidential campaign debut in Dayton, Ohio. "In fact, I told Congress, I told Congress 'thanks but no thanks' on that Bridge to Nowhere."

"If our state wanted a bridge, I said we'd build it ourselves," she said.

But the truth is that she supported the building of the bridge:

On Oct. 22, 2006, the Anchorage Daily News asked Palin and the other candidates, “Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?”

Her response: “Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now — while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.”

Indeed, even when she accepted that the bridge was not going to happen, she appeared to do so with a heavy heart:

"Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer," said Governor Palin. "Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Governor Palin added. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."

I think Stephanopoulos has a point when he says:

STEPHANOPOULOS: But Senator, she turned against that, only she campaigned for it in her 2006 race, and turned against it in 2007 only after it became a national joke.

So let's get this straight. The main reason that McCain says he chose her as his Vice Presidential candidate is because she opposed the building of this bridge. The only problem with that theory is that she didn't.

How well did he vet her again? And how can she claim that she said, "Thanks, but no thanks" to Congress when it was Congress that refused to fund the project?

Indeed, John Katz, who was Palin's special counsel, has written this:

Congressional earmarks for roads and bridges have received much attention in Congress and have become a principal impetus for reform. Unfortunately, Alaska has featured prominently in this discussion.

The Palin administration has responded to this unwanted attention in a number of ways. Certain previous decisions concerning transportation earmarks are being re-examined.

So the truth is not what Palin is claiming and is, in fact, much nearer to the conclusion that Stephanopoulos has arrived at.

There is every indication that, if she could have got that funding, she would have built that bridge.

And yet, McCain claims that he "has been watching her" and that the bridge to nowhere is the main reason that he chose her as his Vice President. The McCain campaign gets more batty day by day.

Hat tip to Think Progress.

Tags: McCain, Palin, bridge to nowhere, earmarks