However, this one gets me:
“The bridge in Minneapolis didn’t collapse because there wasn’t enough money. The bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because so much money was spent on wasteful, unnecessary pork-barrel projects…. I think there is a long, long list of earmarks which went to unnecessary and unwanted projects that I think should have gone to the bridge in Minnesota. I don’t know whether it would have gone or not, but if you’re spending $223 million on a bridge in Alaska to an island with 50 people on it. …”
It was a month later that Palin changed her position on the Bridge to Nowhere but kept the $223 million for Alaska, spending it elsewhere.
So, John McCain, you really want to call Palin a reformer still? Praise her for cutting down on pork barrel spending?
Funny, when you were in St. Paul this past week, you forgot to mention how the money given for the Alaskan bridge would have been better spent on the 35W bridge. Huh.
I don't think McCain's solution of cutting special earmark spending would have solved the problems with the 35W bridge. I do find it incredibly ironic that he uses the Bridge to Nowhere as an example of unecessary pork barrel spending, yet praises Palin for reforming the system while she endless repeats her "thanks but no thanks" crap without mentioning that she never gave back the $223 million of federal money meant for the bridge.
Please, please, please, mainstream media. Pick up the story - it's all there in the Minnesota Independent.