Caesar Posted September 10, 2008 #1 Share Posted September 10, 2008 "Now that Alaska is front and center in the news again, it is a good time to catch up on a favorite story, The Bridge to Nowhere, using the Washington Post US Congress Votes Database. Though Gov. Palin originally supported the earmark spending on the Ketchikan bridge (“to nowhere), she eventually killed the project, chosing to spend Federal money on other infrasturcture programs. However, Sen. Biden and Sen. Obama voted for funding the Bridge, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn, who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief." Source and full article Funny how the main stream media never mentioned this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted September 10, 2008 #2 Share Posted September 10, 2008 "Now that Alaska is front and center in the news again, it is a good time to catch up on a favorite story, The Bridge to Nowhere, using the Washington Post US Congress Votes Database. Though Gov. Palin originally supported the earmark spending on the Ketchikan bridge (“to nowhere), she eventually killed the project, chosing to spend Federal money on other infrasturcture programs. However, Sen. Biden and Sen. Obama voted for funding the Bridge, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn, who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief." Source and full article Funny how the main stream media never mentioned this Bears repeating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Startraveler Posted September 10, 2008 #3 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) For those unfamiliar with legislation: when you vote "aye" on a 1,752 page bill containing 6,376 projects totaling nearly $300 million in new infrastructure, you're probably not basing your vote on a bridge in Alaska. Which is why this passed 91-4. Edited September 10, 2008 by Startraveler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 10, 2008 Author #4 Share Posted September 10, 2008 For those unfamiliar with legislation: when you vote "aye" on a 1,752 page bill containing 6,376 projects totaling nearly $300 million in new infrastructure, you're probably not basing your vote on a bridge in Alaska. Which is why this passed 91-4. Then how can Obama and Bidden blast Palin if they voted for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Startraveler Posted September 10, 2008 #5 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Probably because their campaign isn't based on the idea of rejecting earmarks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 10, 2008 Author #6 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Probably because their campaign isn't based on the idea of rejecting earmarks. Not only did he vote for it, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn, who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief, he voted no. So your saying he's not attacking Palin on the Bridge to Nowhere? Barack Obama goes on attack over Sarah Palin's bridge record Obama, Bridge to Nowhere Funder, Hits Palin For Flip-Flopping Barack Obama turns up heat over Alaska bridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardsman Bass Posted September 10, 2008 #7 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Not only did he vote for it, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn, who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief, he voted no. So your saying he's not attacking Palin on the Bridge to Nowhere? Barack Obama goes on attack over Sarah Palin's bridge record Obama, Bridge to Nowhere Funder, Hits Palin For Flip-Flopping Barack Obama turns up heat over Alaska bridge Obama isn't explicitly going around saying that he "fought the Bridge to Nowhere" like Palin is. In other words, he's attacking Palin's spin, not the fact that she voted for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 10, 2008 Author #8 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Obama isn't explicitly going around saying that he "fought the Bridge to Nowhere" like Palin is. In other words, he's attacking Palin's spin, not the fact that she voted for it. He is attacking her on it. yes she was for it at first then she was against it when she found out more about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zitro1987 Posted September 10, 2008 #9 Share Posted September 10, 2008 (edited) Obama attacks her for being phony and pretending to be a pork-fighting maverick like McCain. Obama never pretended to be someone who never voted for pork-spending and if you check his history: the dude cost us almost $100 MILLION in pork spending. Edited September 10, 2008 by zitro1987 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted September 10, 2008 #10 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Obama attacks her for being phony and pretending to be a pork-fighting maverick like McCain. Obama never pretended to be someone who never voted for pork-spending and if you check his history: the dude cost us almost $100 MILLION in pork spending. But Palin reduced Alaskas govt total spending from previous years, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now