Everybody's talking about Sarah Palin's change of heart on the Bridge to Nowhere, but somehow the more interesting and arguably consequential part of the story keeps getting pushed to the bottom.
"What happened to the $223 million Palin is saying she said 'No Thanks' too?," asks TPM's Josh Marshall. "She kept it."
But many papers reporting this information are having a hard time getting it across clearly.
Here's the Anchorage Daily News taking a a shot.
Paragraph 21: Once Palin spiked the bridge project, the money wasn't available to Minnesota or other states, however. Congress, chastened by criticism of the Alaska funding, had removed the earmark but allowed the state to keep the money and direct it to other transportation projects.
Reuters takes a stab at it:
Paragraph 8: National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.
And, this is an attempt by the AP:
Paragraph 8: After the Ketchikan bridge became an issue and an object of ridicule, Congress dropped the earmark.
It's easy to get bogged down in terms like "earmark designation," but, come on, folks. Just make it clear: She kept the money. And, who's asking where it went?
Katia, seems that you are too swept up in the hype to dig outside of your comfort zone, the oracle of TPM.
For example, did you know that both Obama and Biden voted for funding the Bridge, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn, who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief?
Did you knwo that until this became a campaign issue the Alaskan Democratic part actually credited Palin for killing the bridge?
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31192_Alaska_Democratic_Party_Deletes_Page_Crediting_Sarah_Palin_with_Killing_Bridge_to_Nowhere
Gotta say Katia, you are well on your way to following the rest of the lemmings in your field right off the cliffs or irrelevancy.
What TDC posted doesn't credit Palin at all. That's what's SHE'S taking credit for: driving the nail in the coffin that's already been lowered in the ground and people are shoving dirt on it. Yeah, she finally gave up after Congress killed the bill. Not a reformer.
Trying to change the subject to Biden and Obama doesn't answer the question. Was it right or wrong? Let's hear your opinion, TDC. Is against earmarks or not?
Yeah, Little Green Footballs followed their Dan Rather scoop with...Rachael Ray wearing a terrorist scarf in a Dunkin Donuts ad! Ha ha. That, my friends, is the pinnacle of journalism. Any fake Obama birth certificate hoaxes to share?
What position Obama and Biden took on the issue is absolutely irrelevant. Did Obama claim he killed the bridge in his first speech announcing his candidacy, and in his nomination speech? Is he running ads claiming that he killed the bridge?
Palin is attempting to establish her political character based on a falsehood. The press should challenge that.