More On Sarah Palin

Bob Herbert made an important point in his morning editorial. He reminded us that while we are talking about Sarah Pailn's 17 year old daughter, we are not talking about the crumbling infrastructure, the failing schools, the dismal economy, and the Iraq War. Mr. Herbert stated that the Republican party is very good at changing the subject. Remember Willie Horton, the Swift Boaters, etc.? When the Repubs are unable to win on their merit they change the subject. That is exactly what they have done in choosing a pretty, well spoken and controversial woman. While we are busy pointing out her obvious lack of qualifications and what a total disaster she is we are not talking about the real issues.

Perhaps it's time that we stay on the subject and keep reminding our readers what this election is really about. But before we do, I am adding some more information that I think is pertinent.

Elizaberth Burmiller fleshed out the one redeeming feature that Palin may have and shoots holes in that. Following is an excerpt from her article:

"Mrs Palin said: "I championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, 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."

However it emerged that in a 2006 interview with the Anchorage Daily News during her gubernatorial campaign, Mrs Palin had a different view of the bridge.

Asked "would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?" she replied: "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."

When Congressional funding was withdrawn because of an uproar in Washington about the expense of the project, she canceled it, but in a regretful tone.

"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."

However in 2007 her state received the highest per capita amount of federal funding, $253.16 ($506.34), according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group which tracks "earmark" spending.

She also supported multi-billion-dollar tax increase on Alaska's oil industry, and approved a $250 million state subsidy to a Canadian company wanting to build a natural gas pipeline through Alaska."

We must stay on message and not let the attack machine change the subject.