Sarah Palin said in her acceptance speech at the RNC that "If our state wanted to build a bridge, we were going to build it ourselves." She said pretty much the same to Chris Matthews, Charles Gibson and at every campaign stop.

But it turns out she isn't doing it by herself after all. The federal government is footing a chunk of the bill for the replacement program that would link Ketchikan to its airport.

Gov. Palin’s administration acknowledges that it is still pursuing a project that would link Ketchikan to its airport -- with the help of as much as $73 million in federal funds earmarked by Congress for the original project.

"What the media isn't reporting is that the project isn't dead," Roger Wetherell, spokesman for Alaska’s Department of Transportation, said. In a process begun this past winter, the state’s DOT is currently considering (PDF) a number of alternative solutions (five other possible bridges or three different ferry routes) to link Ketchikan and Gravina Island.

The DOT has not yet developed cost estimates for those proposals, Wetherell said, but $73 million of the approximately $223 million Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and Rep. Don Young (R-AK) earmarked for the bridge in 2005 has been set aside for the Gravina Access Project.

The full details are at ProPublica.

So - how many different ways has she been untruthful about the Nowhere Project now? I confess I've lost count.

Over the past two weeks, the lies emanating from the McCain/Palin campaign have become so brazen that even the most cynical campaign reporters are clearly taken aback. While lies are commonplace in politics, you rarely see candidates continue to repeat factual claims that have been widely debunked in the media, especially claims about biographical facts (lying about your opponent's policy positions is another matter).

The fact that McCain and Palin continue to tell these tall tales about Palin's record in Alaska is aggravating--there's no question--but it also presents the Obama campaign with a golden opportunity. The key to exploiting that opportunity, however, is not to get angry or to join in the lying game. Neither of those tactics ever work well for Democrats. The key to fighting back is to brand McCain and Palin as liars through the use of mockery. I realize that everyone and their brother is playing the role of armchair political consultant at the moment, but please indulge me for thirty seconds.

Here's how I imagine Obama responding:

Continue reading »

Paul Begala goes to town on GOP media consultant Alex Castellanos for peddling blatant falsehoods about Sarah Palin's "reformer" record, specifically her phantom opposition to the "Bridge to Nowhere," which she not only supported, but for which hired a Abramoff crony to secure the earmark.

Download | play Download | play

ALEX CASTELLANOS: The amazing thing about Sarah Palin is when she became governor she actually stood up and said no.

BEGALA: That's not true.

CASTELLANOS: She took a strong stand. That is rare and that never happened.

BEGALA: That's just not true. You know, John, the facts matter. There's lots of things that are debatable who is more qualified or less experienced or more this or more passionate, whatever. It is a fact that she campaigned and supported that bridge to nowhere. It is a fact that she hired lobbyists to get earmarks. It is a fact that as governor she lobbies for earmarks. Her state is essentially a welfare state taking money from the federal government... This is the problem. We have this false debate when we ought to have at least agreed upon facts.

Begala couldn't be more spot on here: Facts are facts. Opinions can be debated, but facts are concrete and can't simply be spun away. It seems to me that this is the crux of the McCain strategy: take an unknown hockey mom from Alaska, tell everyone she's a reformer, lie about her record in order to convince people of it, then keep her sequestered from the press when they start asking questions. Are the American people really dumb enough to fall for it?

Full transcript below the fold:

Continue reading »

I completely agree with Nate Silver: the Obama campaign needs to make better ads.

It's not that Obama's ads are bad by any normal metric. They're well produced and they usually hit the right themes. The problem is that they're very conventional. Obama is supposed to exude change. But his ads don't. They look like the ads we see every election cycle: images, text, and video footage linked together by the voice of a professional narrator. They may be marginally effective, but they are exceedingly forgettable and often make Obama come across as just another politician playing the same old game (even though his ads are much more honest than McCain's).

The Obama campaign needs to think a little more outside of the box. They should aim to produce ads that are either more creative/funny than a typical campaign ad, or more sincere.

Continue reading »