RSS Feeds Feeds: Articles | Issues
Articles About TAP Subscribe Donate
TAPPED  |  Beat the Press

Remember Me
Forgot your password?

The symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.


 


Momma said wonk you out

THE METAPHYSICS OF POST HEADLINES.

Ryan Avent notices a big ol' Post headline today: “Democrats Say Palin Initially Backed Bridge.” Arguably, there are some metaphysical questions involving the meaning of the word "initially" and whether you want to confine your answers to observable political reality (i.e, her first public statement about the Bridge) or delve into what her first private thought was, but assuming this isn't an undergrad philosophy class, Palin's support or opposition to the Bridge is probably part of the public record. And oh wait, here it is, right in the same Post story:

While campaigning in Ketchikan in September 2006, Palin indicated support for the bridge project, assuming there was no better alternative. “This link is a commitment to help Ketchikan expand its access, to help this community prosper,” she told the local chamber of commerce, according to an account in the Ketchikan Daily News.

In other words, Democrats don't "say" Palin initially backed the Bridge, Palin says she initially backed the Bridge, which is to say, Palin initially backed the Bridge, and Democrats are drawing attention to her statement. Attaching a "Democrats say" to "Palin initially backed bridge" makes no more sense than attaching a "Reporters say" to "Gustav Lashes Gulf Coast; Levee System Tested." It's a nonsensical appendage meant to undermine the authority of the story's conclusions: These things are either true or they aren't, and people are paying the Washington Post good money to clear up that ambiguity for them.



COMMENTS

Couldn't ask for a more perfect illustration of what's wrong with journalism in this country.

No doubt, a couple of years after they've managed to elect McCain and with his approval numbers mired in the single digits, they'll be running the usual mea culpa articles about their piss-poor campaign coverage. How many times have we seen this movie now?

""While campaigning in Ketchikan in September 2006, Palin indicated support for the bridge project, assuming there was no better alternative."""

Then as Governor, she found that alternative. She cancelled the bridge and said if Alaska needs it, Alaska will pay for it.

Rather then forcing all of America to cough up their hard earned money for some Senators re-election earmarks.

Cowardice by any other name.

1) She kept the money.
2)She's STILL building the connecting road to nowhere (which will now dead-end at a beach!)because THAT money would have to be given back otherwise.

So much for principled opposition to earmarks.

1) She kept the money.
2)She's STILL building the connecting road to nowhere (which will now dead-end at a beach!)because THAT money would have to be given back otherwise.

Sweet! And it's not dead-ending if it goes to a beach. Even in Alaska.

I like this woman more and more.

anonymous wrote: "Then as Governor, she found that alternative. She cancelled the bridge and said if Alaska needs it, Alaska will pay for it."

I believe she "cancelled" it after the funding was in jeopardy. Before that she campaigned in buidling the bridge to nowhere:
-----Newspaper report:
Congress eventually removed the earmark language but the money still went to Alaska, leaving it up to the administration of then-Gov. Frank Murkowski to decide whether to go ahead with the bridges or spend the money on something else.

In September, 2006, Palin showed up in Ketchikan on her gubernatorial campaign and said the bridge was essential for the town's prosperity.

She said she could feel the town's pain at being derided as a "nowhere" by prominent politicians, noting that her home town, Wasilla, had recently been insulted by the state Senate president, Ben Stevens.

"OK, you've got Valley trash standing here in the middle of nowhere," Palin said, according to an account in the Ketchikan Daily News. "I think we're going to make a good team as we progress that bridge project."
----
http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html

She used what money alaska got to build the access-route to nowhere for a non-existent bridge.

Some courageous stand there.

Has anyone checked out the backgrounds of all the new faces doing political coverage in the WaPo? Bet you'd find that many of them came up through DC-insider publications during the Republican ascendancy, and depended on good sourcing with GOP congressional and lobbying types for their stories.

Somerby, as he usually does, manages to make the key point about this entire discussion. By the time Palin was running for Governer, the bridge earmark had already been dropped from the Congressional bill. It didn't exist anymore. So whatever issues she was fighting with respect to building the bridge had nothing to do with anything going on in Washington. This entire discussion is based upon an utterly stupid and transparent lie told by Palin on her very first day of campaigning in practically the first words out of her mouth.

There is one thing that the "Democrats Say..." preface tells us: that the Post wouldn't have reported on it had the Democrats not pointed it out.

The lack of research, and reliance on he-said, she-said reporting has gotten so bad that the only way real information can find it into the papers is if one of the parties provides it.

Check out the 11 pages of comments over at WaPo - many attack Democrats for making what WaPo claims is an allegation. I guess the truth has a liberal bias.

I would have focused on the word "assuming" in the account of what she said rather than the word "initially" in the headline...

Sweet! And it's not dead-ending if it goes to a beach. Even in Alaska.

A conservative supporting a federal government funded infrastructure project...for a road...to a beach...in Alaska? Really?

Perhaps private industry should build a toll road to this supposed family friendly fantastic getaway location. I'm sure they'll rake in tons of cash.

Brent is right -- please read the Daily Howler today! I will quote his comment again for emphasis:

"By the time Palin was running for Governer, the bridge earmark had already been dropped from the Congressional bill. It didn't exist anymore. So whatever issues she was fighting with respect to building the bridge had nothing to do with anything going on in Washington. This entire discussion is based upon an utterly stupid and transparent lie told by Palin on her very first day of campaigning in practically the first words out of her mouth."

Democrats claim that they don't beat their wives!

Nothing worse than a pro-life Bambi killer with a daughter who can't keep her legs crossed.

Boy are THEY wasting their money...

It is all so simple: Gov. Palin was for the bridge before she was against it.

As the game is set to be released on September 18th many players will be pushing hard to level their characters as fast as possible as well as farming as much gold as they can on the process. Warhammer gold is valued the highest during the start of the game when every player is striving to get as much of it as possible into their own hands.

Post a comment



Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Search for:

About Ezra Klein

Ezra Klein is an associate editor at The American Prospect. An archive of his articles for The American Prospect can be found here.

Email | RSS | Twitter

Link Blog:


Renew your print subscription or e-subscription.
Get an e-subscription for $14.95.
Give the gift of political insight. Send The American Prospect to a friend.
Change your email address or street address.
YES! I want to receive The American Prospect
— the essential source for progressive ideas.
Explore The American Prospect's award-winning investigative journalism and provocative essays in a free trial issue. Continue receiving The American Prospect at only $19.95 for a one-year subscription - a savings of 60% off the newsstand price!
First Name
Last Name
Address 1
Address 2
City
State
ZIP     
Email

Should you decide not to continue receiving the magazine after the initial free issue, simply write "cancel" on the invoice and you will not be billed.

© 2009 by The American Prospect, Inc.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Permissions and Reprints