The View From ‘Nowhere’

« Return to Article

Discuss

  • Posted By: Toujours @ 10/24/2008 10:18:18 PM

    Thanks for sharing your story. As obsessed with politics as I am, this was all new information to me.

  • Posted By: Chicazule @ 10/24/2008 9:58:46 PM

    Not a one of you can find a sentence where the author is asking for money. He is simply telling you the history of the project and why his town is "somewhere." Why is that information so offensive??

  • Posted By: vietnam65 @ 10/24/2008 9:50:01 PM

    get over yourself "Skippy" - you elected her; now live with it. You still have the road money that leads to where the "Bridge to Nowhere" would be, and to say that "politics of earmarks didn't mean much to us up here in Alaska" is nonsense. You folks have requested and received more money in earmarks per capita than any other region or stat in the US. You taxed the oil companies and "shared the weatlh" in individual payments to Alaska residents, then you talk about "Socialization".

    Get a life, grow up and take responsibility for your actions.

  • Posted By: rif242242 @ 10/24/2008 8:57:13 PM

    Just another fine piece of Newsweak at it's best. Ha Ha Ha

  • Posted By: bpettigrew @ 10/24/2008 7:26:23 PM

    I feel for the Mayor. He is in a tough position and expressed his point of view without being derogatory in any manner. If anything, it has made me want to take a step back and rethink the bridge. But most of you have commented with such haste and narrow minded thinking have it all figured out. I can't wait until your leaders are out of office and our government can be run by people who are not so ignorant and short sided. Mayor, I hope you get your bridge. Maybe when this liars war we are funding is over we can make it happen.

    • Posted By: rif242242 @ 10/24/2008 8:53:35 PM

      yah so "short sided". you've made yourself look silly. Even good ol GW wouldnt be that silly. Get your act together. And as long as there is a ferry running every 15 mins in the summer and every 30 mins during the winter there is no need to spend 400 mil on a bridge. Sorry Charlie.

  • Posted By: sweeney7 @ 10/24/2008 8:29:54 PM

    This is the Alaska I've always heard about. Thank you for sharing your story. You left one part out and I see the gentleman below commented on it. He said if you wanted a bridge you should build it. Perhaps he doesn't recall that Ms Palin stated she still accepted the earmark money but chose to spend it elsewhere.

  • Posted By: erikwm @ 10/24/2008 8:19:43 PM

    No dice. 14,000 people is an inadequate population for a 200 million dollar bridge.

  • Posted By: dhume @ 10/24/2008 5:46:03 PM

    Once considering these things I then have no hesitation in giving Obama and Bidden credit for their superior conduct and more convincing faith orientated consciences and feel that when I vote for them I won???t be co-responsible for ???more of the same???.

    You're going to find your boys in over their heads real fast. I cringe at the thought of another Jimmy Carter experience. Oh, we want change, but picking the wet-behind -the-ears bumpkin is not the answer. I respect Obama is a bright guy, but I doubt he has any comprehension of what is going to help here. These rescue packages that we are handing out like Halloween candy are not the solution and tinkering in general is usually a recipe for disaster. Let the economy swing, it is a better problem solver than any tinkerer will ever be.

    • Posted By: poguemathoin@gmail.com @ 10/24/2008 7:09:34 PM

      I would also cringe at the thought of another Jimmy Carter experience. But lest you think it was because Carter was wet behind the ears, I just want to remind you that it was because Carter came at every issue from a moral viewpoint, not necessarily because he was a "bumpkin." Do the research and read some of the Carter biographies. Carter had a very strong, Christian, moral center, a firm and unshakable view of right and wrong, and approached every issue from that standpoint. With some problems, it was the right way to go (e.g., the Israeli-Palestinian peace accord he brokered). With others, it was definitely not the way to solve the problem (e.g., the economy). He was and is a good, moral, Christian man, but a lousy politician and president. People might want to think about that before they say we must have a Christian in the White House. Been there, done that, didn't work out too well. And the bailout? May be right, may be wrong; I'm no economist. Then again, none of them have done too well lately, either. So yes, Obama is a bright guy who may not have any idea of what to do or whether or not to tinker. But more so than McCain, Obama shows himself as willing to listen to others who know more about a situation than he does instead of running around dramatically (yeah, why don't we just dash off to Washington, cancel the debate, and suspend the campaign because there's a crisis? Like *that* is gonna solve things.). Besides, Paul Volcker and Paul Wolf are no slouches when it comes to the economy, and Warren Buffet and George Soros have done pretty well with their own. Since they all like Obama, maybe they can give him some good advice on what to do with ours.

      • Posted By: Nins @ 10/24/2008 8:10:19 PM

        Wow, Pogue, what a great blog! Thanks.

  • Posted By: timmartin @ 10/24/2008 8:09:07 PM

    Mr. Mayor. You want the bridge? You need the bridge? You pay for the bridge.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 10/24/2008 8:08:35 PM

    You know, If Palin had stood up and said "Yes, I support the Bridge to Nowhere because..." and then gave all the arguments the Mayor of Ketchikan just presented, I would have admired her balls. Instead, she tried to pretend that she didn't support it, instead of standing up for her decision and explaining why it was right.

    Palin is full of lies. And guilty ethics violations for abuse of power. Why did she abuse power? Was it because she wanted more for Alaska, or because she gave political favors to people who actually contributed to society in some way? No, she abused her power to GET EVEN with her former brother in law.

    So petty.

  • Posted By: kdtripp2786 @ 10/24/2008 6:49:41 PM

    Sorry, I was wrong. It was $600M. But it was still necessary for the people (mostly Native Alaskans) who live in remote areas who are paying hundreds of dollars a month for heating oil and $10 for a gallon of milk due to shipping costs.

  • Posted By: JBTarhalla @ 10/24/2008 9:57:51 AM

    I've been to Ketchikan and agree with Mr. Kiffer's statements about the need for the bridge. Isn't the real question "who should pay for it?" Why don't the Alaskans who will benefit from it pay for it?

    Jim Tarhalla

    • Posted By: Geoffrey MacPherson @ 10/24/2008 5:50:43 PM

      And what about the tunnels to "nowhere" in Boston?

      Geoff
      Seattle

      • Posted By: jscott5180 @ 10/24/2008 6:36:31 PM

        What about them? MILLIONS of people use those tunnels. And those millions also paid billions in taxes, so why shouldn't they receive the benefits?

        What is so difficult for people to understand about the concept of "the greatest good?" Do you people not realize that we can't just build another bridge for every group of 14,000 people? Has nobody noticed all of the bridges that are falling down? Shouldn't there be some prioritization here?

  • Posted By: kdtripp2786 @ 10/24/2008 6:35:41 PM

    The math done on a previous post for the Energy Rebate of $1200 per person in Alaska is incorrect, the total was around $60M not $600M. The money in question was a surplus generated when oil was over $120 a barrel and we in Alaska were paying the highest prices for gas in the country (we are still are paying about $1 more than the rest of the country.) I am not a Palin supporter, I did not vote for her and pretty much disagree with most of what she does, but I do think she saw a huge budget surplus and was simply trying to alleviate some of the financial hardship being experienced by Native Alaskans in remote communities. The money had to be given to each Alaskan to prevent discrimination lawsuits that would have occurred if they had singled out specific groups to give the money to.

    Many of you posting comments about this article have been somewhat bitter and insulting to Alaska, I will just say, keep in mind we are a very young state. We are celebrating 50 years of statehood this year. How many of your states had financial help in establishing infrastructure when your state was only 50 years old? How long ago was that? How big is your state? Just some things to think about before you judge.

  • Posted By: markci @ 10/24/2008 4:48:31 PM

    ** but that does not diminish the plight of this community to have consistent access to their own airport. These aren't a "few hundred people" - this is a community of over 14,000 (small by lower 48 standards perhaps, but the 4th largest community in Alaska). **

    I'm not interested in Alaska's standards. I'm sorry about the wilderness and the lack of road, but people who live in Alaska choose to do so. They also get paid a couple grand or so from the state government every year. They can pay for it themselves.

    So the town has 14,000. The bridge was going to cost $398 million. That's $28,429 per person. They can pay for it themselves if they don't want to take the ferry. Or move closer to civilization for crying out loud.

    *** I would venture to say, that somewhere in your community's past, there was a congressional earmark that helped you out! ***

    I'm sure there was. The difference is, I live in a city (Atlanta) of 5.5 million people. If we got earmarks worth $28,429 each that would be $156 billion dollars. All the earmarks in the federal budget for the entire country total less than a third of that.

    Alaskans already get far more handouts than anyone else from the federal budget. I'm not interested in subsidizing their lifestyle further. If they want to live there, part of the deal is that they deal with some inconveniences, like taking a ferry to the damn airport.



    • Posted By: Palinnomore @ 10/24/2008 4:53:04 PM

      The handouts your talking about is not from government, it is from the oil industry revenue to the citizens of Alaska.

      • Posted By: Geoffrey MacPherson @ 10/24/2008 5:46:51 PM

        Dearest palinnomore, Your egocentrism is classic for an east coastee. Nowhere is anywhere you aren't. Have you ever traveled beyond your little peiece of the world? Expenses in Alaska are always out of proportion to population. That's how Alaskans are able to provide you with crab, fish, timber, oil, gas, lumber, gold, and wonderful vacation opportunities. When you grow up you'll have a broader perspective.

        Geoff
        Seattle

        • Posted By: Palinnomore @ 10/24/2008 6:25:05 PM

          and to clarify my "handout" comment, i was merely correcting another persons comment about the fund being a govornment handout by stating that is wasn't, it was from the oil revenue.

        • Posted By: Palinnomore @ 10/24/2008 6:12:22 PM

          I am very amused to inform you that I in fact lived in Ketchikan for over 10 years and since moved to the lower 48 so I know first hand of what in takes to live there as well as other places. Maybe you should be the one to check yourself before you critize someone else.

      • Posted By: markci @ 10/24/2008 5:04:23 PM

        Oh, and the "handouts" I was referring to were actually earmarks and other federal expenditures on Alaska:

        http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-22-earmarks_N.htm

      • Posted By: markci @ 10/24/2008 5:00:43 PM

        *** Comment: The handouts your talking about is not from government, it is from the oil industry revenue to the citizens of Alaska. ***

        I couldn't care less. The money winds up in the pockets of the citizens of Alaska. So they can build their own damn bridge. It would be nice if they'd stop sponging off the lower 48 in other ways too, but I don't see that happening.

  • Posted By: GregHere @ 10/24/2008 6:03:59 PM

    ............................Todays L.A. Times gives new information on how Palin as Governor made more than 100 appointments to state positions and nearly 1 in 4 went to campaign contributors or their relatives. Palin filled 16 state offices with appointees from families that donated $2,000 to $5,6000 to her 2006 campaign. Several of Palin's leading campaign donors received State subsidized industrial development loans of up to $3.6 million for business ventures of questionable value. Alaska historians say that Palin's appointees were less qualified than those of her Republican and Democratic predecessors. She gave positions to several of her long time female friends who helped her campaign for office. Palin was supposed to be some major reformer when she appeared at the RNC Convention........not it looks like she is just another "business as
    usual" politician. More and more keeps coming out about Palin and it looks like McCain did a poor job in vetting her past political history before he brought her in to pep up his drab campaign!!!!

  • Posted By: JenDee @ 10/24/2008 4:05:20 PM

    Federal Earmarks cannot be returned to the government. The funding was changed fby Congress, rom specifying the bridge project to being used on other State infrastructure projects. Earmarks can only be used for the purposes set by Congress.
    The Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend cannot be used by the State government - as set out in Alaska Statutes. This is return on investments from original lump of money set aside durign the oil boom in late 70s. Depending on the investments (stock market, etc) the amount of the dividend goes up or down- but the State government cannot spend this money.

    • Posted By: gilmanc @ 10/24/2008 4:54:03 PM

      If Alaska won't change its rules to use its money to help its communities, why should the lower 48 fund it?

      • Posted By: JenDee @ 10/24/2008 5:41:44 PM

        My post was in response to multiple people asking why the governor did not return the money and how it was spent. I was not expressing an opinion on the validity of the bridge project or how it should be funded, just answering the question on where the money went. It is up to Congress to approve/disapprove the earmarks. Every State asks for money from the government - many for projects that the rest of us might think is stupid or unnecessary.

  • Posted By: firetheprincipal @ 10/24/2008 5:39:57 PM

    Cry me a river for your bridge to whatever. Since you all get three thousand a year from oil revenues, why don't you take 15% of the windfall from every citizen and pay for your own bridge. Oops I sound like a Commie.

  • Posted By: Geoffrey MacPherson @ 10/24/2008 5:39:05 PM

    Of course it's "the bridge to nowhere". Just like the tunnel to Boston's Logan Airport is the "tunnel to nowhere"or the freeway to LAX is the "freeway to nowhere".

    To my dear Alaskan neighbors, "nowhere" is always somewhere other than "here". This is especially true if you hail from the east coast.

  • Posted By: jarmo @ 10/24/2008 4:54:08 PM

    Votenow, I find it odd that you like to blame the GOP and deregulation for all of the current economic strife. Deregulation would have never happened to the degree that caused this trouble if the Democrats had not pushed laws and policies requiring lenders to give poverty level and non-credit worthy borrower the "right" to own a home. I work in the mortgage industry, and have for many years. For the past 7+ years I have watched loans go through to the poor and irresponsible. Now those same poor and irresponsible people are voting for Obama. It is his fault and the fault of his fellow Democrats that we are in this mess. The idea that giving undeserved benefits to low class people is good for the nation is absurd. Of course if the opponents of the Democrats point this out, despite being correct, they will be labeled racists. Stop trying to make everything "fair", and be responsible for your own actions and mistakes. We have the right to pursue happiness, bot the right to have happiness. Grow up and stop blaming the successful for your own incompetence. Obama's socialism/communism will lead to more of the undeserving poor gaining benefits and perks that have not been earned. The nation will fall further into depression because casting pearls before swine is always a poor investment.

    • Posted By: Palinnomore @ 10/24/2008 5:10:32 PM

      Lol I think it is very humouris that people think this is just one sides fault...There is enough blame to go around and should rightfully so. Both parties as well as greedy wall street, preditory lending and ceo's can have there share as well as those irresponsible and unqualified home buyers. This wan't one parties fault...it was because of a number a things happend on a number of different levels. Once we get of the blame game and focus on the fix things might start to turn around.

  • Posted By: jarmo @ 10/24/2008 4:53:21 PM

    Votenow, I find it odd that you like to blame the GOP and deregulation for all of the current economic strife. Deregulation would have never happened to the degree that caused this trouble if the Democrats had not pushed laws and policies requiring lenders to give poverty level and non-credit worthy borrower the "right" to own a home. I work in the mortgage industry, and have for many years. For the past 7+ years I have watched loans go through to the poor and irresponsible. Now those same poor and irresponsible people are voting for Obama. It is his fault and the fault of his fellow Democrats that we are in this mess. The idea that giving undeserved benefits to low class people is good for the nation is absurd. Of course if the opponents of the Democrats point this out, despite being correct, they will be labeled racists. Stop trying to make everything "fair", and be responsible for your own actions and mistakes. We have the right to pursue happiness, bot the right to have happiness. Grow up and stop blaming the successful for your own incompetence. Obama's socialism/communism will lead to more of the undeserving poor gaining benefits and perks that have not been earned. The nation will fall further into depression because casting pearls before swine is always a poor investment.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse