I did not see anything "double-faced" in that video. She makes it quite clear that the federal government does have obligations to support highway infrastructure and Alaska is certainly not exempt from that assistance. She also made it clear that state and local government should have a say, and should ultimately decide, which projects ought to be supported and developed by those entities. It is up to the Alaskan government to decide which funds they accept and which projects they feel aren't necessary and don't require federal involvement. Her stance in those videos is no different than the stance she's taking today. The Alaskan government - under her authority - decided to reject the funding for the bridge and she feels that the federal government should not be making state decisions. This is not a "flip-flop" or "two-faced" - it's the fundamental republican (with a small "r") view of government that she has apparently held for quite some time. And acknowledging previous funding for infrastructure (some of which was entirely acceptable under DoT funding) does not mean she supports the wholesale fraud that is federal "pork" spending. *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.