You think being against earmarks is tantamount to “hijacking” the Republican party (which currently has a party platform of limited taxes and spending), and Ronald Reagan and I disagree.

Also I don’t have a “stiffy” for wasteful earmarks, I think they are wrong and hurt the vast marjority of programs that are credible and have federal dollars directed to them. However, I respect the system of governing our Founding Fathers created. The Bridge to Nowhere probably should not have been included in that bill (I say probably only because I don’t know the ins and outs of the communities needs) (note: this is an example of actually thinking about something instead of immediatley discounting it). However, I respect the fact that a majority of elected officials thought that it should be included. Don’t hate the bridge, unelect the people who voted for the bridge if that is important to you.

You’re argument is akin to those who wish to outlaw guns because bad people use them.

Finally, it’s people like you that we are in the minority right now. I am no where near moderate, but if you had your choice I would not be allowed in the party. If we keep going down this road we will be in the same place the Democrats have been the past 20 years or so. Liberals highjacked the Democratic party, now the far far right conservatives are trying to highjack the Republican party. To me its extremely saddening.

Also, I did not defend the “Bridge to Nowhere” I was defending democracy. Secondly, I was insinuateing that irrationally shrinking the federal governement just for the sake of shrinking would be a bad thing. I never said there were not programs that could be cut or minimized.

My biggest problem with these members who hem and haw about earmarks is that they are so disingenious and I have a really hard time respecting them on this issue. They know their counterparts are going to request earmarks and their state will get taken care of so they can do their political grandstanding. When I see a Senator or a Congressman go to the floor of their respective body and offer amendments to strip earmarks that help their consitiuents then I will have respect for them. But the problem is, Senator Coburn or McCain or whoever will NEVER go down and offer amendments to strip every earmark that helps their state. Why? Because they know it would be political suicide and the people of their state they were elected to represent would not be happy campers. They will simply attack other states and then run to a press conference.

In the end, you have three options. One, allow Congress to control the purse strings. Two allow the Executive Branch to control the purse strings (ie career employees, who are unaccountable and unelected). Three, just don’t spend the money, which depending on how you define an earmark could largely shrink the federal government, while stifling economic growth and trade.

Also, I do not work in Washington. I am a music teacher and I teach flute lessons in my spare time.