Don Young's fiscal irresponisibility aside, the debate of earmarks is an exercise in sophistry.

The size of the federal budget is decided before earmarks. Therefore, no matter if Ron Paul, Nancy Pelosi, or any other Congressperson decided to lower the amount of money they earmarked for their district, the Federal Government would still assign that money to something else.

In fact, by eliminating earmarks altogether, you just pass power away from individiual Congressmen to Federal bureaucrats.

Getting rid of the "bridge to nowhere" would be a great idea. That would solve less than 1% of budget problems.

Maybe, if people actually discussed monetary policy rather than engaging in left-right conservative-liberal demagoguery, or if journalists actually had to do research before they vomited on their word processor, we would get real answers to our current financial problems.

The answer to our current problems is certainly not "more power to the State."

For an intelligent discussion on earmarks, hear is a beginner's read:

http://blog.mises.org/archives/007864.asp
http://blog.mises.org/archives/007171.asp
http://blog.mises.org/archives/005951.asp

Ad hominemally, isn't this the website that employs the intellectual titan Spencer Pratt as a columnist?

It seems your buddy Katherine Rizzo on the wall street journal wrote this in her colum
(That's why there was no commercial with Ron Paul asking his followers in Alaska to give Young an 18th term. "Dr. Paul said some nice things but it shouldn't be taken as an endorsement," Benton said.)

So who is right about the endorsment and who is wronge.

seems alot of Paul bashing today. and I agree with the previous commentor(DVDBURNS)

Here is the link to the other Paul basher at least the comment page doesn't require us to sign in.

http://blogs.wsj.com/politicalperceptions/2008/08/27/republicans-pounce-on-each-other/?mod=googlenews_wsj

Why make this story more about Paul than Young?
(or rather to drag Paul down with Young). Paul endorsed him on Youngs Libertarian leanings, not his fiscal policy. Paul is a fiscal conservative; Young believes in earmarking federal dollars for Alaska wherever possible. Paul opposes the Iraq war; Young supports it.

While the comments for others about earmarks not increasing federal spending are true, the premise of this article appears not to be. I do not think Ron Paul has endorsed Don Young. For the complete list of state candidates that Dr. Paul has endorsed, see here: http://www.libertypac.net/html/state.html

The basis of the allegation, if you can call it that, is an article in which Ron Paul said he had known Young for a long time, and considered him to be a friend. Google turned up scores of articles saying that Ron Paul had endorse Young, but not a one of them that I scanned included a link to the original endorsement. A few had selected quotes. That's all. Just shoddy attack journalism, it would appear.

I knew something had been missing from my Tuesdays...