According to Redstate this week, President Obama is praying Jim DeMints bill to ban earmarks will be defeated in the Senate. New Speaker John Boehner has pledged a policy of no earmarks in the House. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell will not agree to an earmark ban. The GOP has been heavily accused of hypocrisy when they voted against the stimulus package and then requested projects from it once it had passed. Republicans defend those requests by pointing out that their constituents will be paying for the package and therefore deserve their fair share of any 'stimulus' monies distributed. There was this blurb in the Washington Post: This this comment from the Heritage Foundation: In truth, almost all of the stimulus monies expended to date look like earmarks for somebody. And the fact is, as long as Congress brings in the money, they will spend it and most will attempt to do so for maximum political advantage for themselves. And in my opinion, that is corrupting both for government and for the beneficiaries of government largesse. So for discussion, let's focus on one or more of the following: 1. Do you think of it as the government's money? Or the people's money? Or your money? 2.. Do you favor redistribution of wealth by Congress taking money from the people and reassigning it where they say it is most needed? 3. Would you prefer a policy in which Congress did no redistribution of wealth but left the people to spend the money as they see fit? Why? 4. What does Constitutionally limited government mean to you?