Repubs Want to Redefine Definition of Earmark

God's Right Hand, Michelle Bachmann

A perfect example of the inane stupidity America is going to be held hostage to come January happened this week.  In an attempt to speak out against evil earmarks, GOP Rep. Michelle Bachmann called for a "redefinition" to what constitutes an earmark.

“Advocating for transportation projects for ones district in my mind does not equate to an earmark.”

“I don’t believe that building roads and bridges and interchanges should be considered an earmark,” Bachmann said. “There’s a big difference between funding a tea pot museum and a bridge over a vital waterway.”

Transportation projects are not earmarks?  Of course transportation projects are earmarks.  Any appropriated money that is ordered to go to certain things is an earmark.  What Bachmann and her Republican tea baggers are wanting to do is unfairly redefine what an earmark is so that their projects in their districts cannot be called earmarks.  In other words, if it's money for Republican projects it will be called Patriot Projects.  But money for Democratic districts will still get the pork label.

Aside from the semantics of what the definition of an earmark is, such projects only make up less than 1% of the entire budget.  So cut them out.  It's not a big deal either way.  Keep them in.  Who cares.  It will matter none on the deficit side of things.  Not to mention, Congress is going to appropriate funds no matter if we call them earmarks or not.  This war on earmarks is grossly exaggerated and made for Fox News.