Republican candidate Steve Ward refuses to sign earmark pledge
March 26th, 2008 by Brendan SteinhauserColorado Republican candidate for the 6th district Steve Ward refused to sign the FreedomWorks “No Earmarks Pledge” today. I just got off the phone with him and he did not provide a reason for this refusal to sign this common sense pledge. Sadly, too many Republicans pay lip service to supporting “limited government” while not putting their money where their mouth is. I encourage all of you in Steve’s district to give him a call and ask him why he won’t sign our pledge.
steve@stevewardforcongress.com
March 26th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Fortunately, Ward is a longshot for the republican nomination in district 6. Given this status it’s even more puzzling why he wouldn’t sign the pledge. Coffman, Armstrong and Harvey are all more likely nominees according to coloradopols.com. Let’s see how they respond.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Wow…now we’re going to berate people that *won’t* sign the pledge too? This is going to be a loooong year indeed folks…
March 27th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
The people of any district should not have to ask a Senator or Congress Person to sign such a pledge. But that would only be true if the world knoew that congress person or senator would not spend the peoples money like a drunkin fool. They have brought a real mess onto the entire country and this mess has to stop.
Now Mister Guy it appears to me has enough money to make the load a little easer on his grand kids. I don’t have that much and if I did I would still love to see anyone who refused to sign this voted right out of office. I believe if any senato or congress person would just honor the oath fo their office this pledge would be unnessary. Thank you.
March 27th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
While I’ve agreed again & again that earmarks are generally bad, they are not bankrupting our country. Now, the War in Iraq, supply-side economics, etc….that *is* bankrupting America…wake up…
March 28th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Knock-Knock, anyone home? Bankrupting the country is what we are concerned about. Unless you are a pacifist the war in the middle east is a must. It is a shame and it does cost a lot of money. My freedom is worth saving. The bridge to no where or Kennedy’s supper highway does nothing but bleed the tax payer.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
The War in Iraq is/was far from “a must”. How about we go after the people who attacked us on 9/11 where they actually are (Afganistan & Pakistan) and *not* where they are not (Iraq & Iran)? Look at the numbers in terms of what’s being spend on what and wake up…
March 30th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Mister Guy is no different than his fellow leftists. He’ll sieze upon an issue and in response issue worn, empty platitudes. I’ve heard all the nonsense about 9/11, Iraq vs. Afghanistan and Pakistan, supply-side economics, ad nauseum.
The issue is earmarks. And it doesn’t matter whether or not that in relative terms, earmarks are or are not bankrupting the country. Earmarking is an end-run around the Constitutional process. And when big government begins such a practice, it must either be forcibly brought to an end or it will grow and grow.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Yeah, earmarks are bad, but you’re not going to balance the budget (remember when the GOP used to be for doing that?) by just focusing on them. The real money is located elsewhere in the budgeting process. Since when are earmarks unConstitutional BTW??