Why use public money for museum many don't care about?

While I'm sure the National Czech & Slovak Museum & Library is a great place, I've lived in Eastern Iowa my entire life and didn't even know it existed until the flood destroyed it.

Many people will say that it's important to our local culture, and I would agree that it should be rebuilt. But I don't think we need to spend money that isn't ours to do it.

Second District Congressman Dave Loebsack took a cheap shot (April 21 story) at commentator Glenn Beck, because Loebsack is a liberal, and liberals must have an enemy to demonize at all times.

Now consider the federal government is $12 trillion in debt. It spent over $1 trillion more than it brought in last year. Don't you think we have better things to spend the money we don't have than on a museum most of us have never heard of? Couldn't the museum have raised the money from private donors? Didn't the museum have insurance?

Why must people who will never visit it pay to have it rebuilt? It's wrong to have the federal government confiscate my money and spend it on something that I will never use.

That's the point Beck was making, and it's the point liberals will never understand.

Matt Corcoran

Coralville