There is really nothing wrong with earmarks. In fact, they provide some security for the people and the Congressmen who represent them because they essentially specify where exactly money in spending bills will go as opposed to passing a bill without earmarks where technically the money can go anywhere including to the executive branch to do whatever they want with it.
The real problem in today's Congress is pork- which is useless standing. I didn't watch the video you posted above yet, but I know Ron Paul's stance on the issue and I really like it. He basically says that he uses earmarks in order to ensure his constituents do get some of the money from the spending projects in government. He still votes against most of these spending increases because he is a proponent of small government and is against bailouts, stimuli, etc, but if even with his no vote such a bill does get passed, it ensures that his constituents do get some of the money. He is against the spending, but if it really must go through he ensures that his people get their fair share.