Actually, no, you're wrong there. As I see it, it's a meta-entity. It can be thought of as a separate thing only so far as in it's actions are considered. It's motives and function are as if it was not a thing, and simply an extension of the people. Ie., it's a bit more complicated than black and white.
I agree that people should discuss the application of government funds to things, but I don't think people should attack the system, or the way in funds are appropriated, if their primary intent is to try and argue that because it does not pay for something you want (or pays for something you're against), that it is somehow bad and should be stripped of "their" money. You don't have that right, you gave that up to live in the country. The Government will take your money, and at that point it ceases to be your money and becomes everyone's money, in which case it is spent as everyone has thusfar decided via the fair medium of representative democracy.
Didn't vote for the person representing you? Tough. That's democracy. Your alternative option is something non-representational and probably less fair. Them's the rules you agreed to by living (or continuing to live) in a country. You agree to abide by the majority's choice, and accept that the person representing your area as a result represents you. Again, if you don't like that, now's the time to go and argue to other people as to why, but don't try and make it seem like the system is somehow horrible because you didn't get what you want, only to praise it when you do get what you want.
But that's why I don't like democracy in the first place. I think it's not representative of anyone, it's not efficient, it's not got good direction, and it does not aim for the greater good as a government ostensibly should. I don't even like the system when I do get what I want, because it's a perversion of what I want.
I do understand my views are real confusing, but that's cause I like to operate as much as possible in the real world. My idealistic dreamspace is very different