Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

WORCESTER TEA PARTY THIS SATURDAY

By

The Worcester Tea Party is part of a national grassroots movement to protest out of control government spending and interference in the free market.  It is a response to the usurpation and subversion of personal freedoms and free market capitalism by the federal government. Tea Party participants support:

•the return to our founding Constitutional principles of personal responsibility, integrity, honesty, liberty, and economic freedom

•the re-assertion of our sovereignty as free men and women

•the re-establishment of local control through the strengthening of the rights of individual states

•the holding accountable of our government through citizen activism

and to accomplish these objectives through educating, recruiting, organizing and mobilizing the citizens of the Commonwealth.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Attendees may bring pro-economic freedom, anti-overspending signs.

    <

    p>You misspelled.  A (more) correct spelling would be:

    <

    p>Attendees may bring proeconomic freedom, antioverspending signs.

    <

    p>It is in a public park after all, so first amendment rights do apply.

    • “Attendees may bring proeconomic freedom, antioverspending signs.”  Note the “may”.  It’s non-exclusive; they “may” also NOT bring said signs or “may” bring other signs.  Your correction is therefore not more correct.

  3. and expanding the role of the federal government in the economy.

    <

    p>He put federal spending through the roof, created a huge new health care entitlement, and created the economic mess that everyone has to fix now.

    <

    p>A cynical observer might suppose the rally is more about partisan support for the Republican Party over the incumbents than a principled position on liberty and economic policy.

      • Internet rule:  replies correcting spelling usually contain errors of splleding.

        <

        p>

        Misspelling (6.00 / 2)
        A cynical observer
        An honest obsesrver

        <

        p>

    • because people didn’t protest Bush, they can never protest?  Even when the deficit is quadrupled and trillions are the new billions?

      <

      p>Its all Bush’s fault!

      <

      p>Yea right.

      <

      p>

      • If you protest now and didn’t protest then, we’ll just think you’re given to simple tribalism and won’t take you seriously.

        <

        p>You may also protest Biden’s malapropisms, oppose funding for the military in Iraq and Afghanistan, and complain about signs of politicization of the Justice Department. You can do that too, and we’ll also think your just doing it out of tribalism.

        • Just like always.  People don’t really care about spending trillions.

          <

          p>And, as if you could throw around accusations of tribalism!  This whole “progressive” “reality based” thing you guys have going on is nothing but.  Just look around.

  4. You meant to exit back at the sign for “Bankrupted Nation Due to Irresponsible Hawkish Excess–Next Right” in order to head for Red Mass Group.  GoogleGarmin is your friend.  

    • You should have added:  None of the above or I believe in government as did the founding fathers.  While the event is “free” the gasoline to drive there would cost money and I have much better uses for my time then to listen to Todd Fineburg, who I find unintelligent and so annoying I don’t listen to WRKO – and I find Carla Howell humorless and so doctrinaire that listening to her is NOT something I would do for recreation nor do I find her positions appealing at all.

      • I’ve yet to hear an ounce of protest over any of the silly left-wing polls posted. Sometimes I will even participate in them.

  5. Reading the bullet points “below the fold”, I gotta say: there’s no reason to be afraid of conservatives anymore. They’ve ceased even caring about making sense. The first bullet point, for example, sounds like a concatenation of Republican talking points, but it makes no sense; it is incoherent. Integrity is a principle? Honesty is Constitutional? Nor was economic freedom exactly a cornerstone of document that permitted human slavery.

    <

    p>I could go on, but why bloody more fish in the barrel?

    • What’s “an expert in government transparency”?

      <

      p>From Mr. Jain’s “Campaign For Liberty” sub-page:

      <

      p>

      My professional background is in a variety of technical and management roles, and that has given me the ability to analyze data.  That, in turn, has led me to the importance of transparency in government because while you can lie about the numbers, the numbers don’t lie.

      <

      p>Meh.

      •  For example:
        2,100,000 people died from AIDS IN 2007 (est. Wikipedia)
        The world population was 6,628,000,000 in 2007 (est. US Census)
        This pandemic affected 0.000006% of the world population.
        2,100,000 Big number! OUTRAGEOUS!
        0.000006 drop in a very large tub. So what.
        It’s all in the interpretation.

        • I’ll note you conveniently left out the 33 million people currently living with AIDS, the 25 million who’ve died, and the 11.6 million AIDS orphans (all courtesy WHO).

          <

          p>Not to mention that folks under 25 account for half the new AIDS cases.

          •  I was only pointing out how democrats, oops, I mean liars, oops again, figure. You may want to notice that I was referring to 2007 numbers only. That is when my school project was studying the disease. Throw all your numbers into the pot and maybe it is 1%. I do not mean to state that AIDS is a trivial issue.  

            • Your omission of relevant figures, no matter what excuse you come up with, is pretty much the definition of intellectual fraud.

              <

              p>You also ignore the definition of pandemic:

              <

              p>

              According to the World Health Organization (WHO), a pandemic can start when three conditions have been met:

              – emergence of a disease new to a population;
              – agents infect humans, causing serious illness; and
              – agents spread easily and sustainably among humans.

              A disease or condition is not a pandemic merely because it is widespread or kills many people; it must also be infectious. For instance, cancer is responsible for many deaths but is not considered a pandemic because the disease is not infectious or contagious.

              <

              p>In any case, “so what” is both dismissive and trivializing.

              <

              p>

              • That has to be your favorite word. You must say it a lot. I was merely pointing that fun with numbers is possible anywhere. My data are relevant to 2007. That is when my study was fociused on. I

Archives