Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Is Sarah Palin coming to Boston?

By

I have heard through the grape vine, the pseudo-spokeswoman for the tea party is coming to Boston on April 14th, 2010 at Copely Square.

Over the next week I challenge my fellow BMGers to engage the teapartiers on “right-wing’ radio.  Hit them with facts about taxation and the REAL REASON for the ORIGINAL TEA PARTY…which was the fight against the East India Company and corporate monopolies in America.

We can take the fight to them, or let them walk into Boston misinformed and misdirected.

ENGAGE, ENGAGE ENGAGE…call WTTK all next week.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • It does appear that Senator Brown is the subject of some lingering anger. Given the fact that he won the election fairly, acted as a complete gentleman up through the point where Senator Kirk gave up the seat, and even has voted with the Democrats on a jobs bill against the wishes of many on the far right, I do wonder when the venom subsides. Perhaps you should be angry with Ms. Coakley for running what I would guess you consider an awful campaign.  

      • Scott Brown is the junior Senator from Massachusetts. (ominous music). His votes on health care and other issues are the reason some people here speak in unflattering terms about him.

        <

        p>The campaign is over, you are right about that. Ms.Coakley is irrelevant to any ongoing discussions about Mr. Brown and approval or disapproval of him, just as Mr. Bush and Mr. Dole were when they lost to Mr. Clinton and just as Mr. Gore was when he lost to Mr. Bush. Mr. Kerry and Mr. Cheney remain(ed) relevant only insofar as they continued to serve in a capacity which led to direct and active opposition.

      • It does appear that President Obama is the subject of some lingering anger. Given the fact that he won the election fairly, acted as a complete gentleman up through the point where President Bush gave up the seat, and even has reached out to the Republicans on multiple occasions (something Bush never did for the Democrats) against the wishes of many on the left, I do wonder when the venom subsides. Perhaps you should be angry with Mr. McCain for running what I would guess you consider an awful campaign.

      • at the Democrats for running a candidate that I will never, not ever, vote for in any election.

        • for running candidates to the political right of the Democrats in the race.  If they would only run candidates more liberal/progressive/lefty than the Democrats, I really would like them so much more.

          <

          p>/concerntroll

          • CMD’s history is not that of a concern troll…he’s frankly a more reliable Democratic vote than some purity types, from his writing.

            <

            p>There were people who often vote (D), for various reasons, who never were going to vote for Coakley.  Just as would be the case for a Lynch candidacy.

          • Who I think is telling the truth about their position, over a person whispering sweet nothings that we wish to hear, just because we want to hear them, and will forget those nothings later.  Will also vote for someone well to my left for the same reason, and did so when I voted for the present governor.

            <

            p>She made her name on the backs of high profile cases, and in my view, revealed herself to have a pretty low ethical bar, to put it charitably.  Her position on the Patriot Act–while pretending to be some ardent defender of civil liberty, revealed that she disguises her own positions when she deems it politically convenient to do so.

            <

            p>If she runs again in 2012, I will vote for Sen. Brown again, and happily.  This November, I will vote for whomever the other candidate for AG is.

  2. The worst thing to do would be to make fun of Palin’s background or cultural image. Doing this will create GOP votes from people who don’t think much about policy but want to “stick it to them fancy-pants, snooty, stuck-up eggheads.” I believe that what matters in government is enforced policies and not vague sentiments, but some people vote their cultural resentments.

    <

    p>The answer to this is economic policies that create jobs in a depression.

    <

    p>If congress had ditched PAYGO and passed a larger stimulus bill, with “BIG GOVERNMENT MAKE WORK JOBS, OH HEAVENS MERCY ME!!!!!”, unemployment would have hit the floor, Santelli’s “tea parties” would be a joke, and support for Obama and Democrats would be through the roof.

    <

    p>Part of the inspiration for the program I just talked about is somebody whose cultural background was considered way MORE “redneck”, “hick”, “goober”, and “hayseed” than Palin is considered today.

    <

    p>He was Governor Huey Long of Louisiana. He did so much for both black and white poor people in Louisiana, and he provided political pressure to FDR to force him to go to the left on economics.

    <

    p>During that depression, I would rather stand with Governor Long that Manhattan Wall Street “sophisticates.”

    <

    p>During this depression, we need to return to those policies that not only provided employment, but built a lot of infrastructure that is with us today.

  3. Yes, Palin will be here.

    <

    p>By all means, condescendingly tell us your superior interpretaion of popular iconography, and why the interpretation having to do with taxation without representation is actualy wrong when view through Zinn-esque lenses.

    <

    p>It’s JUST the way to make friends and influence people!

    • that she is living proof that absentee parents sometimes end up with disfunctional children who become unwed mothers with boyfriends who abandon them.

      <

      p>Yup, Sarah Palin is the poster girl for family values – not her family to be sure but someone’s family values.

    • Are you really concerned about what we think about folks of your flavor?  Are you really suggesting people will like us better if we weren’t so, well, wrong?  Are you really concerned we don’t have any friends? Touched.  Really.  

      <

      p>  

      • PP is a member of the MA Republican State Committee.  What led her to post what she did?  Would counter-protesters help or hurt Sarah?

        <

        p>It IS interesting that PP has accepted the Tea Baggers as her own.  Very Rosemary’s Baby….

    • in the Statehouse and Washington DC. Hopefully they’ll run some principled candidates who can conduct themselves without resorting to this faux intellectual partisan rhetoric.

  4. it was very odd.  They asked if I support the Tea Party Patriots, then asked if I supported Palin.

    • I think she will submarine the GOP.  They’ll solidify their 25% but the crazier they seem, but with obvious fallout among the sane.

      • then immediately though I should have said yes, they probably booted me for the rest of the questions.  Oh well.

        •  I have heard Charlie Baker and infidelity mentioned in the same sentence. Anyone else?

            • Baker hasn’t run on family values
              The state GOP doesn’t seem to rally around them much either
              The national GOP certainly does.

              <

              p>So, how much room does the candidate have to shed his party’s label without actually speaking against it?  Dunno, just food for thought.

    • There is a break off faction of baggers, the New World Order crowd who may not even bother with elections at all.
      There is a right wing flavor to many places in the alt media.  The kind of stuff nobody bothers polling for.

  5. The idea isn’t to change the minds of the entire tea party crowd. That’s impossible. The only  thing where people agree in numbers of 90% or greater are mom and apple pie platitudes that are similar to saying “We all love the sweet goodness.” That is understood.

    <

    p>The idea is to give poor unemployed people well-paid jobs that let them buy goods and services, as well as vote for the politicians that deliver the jobs.

    <

    p>The economy is in a depression now. A lot of people are poor and are unemployed. The wealthy own a high percentage of the wealth. And they just sit on it, because they have everything they need anyway.

    <

    p>Taxing away this wealth, and spending it on government made jobs, gives money to these poor unemployed people. And with their new paychecks, these people BUY THINGS. This new consumer base, and nothing else, will stimulate the economy, creating even more jobs to make these goods and services.

    <

    p>It can also create research for things that are important, but that will not make an immediate profit.

    <

    p>Only this kind of wealth redistribution will get the nation out of the depression.

    <

    p>Politically, I am a “far left social libertarian.” On social issues, I want everyone to be left alone. That means legalized drugs and prostitution, and wide protection for free expression.

    <

    p>And, like Former Governor Palin, I oppose gun control.

    <

    p>I really want to know, how can anyone say that raising taxes on very wealthy people for important programs takes away more freedom than putting someone in jail for what they put in their own bodies?

    <

    p>

  6. The East India Company was not a corporate monopoly but an active agent of a coercive state, similarly the protesters were not humble consumers but rather businessman concerned with opening up foreign markets to their own companies. In many ways the East India Company operated in a way some liberals wish corporations would operate now, their rates were controlled by the state, they profits went back to public coffers and presumably was redistributed among the body politic, corporate responsibility was forced because it was a government entity, and it was certainly a jobs protecting ‘fair trade’ system as opposed to a free trade one. Of course most modern day liberals would be opposed to the unbridled imperialism that the EIC represented.

    <

    p>The right is distorting a historical moment that was important to our history, but make no mistake the original tea party was not a populist insurgency but a bourgeois revolution (which frankly the American revolution was). Britain was holding us back from becoming an economically and politically significant power, rightly so considering we did eventually overtake them. Furthermore the American colonists were demanding liberties the average English person was not even allowed, frankly the people of Manchester who did not have parliamentary representation until the 1830s when the franchise was first reformed had far more to complain about than the people of Boston who did quite well under King George’s ‘tyranny’.

    <

    p>The British risked their manpower and indebted themselves to protect us from the French and Indians, and we then balked at having to pick up the bill. Actually come to think of it a group of selfish, white, freeloaders demanding to get more from their government while paying less sounds a lot like the modern Tea Party movement as well.  

    • The perception of the EIC by the colonists is best represented by their own personal writtings.  The colonists perceived the TEA ACT as the “CROWN” giving the company tax EXEMPT status.(sound familiar today with all the corporate handouts and incentives?)

      <

      p>George R.T Hewes is a person of relevence regarding the writtings…he was present on the ships during the original tea party.

      <

      p>Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter on December 20th 1787 to James Madison…he wanted restriction of Monopolies in the Bill of rights.

      <

      p>If the EIC was not perceived as a monopoly by the founding fathers, why was there so much discontent against them.

      <

      p>Also when looking into their writtings the colonists speak alot about “the company” rather than the country.

  8. April 14, 10AM on the Boston Common (Parkman Bandstand) near Park/Boylston in Boston (this according to the “Tea Party Express” website). It’s Tea Party Terrorists Day in Boston and they’ll be looking to misappropriate the REAL Boston Tea Party not far from the graves of the REAL Boston patriots (who will no doubt be rolling in them).  Pass it on!

    • …what the tea party was really all about.  BTW, your handle is either ironic or very appropriate in this context.

Archives