Or you can look at the way rally organizers billed its goals:

“The rally was conducted by the Statewide Alliance for Restoring the Trust (START). The coalition is comprised of the GBC, the Greater Washington Board of Trade, the Maryland Chamber of Commerce, more than a dozen county and local chambers of commerce, and more than 50 organizations and businesses. It seeks to convince members of the General Assembly to adopt recommendations made by the state’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation Funding to increase annual revenue to the transportation fund by $800 million.”

All Audrey had to look at the Greater Baltimore Committee website to see their legislative agenda, which features a call to “increase TTF revenues by $500 million.” http://www.gbc.org/reports/2012-LegislativeAgenda.pdf

In simpler language, it means raise the gas tax.

Before you answer though, think about the various Tea Party events you’ve gone to – did you always know who all the speakers would be and what they would say beforehand? Or what would be the sentiments expressed by other attendees at such rallies?

One in particular comes to mind – the one a few years back where someone had the bright idea to hang Frank Kratovil in effigy outside of his district office. As memory serves, you wrote about it having been there.

I know full well that isn’t something you’d agree with, but should you be held liable for the expression having been there (and if you weren’t should have you been held liable had you been there) or should you be considered as only supporting the point you were there to make, particularly if you make clear afterwards that you disapprove of that action and were there to protest Kratovil’s support of the leftist agenda and wasteful spending?

She should know that the press is going to be in favor of a gas tax, so I believe my point is still quite valid. If nothing else, they needed a Republican to be a prop and she chose to be there.