Teamsters president Sean O'Brien savages big business in RNC speech

[Matt Collins]

Please do not misconstrue any of my previous posts to mean that Trump is labor friendly.

He's not, and he won't be.

This is all for show and O'brien hooked up with a fastball across the middle with this speech.

Rank and file in the pilot unions I was in were generally social conservatives.

The Teamsters have always acknowledged this.

Other labor unions do not.

Especially public sector unions.....

which should be outlawed.

Yeah the cognitive dissonance here is always fascinating to me. Ultra conservative blue collar workers loving commie organizations who support and fund Democrats.

 

[Matt Collins]

Oh. Well. There's a good reason to turn them away. Far better they fund your opposition than you, right?

You clearly don't understand unions and their communist roots. The leadership will NEVER support conservatives in any meaningful way.

 

[acptulsa]

You clearly don't understand unions and their communist roots. The leadership will NEVER support conservatives in any meaningful way.

You're the one who doesn't understand. The RNC isn't run by conservatives.

 

[Matt Collins]

You're the one who doesn't understand. The RNC isn't run by conservatives.

Ok that is a very fair and valid point.

 

[Occam's Banana]

CLIP from SYSTEM UPDATE #298:

Teamster President's Extraordinary RNC Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueTkTff6EA4
{Glenn Greenwald | 17 July 2024}


​

 

[Invisible Man]

A lot of top republicans would be happy losing, forever, until the republic fell.

I'm with @CaptUSA and @sparebulb on this, the right should have chasing the working man's vote for years now.

Especially now that the Democrat's constituency is naught more than queeers, communists, foreign invaders and unhinged female basket cases concerned only about how many babies they can kill and when they can kill them.

Should the right also chase after the votes of immigrants and people of color so that they can win more?

 

[CaptUSA]

Should the right also chase after the votes of immigrants and people of color so that they can win more?

Sure. LEGAL immigrants and people of every color. As long as you're sticking to principles, it's imperative to show people how those principles apply to them, too.

(Not saying the GOP has any, but if they did...)

 

[Invisible Man]

Sure. LEGAL immigrants and people of every color. As long as you're sticking to principles, it's imperative to show people how those principles apply to them, too.

(Not saying the GOP has any, but if they did...)

I mean. I agree with you. But I would like to hear AF's answer.

 

[sparebulb]

RIP JIMMY HOFFA

I'll second that.

 

[RJB]

Should the right also chase after the votes of immigrants and people of color so that they can win more?

AF said that the right should go after the "working man's vote." With your marxist language, are you implying that immigrants and people of color aren't working men?

 

[Invisible Man]

AF said that the right should go after the "working man's vote." With your marxist language, are you implying that immigrants and people of color aren't working men?

They may or may not be. But what marxist language are you referring to?

 

[RJB]

But what marxist language are you referring to?

Making everything racial to silence an opponent... That's just so 2010. No one cares anymore if you accuse someone who is not racist a racist and frankly no one cares if someone actually is one. We're just trying to survive in this crappy economy. Making things racial just comes across clumsy. It just falls flat.

I think these days they are telling us not to vote, but rather demand freedom harder or something. I don't get the memos, but that's what others seem to be doing. Yeah that's it. Demand harder, that's what you are supposed to be saying.

 

[Invisible Man]

Making everything racial to silence an opponent... That's just so 2010. No one cares anymore if you accuse someone who is not racist a racist and frankly no one cares if someone actually is one. We're just trying to survive in this crappy economy. Making things racial just comes across clumsy. It just falls flat.

I think these days they are telling us not to vote, but rather demand freedom harder or something. I don't get the memos, but that's what others seem to be doing. Yeah that's it. Demand harder, that's what you are supposed to be saying.

AF’s entire purpose here is to make everything racial, as you, being his mindless cheerleader are well aware. And he’s more than happy to support marxism in so doing. In this thread, it’s his language, euphemistically calling the communist labor unions “working people” as if the rest of us got everything we have by inheritance and wage slavery, that’s marxist language, not mine.

 

[RJB]

AF’s entire purpose here is to make everything racial, as you, being his mindless cheerleader are well aware. And he’s more than happy to support marxism in so doing. In this thread, it’s his language, euphemistically calling the communist labor unions “working people” as if the rest of us got everything we have by inheritance and wage slavery, that’s marxist language, not mine.

I'm not cheering him. I'm simply telling you that the shtick that you've used for the last decade under different accounts doesn't work anymore. And I am sure that you know that marxist never were for the working class. Hell they don't give them lip service anymore. As you know, intesectionality is the currrent concept to divide and silence people.

 

[LibertyEagle]

A lot of top republicans would be happy losing, forever, until the republic fell.

I'm with [MENTION=30558]CaptUSA[/MENTION] and [MENTION=5574]sparebulb[/MENTION] on this, the right should have chasing the working man's vote for years now.

Especially now that the Democrat's constituency is naught more than queeers, communists, foreign invaders and unhinged female basket cases concerned only about how many babies they can kill and when they can kill them.

Define “working man”. Does this mean what used to be referred to as blue collar workers? Because in the right-to-work states, something the Teamsters dude seems to hate, blue collar workers aren’t in labor unions. Personally, I have no issue with them, as long as joining one isn’t mandatory, like they once were.

 

[otherone]

Define “working man”.

A "working man" is any person who puts bread on his own table. He neither asks for nor accepts help, especially from the government. He is not a victim. If he fails, he tries harder. He understands that his life is his own responsibility. He is educated or uneducated. He is black, white, latino, gay straight or handicapped. He is my brother.

 

[LibertyEagle]

A "working man" is any person who puts bread on his own table. He neither asks for nor accepts help, especially from the government. He is not a victim. If he fails, he tries harder. He understands that his life is his own responsibility. He is educated or uneducated. He is black, white, latino, gay straight or handicapped. He is my brother.

Well hell, that is all of us who aren’t buying off government to give us special favor.

 

[otherone]

Well hell, that is all of us who aren’t buying off government to give us special favor.

See? Who says libertarians can't find common ground?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Sure. LEGAL immigrants and people of every color. As long as you're sticking to principles, it's imperative to show people how those principles apply to them, too.

(Not saying the GOP has any, but if they did...)

That is very close to what Ron Paul has said.

 

[LibertyEagle]

See? Who says libertarians can't find common ground?

Except that I am not a libertarian. Partly, for sure. Currently, I don’t think I fit in any category, besides an independent American. Once upon a time, I called myself a conservative, but they twisted that all up, just like they did to the term, liberal.

The Goldwater-Conservatives had a lot of libertarian beliefs. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the Libertarian Party created by frustrated Conservatives?