By The Right Scoop


Head of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka, says he got into the Labor movement because he wanted to promote “massive social change”, or as we all know it, socialism. Wow. That is a rather stark admission, but Beck said eventually the would start revealing their agenda out in the open.

I’m glad we are awake.

Source: The Blaze

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Philo-Bedoe/1427079026 Philo Bedoe

    Dear Mr/Ms. Moderator,

    The close up picture of Mr Trumka in the above video link is rather disturbing.

    Regards

    Philo

    • http://doorwaybuck.com CM Sackett

      Philo,

      …first time ever I’ve been thankful for blurred vision. :O)

  • Stltimt

    Thank You Mr. Obvious!

  • Anonymous

    Your headline is extremely misleading, biased, and dishonest.

    • Anonymous

      No it isn’t… go back to hufpo and the DU, tool…

    • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

      No it’s not. That’s exactly what massive social change is and you know it.

    • Anonymous

      “Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution.”

      I don’t care what you people that believe in social justice thinks about it. There’s more of We The People than you the other people, and it won’t happen.

      • Anonymous

        Source?

        • Anonymous

          http://www.websters-dictionary-online.org/definitions/Social+Justice?cx=partner-pub-0939450753529744%3Av0qd01-tdlq&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=Social+Justice&sa=Search#874

          Social justice refers to the concept of a society in which justice is achieved in every aspect of society, rather than merely the administration of law. The term can be amorphous and refer to sometimes self-contradictory values of justice. It is generally thought of as a world which affords individuals and groups fair treatment and an impartial share of the benefits of society. (Different proponents of social justice have developed different interpretations of what constitutes fair treatment and an impartial share’.) It can also refer to the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within a society.

          Social justice is both a philosophical problem and an important issue in politics, religion and civil society. Most individuals wish to live in a just society, but different political ideologies have different conceptions of what a ‘just society’ actually is. The term “social justice” is often employed by the political left to describe a society with a greater degree of economic egalitarianism, which may be achieved through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or property redistribution. The right wing also uses the term social justice, but generally believes that a just society is best achieved through the operation of a free market, which they believe provides equality of opportunity and promotes philanthropy and charity. Both the right and the left tend to agree on the importance of rule of law, human rights, and some form of a welfare safety net (though the left supports this last element to a greater extent than the right).

          Social Justice features as an apolitical philosophical concept (insofar as any philosophical analysis of politics can be free from bias) in much of John Rawls’ writing. It is fundamental to Catholic social teaching, and is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Party upheld by the worldwide green parties. Some of the tenets of social justice, sometimes renamed civil justice, have been adopted by those who lie on the left or center-left of the political spectrum (e.g. Socialists, Social Democrats, etc). Social justice is also a concept that some use to describe the movement towards a socially just world. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_B2IWXAC2IWBPPQHS7GJOALTVTI Christopher

        “progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution.”

        Everything that Socialism promotes.

  • moonbatkiller

    dismantle and outlaw all federal, state, and local unions NOW!!!!!!!!

    • Jeremiah

      Agreed.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah! Screw people’s rights to free speech and assembly!

        • sadpanda

          Thats not what its about you bafoon. Its ignorant people like you that make me believe this “social change” is very possible.

          • Anonymous

            What exactly is it about then? Labor unions are far from perfect, and I’m more than comfortable with acknowledging that, but by dismantling unions you would essentially be saying that workers have no right to organize and use their collected influence as leverage against more powerful interests that may or may not have their best interests at heart. Also, there is, of course, the Constitution, and any attempt by force of law to dismantle unions would be in violation thereof.

            With unions, you have a lot of people who are disconnected from the reality of the company’s bottom line petitioning – and on many occasions unreasonably – their employers for conditions that will allow them to lead comfortable lives under the threat of seriously damaging the company’s ability to function. Without unions you have a much smaller group of people who are primarily concerned with a company’s bottom line but often disconnected from the reality of their worker’s lives dictating conditions under the threat of firing people and making their lives that much more difficult.

            It’s a trade off either way, and as of yet, no middle ground has emerged; much like governance, power is best when it’s neither concentrated in a small group nor diffused among huge masses – but given the choice between an oligarchy and a pure democracy, I’d rather live in the latter.

  • Anonymous

    Bill O’Reilly said it best, ‘When people start talking about social justice, hold on to your wallets, folks’ or something like that. So even Ted Baxter knows the deal here.

  • Anonymous

    Richard Trumka AND Andy Stern are both communist’s who work at the pleasure of Comrade Barack Obama and George Soros. Trumka is a THUG and a very corrupt dirtbag. Unions are destroying this country’s economy with their ridiculous union pensions that the Taxpayer has to pay for. All their contracts need to be renegotiated and then their unions dissolved.

  • Extremely Right

    I’m sure there a lot of union members who cringe every time this thug opens his mouth. At least I hope so.

  • loveitorleaveit

    Why reinvent the wheel? There are plenty of socialist countries for him and others who feel and think socialism is so great, why don’t they move there and they can live their dream. Let’s propose a bill for a one way ticket to the socialist country of their chose. That would give a boost to the economy and at the same time provide opportunity for the socialist to start lining their dream.

  • Anonymous

    I wish this guy would end up like Jimmy Hoffa.

  • Anonymous

    I wish this guy would end up like Jimmy Hoffa.

  • WilliamHall1

    TREASON!