Who would have thought we’d be siding with the Teamsters Union?

Bush gives Mexican truckers access to American highways

Is this a by-product of the recent Montebello Summit where the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the North American Union, were top-of-the-agenda topics for Bush and his Canadian and Mexican counterparts?

Associated Press covers this important story:

The Teamsters Union said it will seek an emergency injunction from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to block the Bush administration’s plan to begin allowing Mexican trucks to carry cargo anywhere in the United States. Saturday will mark the beginning of the authorization of expansion of Mexican truckers beyond border areas. Mexican trucks are required to stop within a buffer border zone and transfer their loads to U.S. trucks.

 “What a slap in the face to American workers, opening the highways to dangerous trucks on Labor Day weekend, one of the busiest driving weekends of the year,” said Teamsters President Jim Hoffa.


14 Responses to Who would have thought we’d be siding with the Teamsters Union?

  1. Anon says:


    Republicans are supposed to be free trade. The trucking article is part of a 17-year old trade agreement. We should live up to the deal.

    Bully to Mary Peters for having the stones to step up.

  2. Frank W. says:

    Given that you are correct about this agreement, times have most definitely changed in the intervening years. Your “sigh” is lost on me! I care about this nation’s safety, sovereignty and security. Free trade flies right out the window when juxtaposed against our survival.

    Mary Peters has no “stones.” She answers to the White House and its agenda.

  3. ana says:

    Hey Republicans. If you care about this country know that for every ten trucks that come north from Mexico, only two go south into Mexico with American goods.

    So do the math. Eight American truckers will be out of work because a Mexican trucker took over their route.

    Don’t let it happen. Join with the displaced American truckers to save their jobs.

  4. Mr. Conservative says:

    Yeah, let’s help the Teamsters save their jobs!!! Oh, wait a minute, who do the Teamsters give money to every election year? Let’s think this through…

  5. ana says:

    Mr. Conservative,

    If you would rather give American jobs to foreigners rather than Americans because of partisan politics, you are not looking out for the good of America, but rather unwisely for the Republican party. It is Pubs like you who will help the Republicans lose elections. The American people and the good of the country are the issue. Poplulism will win the next election.

    George Bush has lost many votes for the Republicans and just today I heard a Republican conservative say that Giffords is better on border issues than Republicans.

    Keep it up.

  6. Frank W. says:

    George Bush is not only responsible for the loss of American jobs, he will also be responsible for the loss of congressional seats and the presidency. How I wish it were not so.
    We have been duped by a liberal charlatan masquerading as a conservative. I regret the fact that I gave him money and worked on his behalf. Bush is the second worst president we have ever had—topped in that infamous list by Jimma Carter.

    George Bush is proof positive that the “apple doesn’t fall far from the tree,” is a quote that is worth committing to memory. His father was also a snake.

  7. Anon says:

    Frank W. and ana are reading off of Big Labor Democrat talking points. No wonder this blog likes Sydney Hay. She worked for Duncan Hunter, one of the biggest protectionists in Congress.

    Don’t think that this back and forth over Nafta trucking isn’t costing you anything. Transfering goods to new trucks at the border isn’t free. Those costs get passed on to consumers. And all those idling trucks at the border? That’s not perfume and sunshine they’re spewing out.

  8. Frank W. says:

    The costs involved with transferring goods to American trucks is nothing compared to the highway safety and national security costs. Those are the highest prices of all—paid for with American lives.

  9. Anon says:

    Absurd. Absolutely absurd.

    Do you really think Mexican trucking companies already have the routs and business relationships established to start storming the border?

    What evidence are you citing that Mexican trucks will bring forth highway carnage? You sound like Pete DeFazio.

  10. ana says:

    Every Anerucan trucker who loses his job to a Mexican trucker is one more person who most likely loses the American dream. I know people who have been truckers who are literally living in shelters.

    Populism will win the next election.

  11. ana says:

    By the way, nothing will change at the border as far as trucks sitting there waiting to cross. That is a logisiical nightmare. The only thing that will change is that American truckers will not hitch their rigs to a trailer to bring them north. They will have to give up that task to Mexican truckers.

  12. anon says:

    ana –

    Yes, things will change. The drayage system will go away.

    “I know people who have been truckers who are literally living in shelters.”

    That has nothing to do with the trucking industry. I’m sorry to hear of their plight, but trucking companies are desperate for drivers. I don’t follow your logic. The Mexican truck deal hasn’t happened yet, but truckers are already living in shelters. Huh?

  13. ana says:

    My point about truckers is that there is no where for them to go when they lose their jobs. I do not know about so many trucking jobs being available.

    Could you please tell me how one finds out about them so I can pass the information one?

  14. anon says:


    The ATA will be able to hook you up.

%d bloggers like this: