What I find hilarious is how the Leftists moan and complain about the various “innocent” compatriot commies of theirs that died.

Best way to get a lefty to shut up on Pinochet is to bring up the 81-47 Chamber of Duties vote. They do not like to hear that.

It’s very easy to tweak their noses with this, manipulating their emotions and pulling on the fear one above all others.

http://neoneocon.com/2009/04/03/obama-and-the-disturbing-influence-of-frank-marshall-davis/

And would point to Dreams From My Father, where Barack Obama says that in college he “sought out..Marxist professors” in order to not be considered “a sellout.” When Obama was in high school, the genocide in Cambodia was well known. Before Obama had started his second semester in college, the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Anyone who, after such evidence of the genocidal and imperialist ambitions of Marxist regimes, would still “seek out..Marxist professors” is to my way of thinking, pretty hard core.

Employing self-professed Commie Van Jones in the Obama White House raised some eyebrows. Jones resigned soon after Glenn Beck and others publicized it.

But ultimately, Obama is for power for himself.

BTW, this blog has had some rather interesting conversations with the [apparent] son of Commie Frank Marshall Davis, who was a mentor of sorts to the teenaged Obama when he was a high school student in Hawaii. Perhaps Neo can pull them up.

“Would a one-party state be good for Chile?” I asked him.
And he answered, thoughtfully but surely, “No…no, not right away. It will take a while.”……….
“If you are elected, will there be elections again?” I asked him. He paused. “You must understand,” he said, carefully but revealingly, “that by the next elections, everything will have changed.”

How many democrats think a one-party state will be good for a country? Just wondering.

Here is a link to the complete Resolution of August 22 1973 the Chilean Chamber of Deputies passed by an 81-47 vote, which enumerated the failings of Allende. The Resolution is sometimes known as the “Declaration of the Breakdown of Chile’s Democracy.”

The Chilean Supreme Court also stated that Allende violated the Consitution.

One of Allende’s “legal” maneuvers was to decree hundreds of nationalizations, which he justified by referring to a DECREE LAW issued by Colonel Marmaduke Grove during the short-lived Socialist Republic of the 1930s. The Socialist Republic came to power by a military coup. Allende justifies his nationalizations by referring to a DECREE LAW issued by a military golpista government. Ironic, isn’t it? BTW, Allende was a a relative by marriage to Colonel Grove.

Chilean President Patricio Aylwin, the first elected President after the Pinochet years, had been head of the Christian Democratic Party during the Allende years. He played a leading part in the crafting of the August 22 Resolution- a Resolution which Allende correctly pointed out promoted a coup.
Aylwin had supported the coup- as did all living former Chilean Presidents- and later helped lead the NO vote in the 1988 referendum that lead to the December 1989 elections that replaced the Pinochet regime. A supporter of a Declaration that was an invitation to a coup, is later a leader in the winning NO vote in the 1988 Referendum that means that elections will be held and Pinochet has to leave office, and subsequently gets elected President in a center-left coalition. History is messy.