PDA

View Full Version : Democrats block Senate Resolution to pay homage to Margaret Thatcher



txradioguy
04-15-2013, 06:04 AM
Senate Democrats have reportedly blocked a proposed resolution to honor former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, with Republicans blasting their opponents for failing to show respect.

A Capitol Hill source claims that the tribute was supposed to pass on Wednesday night but was placed on hold by Democrats, according to a blog by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative American think tank.


The House of Representatives already passed a resolution in honor of the late Conservative politician, who died on Monday in London at age 87.


'To refuse to honor a woman of such great historical and political significance, who was deeply loyal to the United States, is petty and shameful,' Katherine Rosario, Communications Deputy for Heritage Action wrote in her post reporting the Senate debacle.


'One truly has to wonder, what is it about Lady Thatcher that gives them pause? Her unfaltering commitment to freedom? Or perhaps the way she fought for individual liberty and limited government?'


In response to the Senate's alleged failure to pass the resolution, a House GOP aide told the MailOnline, 'Wow, we knew Senate Democrats couldn't pass budgets, but it’s pretty amazing that they can’t pass a resolution to honor the late Margaret Thatcher.'

In the lower chamber of Congress, Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Virginia) presented a resolution on Tuesday to honor Thatcher, hailing the late leader for her 'life-long commitment to advancing freedom, liberty, and democracy and for her friendship to the United States.'


The House, which is Republican controlled, passed H. Res. 141 on Tuesday night by unanimous consent.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308293/Republican-fury-Democrats-block-Senate-Resolution-pay-homage-Margaret-Thatcher-House-unanimously-passes-tribute-

Lanie
04-15-2013, 09:41 AM
Okay, I've tried to be nice because she's dead. Didn't want to be a grave dancer.

But now, if you don't like her and don't think she should be honored, you're some sort of a commie.

Let's make something clear. This woman supported Pinochet. That's what gives me pause. That's what makes me conclude she wasn't for human rights, much less freedom.

More about Pinochet.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/461158/Augusto-Pinochet


Augusto Pinochet, in full Augusto Pinochet Ugarte (born Nov. 25, 1915, Valparaiso, Chile—died Dec. 10, 2006, Santiago), leader of the military junta that overthrew the socialist government of President Salvador Allende of Chile on Sept. 11, 1973, and head of Chile’s military government (1974–90).

And btw, that socialist government (say what you will about it) was democratically elected. If you're for overthrowing a democratically elected government, then you're against freedom.


Pinochet, a graduate of the military academy in Santiago (1936), was a career military officer who was appointed army commander in chief by President Allende 18 days before the coup, which he planned and led. Pinochet was named head of the victorious junta’s governing council, and he moved to crush Chile’s liberal opposition; in its first three years, the regime arrested approximately 130,000, many of whom were tortured. In June 1974 Pinochet assumed sole power as president, relegating the rest of the junta to an advisory role.

Pinochet was determined to exterminate leftism in Chile and to reassert free-market policies in the country’s economy. His junta was widely condemned for its harsh suppression of dissent, even though its reversal of the Allende government’s socialist policies resulted in a lower rate of inflation and an economic boom in the period from 1976 to 1979. A modest political liberalization began in 1978 after the regime announced that, in a plebiscite, 75 percent of the electorate had endorsed Pinochet’s rule.


Later in 1998, while visiting London, he was detained by British authorities after Spain requested his extradition in connection with the torture of Spanish citizens in Chile during his rule. The unprecedented case stirred worldwide controversy and galvanized human-rights organizations in Chile. The United States and other countries were prompted to release formerly classified documents concerning Chileans who had “disappeared”—were kidnapped and presumably killed by the Pinochet regime. The disclosures brought to light details of Operation Colombo, in which more than 100 Chilean leftists had disappeared in 1975, and Operation Condor, in which several South American military governments coordinated their efforts to systematically eliminate opponents in the 1970s and ’80s. In January 2000 Pinochet was allowed to return home after a British court ruled that he was physically unfit to stand trial. Nevertheless, he continued to face investigations by Chilean authorities.

Thatcher's role in this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/304516.stm


Baroness Thatcher has visited General Pinochet at the home where he is staying under house arrest near London - and talked of the "debt" she believes the UK owes him.


She added: "I'm also very much aware that it is you who brought democracy to Chile, you set up a constitution suitable for democracy, you put it into effect, elections were held, and then, in accordance with the result, you stepped down."

Brought democracy to Chile? It was a coup, and he wouldn't allow any meaningful political opposition (either killing or disappearing his opposition). Either she was ignorant or she flat out lied.

If this woman supported Pinochet, then there's probably other nasty cold war stuff about her I don't know. I'm sorry that she's dead, but she was NOT a hero. She was a woman who supported a mass murderer. She doesn't deserve honor. That's just conservatives trying to ram their beliefs down our throats.

Truth is if you support Pinochet, then you don't support freedom. PERIOD.

Lanie
04-15-2013, 09:57 AM
More on Thatcher.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/people/margaret_thatcher


She was an advocate of privatising state-owned industries and utilities, reforming trade unions, lowering taxes and reducing social expenditure across the board. Thatcher's policies succeeded in reducing inflation, but unemployment dramatically increased during her years in power.

So, not much of an advocate for the working class or even employment.


In the 1987 general election, Thatcher won an unprecedented third term in office. But controversial policies, including the poll tax and her opposition to any closer integration with Europe, produced divisions within the Conservative Party which led to a leadership challenge. In November 1990, she agreed to resign and was succeeded as party leader and prime minister by John Major.

If you're for a poll tax (taxing somebody to vote), then you are not for freedom. She knew that there would be people who wouldn't qualify as being considered poor, but yet couldn't pay that tax. It's just common sense.

So yeah. I don't want to dance on her grave, but I don't appreciate the idea that you better honor her or you're against freedom. It's the opposite.

LukeEDay
04-15-2013, 09:58 AM
Dems suck. Plain and simple. They are all dancing in the isles to honor Chavez but not Thatcher? Oh wait, Chavez was a communist like them.

txradioguy
04-15-2013, 10:49 AM
Lanie/Bridget...fuck off.

I mean that sincerely.

The woman was one of the main reason the Soviet Union is referred to in the past and not the present.

And all mouth breathing moronic ass clowns like you can do is grave dance.

You didn't "try to be nice"...you came out of the gate with this rubbish.

You'd have been better off knowing your role and shutting your damn mouth for once.

You wonder why you get treated here like you do...it's because you act like you're all innocent and nice and hide behind that rouse to say some of the meanest Libtard things imaginable.

I'll remember this the next time you get your panties in a twist because we say good riddance to some dictator that was beloved by your fellow Socialist Democrats.

txradioguy
04-15-2013, 10:58 AM
Dems suck. Plain and simple. They are all dancing in the isles to honor Chavez but not Thatcher? Oh wait, Chavez was a communist like them.

Great Britan was in worse shape economically than the U.S. was when she took over at PM. She saved that country. most of the hate over there is coming from...surprise...the labor unions and here it's coming from people pissed the USSR is no more and idiots like Lanie/Bridget who weren't old enough to know what she did not only in her own country to save it but her contributions to a free Europe...and only repeat the allegedly eveil deeds she did.

If you listened to Libtards like her...you'd think the three most evil people ever put on this earth were Maggie Thatcher Ronald Reagan and Karol Józef Wojtyła.

Bailey
04-15-2013, 11:23 AM
Lanie/Bridget...fuck off.

I mean that sincerely.

The woman was one of the main reason the Soviet Union is referred to in the past and not the present.

And all mouth breathing moronic ass clowns like you can do is grave dance.

You didn't "try to be nice"...you came out of the gate with this rubbish.

You'd have been better off knowing your role and shutting your damn mouth for once.

You wonder why you get treated here like you do...it's because you act like you're all innocent and nice and hide behind that rouse to say some of the meanest Libtard things imaginable.

I'll remember this the next time you get your panties in a twist because we say good riddance to some dictator that was beloved by your fellow Socialist Democrats.



She has earned (Lanie) the title Scrunt to be honest with you.


We owe her a debt of honor after all the help she gave us in defeating the USSR.

txradioguy
04-15-2013, 11:26 AM
We owe her a debt of honor after all the help she gave us in defeating the USSR.

Couldn't have done it with out here quite honestly.

NJCardFan
04-15-2013, 12:43 PM
<snip>

However, you love Obama even though he has a love for Chavez, Castro, Mao, Stalin, etc. Typical leftist hypocrite.

NJCardFan
04-15-2013, 12:44 PM
You'd have been better off knowing your role and shutting your damn mouth for once.



Alright there Dwayne. :cool:

Jim54
04-15-2013, 01:55 PM
Okay, I've tried to be nice because she's dead. Didn't want to be a grave dancer.

But now, if you don't like her and don't think she should be honored, you're some sort of a commie.

Let's make something clear. This woman supported Pinochet. That's what gives me pause. That's what makes me conclude she wasn't for human rights, much less freedom.

More about Pinochet.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/461158/Augusto-Pinochet



And btw, that socialist government (say what you will about it) was democratically elected. If you're for overthrowing a democratically elected government, then you're against freedom.





Thatcher's role in this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/304516.stm





Brought democracy to Chile? It was a coup, and he wouldn't allow any meaningful political opposition (either killing or disappearing his opposition). Either she was ignorant or she flat out lied.

If this woman supported Pinochet, then there's probably other nasty cold war stuff about her I don't know. I'm sorry that she's dead, but she was NOT a hero. She was a woman who supported a mass murderer. She doesn't deserve honor. That's just conservatives trying to ram their beliefs down our throats.

Truth is if you support Pinochet, then you don't support freedom. PERIOD.

He used the left's favored methods against them. He did exactly what Mao or Uncle Joe wouldv'e done. He had informers, he tortured, he executed, he was ruthless just as his enemies were. Does it make what he did morally right by our standards? Hell no it doesn't, but it made him very effective. And now, let us apply the universal multicultural relativism standard and we see that he was only doing what his culture allowed. If 100 million assorted victims of Stalin, Mao or Hitler don't get a rise out anyone then why now? Oh wait, his victims were mostly leftists, and the demographic makes all the difference to some, doesn't it?

Odysseus
04-15-2013, 03:07 PM
Lanie:

Pinochet didn't singlehandedly depose Allende. Allende won a small plurality of the vote and proceded to govern as if he'd won a landslide, which united the opposition into a majority that would have swept him out of office in the next election. The economy collapsed and Allende attempted to rule by decree, but the opposition paralyzed the country with strikes and civil disobedience. Allende's response was to arm his supporters and pull a Chavez, but the army responded and Allende's putche failed. Pinochet ran the country until the leftist revolutionaries were defeated, at which point he voluntarily stepped down and restored the constitutional norms. When he was detained in Britain, it was at the behest of a Spanish court claiming jurisdiction over internal Chilean affairs and voiding Pinochet's diplomatic immunity as a member of the Chilean legislature. Thatcher's support for the rule of law enraged the British left (as always) and they libeled her once again.

Stop repeating the talking points of liars unless you want to be judged as one yourself.

Sic hacer pace, para bellum.
Sent from my android.

LukeEDay
04-15-2013, 03:34 PM
Two of the greatest people from my generation are Reagan and Thatcher. To hell with the stupid Liberals who hate them both. They are just upset because they didn't try to destroy the country by passing their socialist agenda.... Typical brain dead liberals. Think they know what is best for everyone, but don't follow their own agenda.. You want me to give you some examples? God, liberals are stupid ..

Lanie
04-15-2013, 11:35 PM
Dems suck. Plain and simple. They are all dancing in the isles to honor Chavez but not Thatcher? Oh wait, Chavez was a communist like them.

Chavez sucked too because he also trampled on political opposition.

Lanie
04-15-2013, 11:39 PM
Lanie/Bridget...fuck off.

I mean that sincerely.

The woman was one of the main reason the Soviet Union is referred to in the past and not the present.

And all mouth breathing moronic ass clowns like you can do is grave dance.

You didn't "try to be nice"...you came out of the gate with this rubbish.

You'd have been better off knowing your role and shutting your damn mouth for once.

You wonder why you get treated here like you do...it's because you act like you're all innocent and nice and hide behind that rouse to say some of the meanest Libtard things imaginable.

I'll remember this the next time you get your panties in a twist because we say good riddance to some dictator that was beloved by your fellow Socialist Democrats.


I don't recall getting my panties in a twist over you all being happy for the death of somebody like Chavez. In fact, I went on DU and pointed out he was against political opposition and was basically not a hero, just like I said here. I wasn't grave dancing then, and I'm not grave dancing now. I'm not happy that she's dead. I just don't appreciate the idea that people HAVE to honor her or else they're bad. And yes, I did try to be nice. I've been practically silent the entire time.

So, I'll make you a deal. I'll "fuck off" in regards to saying things that aren't nice about Thatcher if you "fuck off" in regards to the idea that we MUST honor her. If you and your fellow conservatives drop that idea, I'll keep my mouth shut.

Lanie
04-15-2013, 11:42 PM
However, you love Obama even though he has a love for Chavez, Castro, Mao, Stalin, etc. Typical leftist hypocrite.

I think he paid respect to Chavez. I don't recall Obama paying any respect to the other leaders that you mention.

Good point though, although I don't love Obama. I usually don't love leaders the way some of you all do.

Lanie
04-15-2013, 11:47 PM
Lanie:

Pinochet didn't singlehandedly depose Allende. Allende won a small plurality of the vote and proceded to govern as if he'd won a landslide, which united the opposition into a majority that would have swept him out of office in the next election. The economy collapsed and Allende attempted to rule by decree, but the opposition paralyzed the country with strikes and civil disobedience. Allende's response was to arm his supporters and pull a Chavez, but the army responded and Allende's putche failed. Pinochet ran the country until the leftist revolutionaries were defeated, at which point he voluntarily stepped down and restored the constitutional norms. When he was detained in Britain, it was at the behest of a Spanish court claiming jurisdiction over internal Chilean affairs and voiding Pinochet's diplomatic immunity as a member of the Chilean legislature. Thatcher's support for the rule of law enraged the British left (as always) and they libeled her once again.

Stop repeating the talking points of liars unless you want to be judged as one yourself.

Sic hacer pace, para bellum.
Sent from my android.

Pinochet murdered people for being the opposition. That's not a lie. Nothing Allende or another leader did justifies that.

You all make excuses for these human rights violations with what? Stalin did it. Nobody here is disagreeing that Stalin was a monster, so that's why I'm not complaining about him. But people are making excuses for Pinochet. There was no excuse in what he did.

How can you expect me to believe your side is for freedom, when people defend stuff like this? How can you expect me to believe you're for free speech when you try to use the tactic of "Convert or you're a liar?" No, I'm not playing that game.

SaintLouieWoman
04-15-2013, 11:55 PM
Pinochet murdered people for being the opposition. That's not a lie. Nothing Allende or another leader did justifies that.

You all make excuses for these human rights violations with what? Stalin did it. Nobody here is disagreeing that Stalin was a monster, so that's why I'm not complaining about him. But people are making excuses for Pinochet. There was no excuse in what he did.

How can you expect me to believe your side is for freedom, when people defend stuff like this? How can you expect me to believe you're for free speech when you try to use the tactic of "Convert or you're a liar?" No, I'm not playing that game.

In the words of the immortal Rhett Butler in Gone with the Wind, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

Lanie, it's not all about you and why we should get all excited trying to make you agree with conservatives. It's a moot point.

Lady Thatcher has always been one of my heroes. She was a great, courageous woman who spoke her mind and stood up for what she thought was right. You don't see much of that around today.

She was a great supporter of Reagan and under her, the UK was a staunch ally of the United States.

I personally don't get all wrapped up in wanting liberals to agree with me. Everyone has their right to their opinion.

And I don't like grave dancers on either side of the aisle.

Lanie
04-16-2013, 12:03 AM
In the words of the immortal Rhett Butler in Gone with the Wind, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

Lanie, it's not all about you and why we should get all excited trying to make you agree with conservatives. It's a moot point.

Lady Thatcher has always been one of my heroes. She was a great, courageous woman who spoke her mind and stood up for what she thought was right. You don't see much of that around today.

She was a great supporter of Reagan and under her, the UK was a staunch ally of the United States.

I personally don't get all wrapped up in wanting liberals to agree with me. Everyone has their right to their opinion.

And I don't like grave dancers on either side of the aisle.

You're right. It's not about me. It's about wanting Dems to support a resolution honoring her. Truth is nobody wants the silence of Democrats. The conservatives want their support.

And I'm not glad that she's dead. All the people in the world saying otherwise won't change that fact.

Lanie
04-16-2013, 12:11 AM
And for those of you who think Pinochet only murdered and disappeared extreme Marxists, you're wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/pinochet/overview.htm


The victims of the persecution spanned the population: indigenous peoples, the Catholic Church, the rural community with labor unions, former government officials and leftist political parties facing the fiercest repression. More people were killed in the four months following the coup (through December 1973) than in any other year of the dictatorship. According to Amnesty International and the U.N. Human Rights Commission, 250,000 people were detained for political reasons during this period.

It's funny. During the 2012 election, a big deal was made about the supposed persecution of Catholics over the birth control issue. All the while, this guy murdered Catholics. But that's no big deal because he was a righty, right? He killed people in the rural community for being part of unions. Nobody deserves to die or to be arrested for this stuff.

I've said what I had to say.

txradioguy
04-16-2013, 06:08 AM
In the words of the immortal Rhett Butler in Gone with the Wind, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

Lanie, it's not all about you and why we should get all excited trying to make you agree with conservatives. It's a moot point.

Lady Thatcher has always been one of my heroes. She was a great, courageous woman who spoke her mind and stood up for what she thought was right. You don't see much of that around today.

She was a great supporter of Reagan and under her, the UK was a staunch ally of the United States.

I personally don't get all wrapped up in wanting liberals to agree with me. Everyone has their right to their opinion.

And I don't like grave dancers on either side of the aisle.

QFT

txradioguy
04-16-2013, 06:08 AM
And for those of you who think Pinochet only murdered and disappeared extreme Marxists, you're wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/pinochet/overview.htm



It's funny. During the 2012 election, a big deal was made about the supposed persecution of Catholics over the birth control issue. All the while, this guy murdered Catholics. But that's no big deal because he was a righty, right? He killed people in the rural community for being part of unions. Nobody deserves to die or to be arrested for this stuff.

I've said what I had to say.

Just can't ever admit you're wrong can you? :rolleyes:

Lanie
04-16-2013, 09:21 AM
Just can't ever admit you're wrong can you? :rolleyes:

I thought about apologizing last night because I know how much Thatcher means to people. Saying I think I'm wrong about Thatcher and that you all are right would be lying though. And isn't that what you accuse me of all the time? Lying. You want me to "tell the truth" and admit I'm a moonbat. Well, here you go. This is how I honestly think/feel about this subject.

I'm sorry that I've offended you all with my words. I am sorry for those grieving her death including her family.

Odysseus
04-17-2013, 09:05 AM
Pinochet murdered people for being the opposition. That's not a lie. Nothing Allende or another leader did justifies that.

You all make excuses for these human rights violations with what? Stalin did it. Nobody here is disagreeing that Stalin was a monster, so that's why I'm not complaining about him. But people are making excuses for Pinochet. There was no excuse in what he did.

How can you expect me to believe your side is for freedom, when people defend stuff like this? How can you expect me to believe you're for free speech when you try to use the tactic of "Convert or you're a liar?" No, I'm not playing that game.

Lanie, he was fighting a civil war. Before Allende was deposed, he had been cited unanimously by the Chilean Supreme Court for taking unconstitutional measures, and impeached by the legislature. Allende's response was to foment a civil war. Here's Wikipedia's summary:


Supreme Court's resolution On 26 May 1973, Chile’s Supreme Court unanimously denounced the Allende régime’s disruption of the legality of the nation in its failure to uphold judicial decisions. It refused to permit police execution of judicial resolutions that contradicted the Government's measures.
[edit (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/w/index.php?title=1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat&action=edit&section=4)] Chamber of Deputies' resolutionOn 22 August 1973, with the support of the Christian Democrats and National Party members, the Chamber of Deputies passed 81–47 a resolution that asked "the President of the Republic, Ministers of State, and members of the Armed and Police Forces"[19] (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/#cite_note-19) to "put an immediate end" to "breach[es of] the Constitution . . . with the goal of redirecting government activity toward the path of Law and ensuring the Constitutional order of our Nation, and the essential underpinnings of democratic co-existence among Chileans."

The resolution declared that the Allende Government sought ". . . to conquer absolute power with the obvious purpose of subjecting all citizens to the strictest political and economic control by the State . . . [with] the goal of establishing a totalitarian system", claiming it had made "violations of the Constitution . . . a permanent system of conduct." Essentially, most of the accusations were about the Socialist Government disregarding the separation of powers, and arrogating legislative and judicial prerogatives to the executive branch of government.
Specifically, the Socialist Government of President Allende was accused of:


ruling by decree (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/wiki/Ruling_by_decree), thwarting the normal legislative system
refusing to enforce judicial decisions against its partisans; not carrying out sentences and judicial resolutions that contravene its objectives
ignoring the decrees of the independent General Comptroller's Office
sundry media offences; usurping control of the National Television Network and applying ... economic pressure against those media organizations that are not unconditional supporters of the government...
allowing its socialist supporters to assemble armed, preventing the same by its right wing opponents
. . . supporting more than 1,500 illegal ‘takings’ of farms...
illegal repression of the El Teniente miners’ strike
illegally limiting emigration

Finally, the resolution condemned the creation and development of government-protected [socialist] armed groups, which . . . are headed towards a confrontation with the armed forces. President Allende's efforts to re-organize the military and the police forces were characterised as notorious attempts to use the armed and police forces for partisan ends, destroy their institutional hierarchy, and politically infiltrate their ranks.
It can be argued that the resolution called upon the armed forces to overthrow Allende if he did not reform, as follows "...To present the President of the Republic, Ministers of State, and members of the Armed and Police Forces with the grave breakdown of the legal and constitutional order ... it is their duty to put an immediate end to all situations herein referred to that breach the Constitution and the laws of the land with the goal of redirecting government activity toward the path of Law " [20] (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/#cite_note-20)
[edit (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/w/index.php?title=1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat&action=edit&section=5)] President Allende's responseTwo days later, on 24 August 1973, President Allende responded,[21] (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/#cite_note-21) characterising the Congress's declaration as destined to damage the country’s prestige abroad and create internal confusion, predicting It will facilitate the seditious intention of certain sectors. He noted that the declaration had not obtained the two-thirds Senate majority constitutionally required to convict the president of abuse of power: essentially, the Congress were invoking the intervention of the armed forces and of Order against a democratically elected government and subordinat[ing] political representation of national sovereignty to the armed institutions, which neither can nor ought to assume either political functions or the representation of the popular will.

Allende argued he had obeyed constitutional means for including military men to the cabinet at the service of civic peace and national security, defending republican institutions against insurrection and terrorism. In contrast, he said that Congress was promoting a coup d’état or a civil war with a declaration full of affirmations that had already been refuted before-hand and which, in substance and process (directly handing it to the ministers rather than directly handing it to the President) violated a dozen articles of the (then-current) Constitution. He further argued that the legislature was usurping the government's executive function.

President Allende wrote: Chilean democracy is a conquest by all of the people. It is neither the work nor the gift of the exploiting classes, and it will be defended by those who, with sacrifices accumulated over generations, have imposed it . . . With a tranquil conscience . . . I sustain that never before has Chile had a more democratic government than that over which I have the honor to preside . . . I solemnly reiterate my decision to develop democracy and a state of law to their ultimate consequences . . . Parliament has made itself a bastion against the transformations . . . and has done everything it can to perturb the functioning of the finances and of the institutions, sterilizing all creative initiatives.

Adding that economic and political means would be needed to relieve the country's current crisis, and that the Congress were obstructing said means; having already paralyzed the State, they sought to destroy it. He concluded by calling upon the workers, all democrats and patriots to join him in defending the Chilean Constitution and the revolutionary process.


Given that he had armed organized his own paramilitary forces, this was a call to violent reprisals against the opposition, which were implemented. The Chilean Army opposed this coup, and acted against Allende. When Allende was deposed, the Chilean left began a terror campaign. From Wikipedia:


After the coup, left-wing organizations tried to set up resistance groups against the regime. Many activists created groups of resistance from refugees abroad, while the Communist Party of Chile (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Chile) set up an armed wing, which became in 1983 the FPMR (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/wiki/FPMR) (Frente Patriótico Manuel Rodríguez). In the first three months of military rule, the Chilean forces recorded 162 military deaths.[66] (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/#cite_note-books.google.co.uk-66) A total of 756 servicemen and police are reported to have been killed or wounded in guerrilla incidents.[75] (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/#cite_note-75) The Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/wiki/Revolutionary_Left_Movement_(Chile)) (Revolutionary Left Movement, MIR) founded at the University of Concepción (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/wiki/University_of_Concepci%C3%B3n) suffered heavy casualties in the coup's immediate aftermath, and most of its members fled the country.[76] (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/#cite_note-76)


The insurgency against the government precipitated the repressions against the terrorists and their supporters. This is something that the left invariably leaves out of its outraged recollections of Pinochet. They also forget that Pinochet stepped down voluntarily and submitted to free elections, something that only one communist government has ever done (and the Sandinistas were forced to concede only because the sheer volume of their loss could not be hidden from the international observers and the Bush administration would not permit them to ignore the results).

But, this isn't about Pinochet, this is about Thatcher. The left doesn't hate her because she had something nice to say about a dictator (they've never objected to dictators, as long as they were leftist dictators), they hate her because she proved them wrong. Britain was presumed to be in a permanent state of collapse, and Thatcher reversed that. She brought the unions, which had paralyzed the country with strikes, back under the rule of law (which is why the unions loathed her). My wife's description of the "Winter of Discontent" prior to Thatcher's election was that they were constantly short of critical staples due to strikes. She remembers having to read by candlelight because the coal miners had brought electricity generation to a halt. The late 70s rivaled the Blitz for austerity, but unlike the Blitz, the 70s austerity was imposed from within. Thatcher ended that by applying the law, which the unions had flouted, and by privatizing industries that had been failing for decades. You claim that she was not a supporter of the working class, but it was Thatcher whose privatization of public housing turned the majority of Britons into home-owners. It was also Thatcher who unequivocably supported the US in the Cold War, allowing the deployment of Pershing II missiles to Britain, despite the efforts of the Soviet-backed Nuclear Freeze Movement. When the Berlin Wall came down, the left blamed Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher for the end of their party. That's why they are grave-dancing.

txradioguy
04-17-2013, 09:24 AM
But, this isn't about Pinochet, this is about Thatcher. The left doesn't hate her because she had something nice to say about a dictator (they've never objected to dictators, as long as they were leftist dictators), they hate her because she proved them wrong. Britain was presumed to be in a permanent state of collapse, and Thatcher reversed that. She brought the unions, which had paralyzed the country with strikes, back under the rule of law (which is why the unions loathed her). My wife's description of the "Winter of Discontent" prior to Thatcher's election was that they were constantly short of critical staples due to strikes. She remembers having to read by candlelight because the coal miners had brought electricity generation to a halt. The late 70s rivaled the Blitz for austerity, but unlike the Blitz, the 70s austerity was imposed from within. Thatcher ended that by applying the law, which the unions had flouted, and by privatizing industries that had been failing for decades. You claim that she was not a supporter of the working class, but it was Thatcher whose privatization of public housing turned the majority of Britons into home-owners. It was also Thatcher who unequivocably supported the US in the Cold War, allowing the deployment of Pershing II missiles to Britain, despite the efforts of the Soviet-backed Nuclear Freeze Movement. When the Berlin Wall came down, the left blamed Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher for the end of their party. That's why they are grave-dancing.

QFT.

DumbAss Tanker
04-17-2013, 10:03 AM
President Allende wrote:. . . Parliament has made itself a bastion against the transformations . . . and has done everything it can to perturb the functioning of the finances and of the institutions, sterilizing all creative initiatives.

That part was a particular laugher, Allende had, if I recall correctly, virtually destroyed the resource-rich Chilean economy through typically-effective attempts at central planning and hyper-inflation, to the extent that most of the country was more relieved than outraged when he was shot and the bullshit was finally over.


Originally Posted by Lanie
...How can you expect me to believe your side is for freedom, when people defend stuff like this? How can you expect me to believe you're for free speech when you try to use the tactic of "Convert or you're a liar?" No, I'm not playing that game.

Also a laugher. This is an internet forum, not a religious mission to rescue benighted idiots. If you are convinced in your emo little heart that 2 + 2 = Potato, it's a waste of time for anyone to try to introduce you to the concept of "4," and we're not here because it's about you.

Odysseus
04-17-2013, 11:24 AM
That part was a particular laugher, Allende had, if I recall correctly, virtually destroyed the resource-rich Chilean economy through typically-effective attempts at central planning and hyper-inflation, to the extent that most of the country was more relieved than outraged when he was shot and the bullshit was finally over.

Not so much virtually as literally. By 1972, the Chilean economy was suffering from inflation rates of 140% with Real GDP contracting between at an annual rate of 5.6% ("negative growth"). The government's deficit soared against declining foreign reserves. Basic food staples disappeared from supermarkets and black marketeering was rampant. Exports fell 24% and imports rose 26%, with imports of food rising an estimated 149%. And people wonder why Allende was ousted.



Also a laugher. This is an internet forum, not a religious mission to rescue benighted idiots. If you are convinced in your emo little heart that 2 + 2 = Potato, it's a waste of time for anyone to try to introduce you to the concept of "4," and we're not here because it's about you.

The point of the OP is that leftists are using any excuse to deny Margaret Thatcher a tribute. Lanie has brought up Pinochet, and forced us onto a tangent, but as previously stated, Pinochet is irrelevent. If Thatcher had denounced him, the left would still loathe her for proving them wrong. Thatcher was so effective at destroying the British left that the only way that they were able to regain power was to rename their party (remember "New Labour"?) and pretend to purge the loons.

Adam Wood
04-17-2013, 12:50 PM
That part was a particular laugher, Allende had, if I recall correctly, virtually destroyed the resource-rich Chilean economy through typically-effective attempts at central planning and hyper-inflation, to the extent that most of the country was more relieved than outraged when he was shot and the bullshit was finally over. FWIW, the official story is still that he offed himself. They dug his sorry ass up a few years ago and did another autopsy, and found that the forensics were consistent with the story at the time: the guy put an AK-47 (a personal gift from Fidel Castro) under his chin, set at full-auto, and pulled the trigger, which released two rounds into and through the top of his head.

JB
04-18-2013, 04:48 PM
Barry didn't send anyone from his administration to her funeral. Just found this out. What a scumbag he is.

No VP, Sec of State, no one. He flies his kids all over the country on our dime but he can't spare someone from his administration a few hours to represent the US at her funeral? Again, scumbag.

Maybe he'll send her family DVDs of his speeches. With any luck they will be out of region too. Scumbag.

RobJohnson
04-20-2013, 04:59 PM
Barry didn't send anyone from his administration to her funeral. Just found this out. What a scumbag he is.

No VP, Sec of State, no one. He flies his kids all over the country on our dime but he can't spare someone from his administration a few hours to represent the US at her funeral? Again, scumbag.

Maybe he'll send her family DVDs of his speeches. With any luck they will be out of region too. Scumbag.

If George Soros would of really died, Obama would of been there.

Elspeth
04-20-2013, 05:03 PM
Barry didn't send anyone from his administration to her funeral. Just found this out. What a scumbag he is.


Maybe he was just getting back at the Queen for not inviting him to the royal nuptials. :friendly_wink:

SaintLouieWoman
04-20-2013, 05:53 PM
Maybe he was just getting back at the Queen for not inviting him to the royal nuptials. :friendly_wink:

Who would want them there? He's behaved boorishly toward the Brits and continues to do so. Apparently no one in his administration seems to understand protocol.

At least Cheney was there. Obama will never have the class of Cheney. (just throwing the last sentence in to get the lefties into spasms). :biggrin-new:

Elspeth
04-20-2013, 06:09 PM
Who would want them there? He's behaved boorishly toward the Brits and continues to do so. Apparently no one in his administration seems to understand protocol.

Oh, I don't know. I'm sure Will and Kate would have appreciated a bunch of American DVDs that didn't work in British players. :friendly_wink:


At least Cheney was there. Obama will never have the class of Cheney. (just throwing the last sentence in to get the lefties into spasms). :biggrin-new:

Well, Cheney has long term connections to the Thatcherites through Reagan/Bush. I'm sure Cheney was invited to the funeral with an engraved card, if only for the Brits to see how a man with a mechanical heart looks in person. :friendly_wink:

NJCardFan
04-21-2013, 12:52 AM
I think he paid respect to Chavez. I don't recall Obama paying any respect to the other leaders that you mention.

Good point though, although I don't love Obama. I usually don't love leaders the way some of you all do.

And where was Obama's respect for Thatcher?

Janice
04-21-2013, 01:02 PM
http://i37.tinypic.com/6tkzkp.jpg

Adam Wood
04-21-2013, 02:49 PM
http://i37.tinypic.com/6tkzkp.jpg
Oh, now that's good. Very, very good.

Odysseus
04-22-2013, 12:40 PM
Barry didn't send anyone from his administration to her funeral. Just found this out. What a scumbag he is.

No VP, Sec of State, no one. He flies his kids all over the country on our dime but he can't spare someone from his administration a few hours to represent the US at her funeral? Again, scumbag.

Maybe he'll send her family DVDs of his speeches. With any luck they will be out of region too. Scumbag.

Considering that Biden had been in London a few weeks previously, and spent more than half a million in taxpayer dollars for his one night there, with far less reason, this becomes even less justifiable.


Oh, I don't know. I'm sure Will and Kate would have appreciated a bunch of American DVDs that didn't work in British players. :friendly_wink:



Well, Cheney has long term connections to the Thatcherites through Reagan/Bush. I'm sure Cheney was invited to the funeral with an engraved card, if only for the Brits to see how a man with a mechanical heart looks in person. :friendly_wink:

Cheney's mechanical heart is warmer than Obama's organic one.