Pinochet's military dictatorship killed thousands, tortured tens of thousands and drove more than a million Chileans into exile. A society with a 150 year tradition of democracy and participation suffered under totalitarian rule. You can't just hide your head in the sand and ignore how disgusting our foreign policy has been since WWII. You know what we did for Pinoche even after these atrocities? The United States rewarded Chile by dramatically increasing both grants and loans. On June 8, 1976, at the height of Pinochet's unrelenting repression, Kissinger met in private with the dictator and told him, "We are sympathetic to what you are trying to do here".
Having thwarted the possibility that Chile would become a model of democratic socialism, the United States made Chile a model of dictatorial capitalism. Under the hands-on guidance of University of Chicago economists, the Chilean economy was restructured. Unions were outlawed. Real wages plunged. Social spending was slashed. Of 507 public enterprises in l973 only l5 remained in government hands by l980. Chile privatized its social security system.
The experiment failed. Unemployment soared. In l973 Chile had the second highest income in Latin America, next to oil rich Venezuela. By 1988, when the military relinquished the reigns of government, Chile's income had fallen behind that of many countries, including Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay.
And this is just one example of how our foreign policy has "made the world better."

Yeah, I remember that, but I've been Googling for an hour, and can't find anywhere where Clinton sent monitary support to the Taliban. Please give me a reference.

So what if they're favoring world socialism? Shouldn't every country have a say in world events? You don't like the UN because they blocked us from doing what we wanted to do in Iraq. That's what they're there for! France and Germany both said "Give the inspectors more time," which, if you think about it, might have saved us a LOT of money in a war that was not needed.
Yes, Saddam was bad, but why did we wait until now to take him out? Why not take him out when he first gassed his own people in 1983? Oh, that's right...because he was our FRIEND then. Look, as bad as he was, the region was stable. Taking Saddam out was one of the worst things we could do. Now the entire region is unstable. It's called Balance of Power. Study it.

That's right. I would call myself a socialist. I think it would be THE perfect way to govern...if it WORKED, but it CAN'T so we have to find some other way. But capitolism ain't it. Look at what's happening. All of these big businesses that you conservatives are trying to protect are sending jobs to Mexico. The tax cut is a joke. (Could I ask you something? If you take a paycut, can you go out and buy a big screen tv? That's exactly what Bush is doing right now. Three tax cuts in two years, and he's raising spending on everything else...that's called a DEFICIT and we'll never be able to pay it off.) There are 43 Million people in the US that don't currently have health insurance.
Capitolism boils down to class warfare. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The idea that hard work will let you advance in the world is a joke. That kind of mentality hasn't worked since the fifties. Maybe you should move into the 21st century. (And don't give me that "Well, communism fell in the 20th Century bs." I SAID there has to be a balance.)

Fair enough. I have my BA in Communications from Oklahoma Baptist University. I'm 27.