I am particularly struck by the line, “…when Garzon attempted to extradite the aging Augosto Pinochet from Britain on charges (of) genocide.” What importance is it, exactly, that Pinochet was ‘aging’ (like everyone else for that matter)? Those of us who do not reside on ‘planet neocon’ and live instead in the real world (where global warming is a fact and not ‘politically correct’ science and were not persuaded by some laughably dismissable prediction that McCain would crush Obama or, my favorite, that ‘aging’ academes are so corrosive to young minds as to be ‘tenured radicals’) recognize Pinochet for who he was: a brutal and oppressive dictator who exercised torture and human rights violations (perhaps it should be the task of the conservative to show how human rights are a ‘social construction’) on the people of Chile for nearly 17 years. It is rather remarkable how almost anything the left does can be explained and dismissed as an act of p.c.ness. I suppose conservatives think the same of reading detainees (err, um, terrorists) their rights (like both the U.D.H.R. and the U.S. Constitution require); seriously, do conservatives ever tire from resorting to the same argument?