Coups, interference, and the shifting standards of Obama; Update: Coup or ‘military impeachment’?

posted at 11:28 am on June 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

It’s difficult to make sense out of the foreign policy coming out of the White House under Barack Obama.  On the one hand, Obama insisted that he could not interfere with the internal politics of the “sovereign government of Iran,” refusing for days to even condemn Iran for its flagrantly violent repression of dissent.  When Honduras’ military staged a coup, though, Obama apparently had no such reticence in involving the US on behalf of deposed President Manuel Zelaya — a close ally of Hugo Chavez:

In an unusual concurrence of views, the Obama administration and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said they still recognized Mr. Zelaya as Honduras’ president. The State Department called the events an “attempted coup” and urged Mr. Zelaya’s “return and restoration of democratic order.”

U.S. officials said they were engaged in multinational efforts to resolve the crisis, through the Organization of American States and European allies. At the same time, Washington wants a resolution “free from external influence and interference,” a senior official told reporters during a conference call organized by the State Department.

The official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named, said the U.S. Embassy in Honduras was “consistently and almost constantly engaged in the last several weeks working with partners” and that U.S. officials were “in contact with all Honduran institutions, including the military.” However, the military stopped taking the embassy’s calls since the coup attempt, the official said.

The Wall Street Journal also reports Obama’s eagerness to “interfere”:

The Obama administration and members of the Organization of American States had worked for weeks to try to avert any moves to overthrow President Zelaya, said senior U.S. officials. Washington’s ambassador to Honduras, Hugo Llorens, sought to facilitate a dialogue between the president’s office, the Honduran parliament and the military.

The efforts accelerated over the weekend, as Washington grew increasingly alarmed. “The players decided, in the end, not to listen to our message,” said one U.S. official involved in the diplomacy. On Sunday, the U.S. embassy here tried repeatedly to contact the Honduran military directly, but was rebuffed. Washington called the removal of President Zelaya a coup and said it wouldn’t recognize any other leader.

The U.S. stand was unpopular with Honduran deputies. One congressman, Toribio Aguilera, got prolonged applause from his colleagues when he urged the U.S. ambassador to reconsider. Mr. Aguilera said the U.S. didn’t understand the danger that Mr. Zelaya and his friendships with Mr. Chavez and Cuba’s Fidel Castro posed.

Zelaya was violating his country’s constitution with his referendum that would have, Chavez-style, repealed term limits on the presidency.  The Honduras Supreme Court ruled the referendum illegal, and the military refused to distribute the ballots.  Instead of backing down, Zelaya fired the head of the military, which precipitated the ouster.

Clearly, democracies cannot abide armed overthrow of elected governments, but that presumes that the government acts within the rule of law.  Zelaya had no intention of doing so, and his flagrant violations and attempt to accrue personal power made that crystal clear. Zelaya had begun seizing dictatorial powers, and the military responded by arresting him.  The military then handed power back to the legislature rather than keeping it for themselves, which makes this less of a coup and more of a military impeachment.

Why did Obama decide to intervene on behalf of a “president” obviously abusing his power and to prevent the military from removing him once he started acting like a dictator?  He didn’t put nearly that much effort into assisting Iranians who have gone into the streets and died to protest the mullahcracy that oppresses them.  Rick Moran thinks that’s a pretty good question as well:

Further, the military was acting under the orders of the Honduran Supreme Court although they apparently exceeded their authority by whisking him away to Venezuela. And finally, it was Zelaya’s actions in violating the constitution, ignoring a ruling by the Supreme Court that any referendum be put on would be illegal, and the universal belief in Congress, the military, and much of the populace that eventually, he would little more than a stand in for Chavez if he was allowed to carry out his illegal referendum that sealed Zelaya’s fate.

And yet our president, acting contrary to American interests, chose the route of least resistance and condemned what many Hondurans believe was a restoration of constitutional order. The president will find himself in familiar territory with this condemnation – Castro, Ortega, and other Latin American leftist thugs also condemned the coup. Maybe someone could look it up but when was the last time we were on the same side with Cuba on any international issue?

Way to go Barry. Like, we should listen to the Castros when they complain about democratic procedure not being followed? …

In fact, after swearing off “interferring” in Iran where demonstrators were getting shot, beaten, and axed to death, our clueless Chief Hypocrite worked frantically behind the scenes to save Honduran President Zelaya’s job, thus [interfering] on the wrong side while making himself out a liar on Iran.

We’re getting a close look at Obama’s priorities, and they’re hideously out of step with democracy and the rule of law.

Update: The controversy now is whether this is a coup or a lawful action on behalf of the Honduras legislature and courts.  Fausta has gone on record saying it’s not a coup, as the military responded to a request from the legislature and courts to remove Zelaya.  I tend to agree with Larisa Alexandrovna on this point, though:

As noted here (in Spanish), the Honduran Congress cited repeated violations of the Honduran Constitution by President Manuel Zelaya and voted for his removal. That said, as I noted earlier, he is both a bad guy and a good guy. This is a complex political environment in a very unstable part of the world.

The right sees this as a simple restoration of democracy. Yet the use of military personnel to detain, arrest, and transport a sitting president to another country against his will is not part of any democratic process that I am aware of. They do have courts in Honduras and a legal system. This is a coup, despite the passions of the right-wing. They also have law enforcement. Anytime the military becomes involved, it is not as simple as impeachment by Congressional edict through military force. Shorter=coup.

Had the military arrested and detained Zelaya in advance of an impeachment action and/or criminal prosecution, then I could go with the not-a-coup argument.  Dumping him outside of the country is not exactly a due-process removal — and I think that falls into the yes-it’s-a-coup territory.  Perhaps necessary, perhaps very supportable, but it’s obviously an extralegal removal, which is the very definition of a coup.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

This is a legal removal of a president that is in violation of the Honduran Constitution.
Zelaya’s actions of the past 5 months have been in blantant disregard for the Honduran Constitution, which he sought to rewrite, the Honduran Supreme Court, which he has undermined, the Honduran Congress, which he has tried to delegitimize, his own party that has resisted Hugo Chavez, and 72% of the Honduran public, that feel disenfranchised by Zelaya. This was not a coup. Zelaya was legally removed by the military at the request of the Honduran Congress and the Honduran Supreme Court that have the following two articles of the Honduran Constitution as the legal authority to do so

ARTICULO 239.- El ciudadano que haya desempeñado la titularidad del Poder Ejecutivo no podrá ser Presidente o Designado.
El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos, y quedarán inhabilitados por diez años para el ejercicio de toda función pública.
TRANSLATION Article 239 The citizen that has been the head of the Execute Branch cannot be President or Vice-President (again).
Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.
ARTICULO 205.- Corresponden al Congreso Nacional las atribuciones siguientes:
15. Declarar si ha lugar o no a formación de causa contra el Presidente
20. Aprobar o improbar la conducta administrativa del Poder Ejecutivo, Poder Judicial y
TRANSLATION – Article 205 – Congress has the following authority:
15 To indict the President
20 To approve or disapprove of the administrative conduct of the Execurive Branch, …

Why is Obama now meddling in the internal affairs of a soveriegn nation and why is he siding with Hugo Chavez against the nation of Honduras?

elduende on June 30, 2009 at 1:02 AM

The military exceeded their authority by whisking him away to Venezuela in the middle of the night in his pajamas.

Bill Blizzard on June 30, 2009 at 12:54 AM

Would you have preferred if they had dropped the little Mussolini off in the ocean wearing an armor suit?

MB4 on June 30, 2009 at 1:05 AM

Why is Obama now meddling in the internal affairs of a soveriegn nation and why is he siding with Hugo Chavez against the nation of Honduras?

elduende on June 30, 2009 at 1:02 AM

Why did Hitler support Mussolini when he got into trouble?

MB4 on June 30, 2009 at 1:07 AM

The audacity of hope was for his campaign
Supporting tyranny and thuggery are for his reign
His candidacy was rather like that of a Henry Houdini
His presidency is shaping up to be much more like that of a Benito Mussolini

Although he tries to slip it all in under another guise
To all his fascist action most foul we must still be wise
In spite of all the Houdini lies
Dancing in Obama’s Mussolini eyes

MB4 on June 30, 2009 at 1:09 AM

Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.

Terry_Dyne on June 29, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Meet Terry Dyne, Ladies and Genetlemen, the girl raised by Feminist Nazi Tax Auditors in Youngstown, OH.

TMK on June 30, 2009 at 1:11 AM

f our own Supreme Court found their guts and their brains, heard a case on The Precedent’s eligibility and ruled him Consitutionally ineligible to serve as President

My thoughts also. No surprise for me he would support Zelaya. Why do people seem surprised when they elected a communist as President? Many are still in denial thinking that Obama would stand for the rule of democratic law. If Zelaya suspended or violated the constitution then that would be just okay with Obama. It would not surprise me if when opportunity arise in USA, Obama will also suspend constitution. He thinks the constitution is outdated already and would love to re-write it like most progressive liberals. Free speech, Right to Bear Arms, State Rights all are being violated now. The founding fathers are rolling in their graves. Obama is very stupid when it comes to history and democratic republic government. He was studying Marx and the Koran in school. Not US history or Government. I don’t know what would be procedure here if and when they find out Obama is not eligible to be President, due to being born in Kenya not USA. Many would still want him as their president and fight to prevent his ouster. It would be touch and go if it developed into a full blown civil war. He very well may look for intervention from those despots he calls friends.

Ed Laskie on June 30, 2009 at 1:13 AM

Meet Terry Dyne, Ladies and Genetlemen, the girl raised by Feminist Nazi Tax Auditors in Youngstown, OH.

TMK on June 30, 2009 at 1:11 AM

That, or she was just being sarcastic…let’s hope for the latter.

AUINSC on June 30, 2009 at 1:13 AM

He is a deceiver, a dissembler
His trousers are alight
From what pole or gallows
Shall they dangle in the night?

What infernal serpent
Has lent him his forked tongue?
From what pit of foul deceit
Are all these whoppers sprung?

PercyB on June 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM

Not only are some of the more extreme elements of the far right claiming this coup to be a victory for the Honduran people,

Er … no. This is a victory for the Honduran Constitution and the structure it defines. This is about a limit put on the power of the people, the way civilized societies work.

they are also now claiming that the Obama administration is trying to undermine democracy by condemning the coup.

Er … no, again. He’s trying to replace a republic with a democracy. He doesn’t care about the constitution. He is in favor of the people having unlimited power. This is how savage societies are structured.

Wow. How does one even begin a conversation with a person who cannot grasp basic principles of democracy?

LOL. It must be really embarrassing to act so arrogant while having no clue what one is talking about. Dang!

I’d really love to hear what these “principles of democracy”. Ten to one, they have little to do with democratic processes.

Just because someone (in this case, the people who ousted Zelaya) claims that there actions are legal, does not make it so.

Er … Beside the fat that we can all read their constitution, for ourselves, and see how illegally Zelaya was acting, the determination of constitutionality is exactly the task of their supreme court. I mean … uh … what can I say? Just read it for yourself, if you can read.

I don’t know how Hondurans feel, but Zelaya had to sneak over to Chavez to get the actual ballots, since the court ruled the referendum illegal and void, and then he broke into where they were being kept to steal and distribute them in opposition to the express rule of the supreme court. I don’t know … it’s pretty tough to get behind that sort of stuff and then scream “democracy”. Kind of silly, really.

In fact, in every bloodless coup (and even most of the bloody ones), the people enacting the coup claim to represent the will of the nation and proclaim their actions entirely legal.

This is a problem so basic and fundamental, that I really question the mental fitness of someone who can’t get it:

The will of the nation is not what is being represented by the appropriate side, here, it is the integrity of the constitution, which is far more important. That is what separates a Republic from a Democracy (just repeating this for the writer). How can someone talk about what is “legal” and not even understands the foundation of legality, but instead is constantly trumpeting for the whims of the mob.

Again, use this example to better understand the absurdity of the “not coup” crowd:
Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership order the arrest and rendition of President Bush to Mexico using loyalists to the Dem leadership in the US military to accomplish this process. Pelosi and the Dems then quickly assemble enough of a majority to vote on a hastily written bill of sorts. The vote declares that Bush is no longer president and that Nancy Pelosi is now the POTUS.
A resignation letter alleged to have been written by Bush is provided to the compliant media. Yet Bush, who is by now in Mexico, denies ever having written a resignation letter or resigning. Pelosi, Justice Stevens, and SecDef Robert Gates all tell you this is legal.
What would you call this situation if you were a Republican sitting at home watching Fox News? Hell, I am an independent and I would call it a coup. How difficult is it to understand why this coup is exactly that, a coup? Why would anyone claim this was the workings of a functional democracy?

Let me give a better scenario:

The SCOTUS hears a case on The Precedent’s eligibility and rules, as it should, that natural-born citizen status is obviated by the preson holding another citizenship at any time in their life (nothing but an American, from birth). Therefore, The Precedent is not a natural-born American and, therefore, is not eligible to be a President, and must be removed from office.

But Precedent Hussein refuses to leave and, instead, orders the firing of everyone who tries to carry out the SCOTUS’ rule. So, the military goes and yanks him out of the White House (starting with the guy carrying the nuclear football not returning it to him) and he is finally thrown out of office, after which Crazy Joe Biden is sworn in and nominates a new VP.

That’s about it.

progressoverpeace on June 30, 2009 at 1:25 AM

If you followed the link Ed provided and read the whole article, I think you missed this.>

I did not (eventhough you think so, but I should have said that I did not usually read her stuff), I did and I did – in reverse order :-)

How would you feel about that scenario?

Bill Blizzard on June 30, 2009 at 12:33 AM

Interesting question, bad analog by Alexandrovna. Though she may think hell of W, it doesn’t make him a constitutional law breaker. Indeed W had bent over backwards in order to comply to the letter with 5-to-4 SCOTUS rulings against his adminstration’s positions. But, I digress.

If you wish to make the comparison, think on this, instead. Imagine W’s second term were to end in 2007, January, with Presidential elections in 2006, November. Hastert is still speaker and the House successfully votes to impeach W for trying to circumvent US constitutional amendment (#22) limiting him to two terms by holding a federal plebiscite given the following background.

SCOTUS said ‘no way’ when the plebiscite case is brought before them. FEC refuses to compose and issue referendum language and ballots for the vote (not their role, but stick with me, please). So, W goes abroad to, say, Italy has the referendum materials made up and has the USAF bring them back stateside. SCOTUS says ‘lock up the ballots’ and ‘that any such referendum is illegal’ since US Congress recently passed a law (likely over W’s veto) to outlaw referenda with 180 days of nominally scheduled elections. W goes ahead and sacks his Army Sec for refusing to countermand SCOTUS and order USArmy to distribute the ballots. SecDef (Rummy!) resigns in protest along with other DoD/military chiefs.

The above notwithstanding, W calls on his campaign folks to break into the USAF facility, retrieve the referendum ballots, and distribute them nationwide, which his campaign begins to do. Finally, AG (Gonzalez!!) refers W to the US House of Representatives for impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors (possibly also conspiring with foreigners against the US people and their constitution). That is when the impeachment vote occurs.

Now, what do you think about that scenario?

ConScribe on June 30, 2009 at 1:48 AM

That, or she was just being sarcastic…let’s hope for the latter.

AUINSC on June 30, 2009 at 1:13 AM

LOL, or both…

Mmmmmmmm……

TMK on June 30, 2009 at 2:49 AM

Zelaya hoped to hold an informal, nonbinding plebiscite on Sunday to gauge whether Hondurans want to change their national charter and allow, among other things, more than one term for Presidents. He wanted to let Hondurans decide which is how a democracy works. But the Supreme Court ruled the vote illegal. The Congress, where Zelaya loyalists are a minority, and the attorney general rejected it as well which is undemocratic.

Zelaya vowed to hold the referendum anyway. He believes that Honduras’ grinding poverty stemmed from a constitution written in 1982 at the height of that country’s brutal repression of leftists. That rigs the game for the most powerful families and interests.

Then Their Congress began deliberations over whether Zelaya was still mentally fit to govern. Sounds like what use to happen in the Soviet Union when the entrenched powers felt threatened.

In the end, though, it was Zelaya’s opponents who appear to have become unhinged. Technically, before Sunday anyway, Honduras’ Justices and generals could claim they held the legal high ground. Zelaya was, after all, blatantly defying a high-court ruling, as well as his legislature and attorney general. He was, they could argue, behaving like the populist caudillo his opponents warned he wanted to be. But their violent Sunday-morning response has made them look like the Latin oligarch lackeys of old and has in fact lent credence to Zelaya’s suggestion that they were indeed just defending a constitution fashioned exclusively for the haves of Honduras.

Bill Blizzard on June 30, 2009 at 3:09 AM

He wanted to let Hondurans decide which is how a democracy works. But the Supreme Court ruled the vote illegal. The Congress, where Zelaya loyalists are a minority, and the attorney general rejected it as well which is undemocratic.

The President doesn’t have the ability to just change the country’s governing structure at his whim. Are you totally insane? Do you even understand what you are arguing for? I don’t think so. To put it succinctly, you hate the rule of law and argue against it. Despicable.

As to Democracy (which is a savage governing system) our Founders hated it. I’ll post these quotes, for the 1000th time:
Democracy is the most vile form of government… democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.

– James Madison

Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.

– John Adams
Your appeal to an unlimited power in the will of the people is something that our Founders roundly rejected, as does anyone with a brain.

He believes that Honduras’ grinding poverty stemmed from a constitution written in 1982 at the height of that country’s brutal repression of leftists. That rigs the game for the most powerful families and interests.

Here you go folks. Pay close attention, because this is what the left’s argument is going to be for destroying Constitutional structures anywhere they can (with The Precedent even attempting to pull this, here). The President decides that he doesn’t like the constitution, so he just does whatever he wants, so long as he calls a vote, of some sort. They are going to be moving for this sort of mob rule, and trying to hide behind the idiocy of “Democracy”. I can see the argument here, in the US, that “natural-born” is a silly clause that no one should be bound to follow. This is pretty pathetic, but it is a real threat and it is coming. And they are even going to try to sell it as “American”, the fools.

But their violent Sunday-morning response has made them look like the Latin oligarch lackeys of old and has in fact lent credence to Zelaya’s suggestion that they were indeed just defending a constitution fashioned exclusively for the haves of Honduras.

Bill Blizzard on June 30, 2009 at 3:09 AM

Bill Blizzard, you and your ilk are among the lowest dregs of humanity. You people are not fit for civilized society, as you do nothing but bring chaos, poverty and the insecurity of person, with you everywhere.

I never read any of your posts, before, but you are out of your gourd. Crazy.

This is what they are coming with: social and economic justice … all the way. This is going to be very ugly. These leftists are out for blood.

progressoverpeace on June 30, 2009 at 3:52 AM

Had the military arrested and detained Zelaya in advance of an impeachment action and/or criminal prosecution, then I could go with the not-a-coup argument. Dumping him outside of the country is not exactly a due-process removal — and I think that falls into the yes-it’s-a-coup territory.

First of all, this was not a coup. Power was not illegally usurped from anyone. The military arrested the president on behalf of the other two branches of government, who had essentially impeached him and, with the Honduran Constitution firm in hand, deposed him.

Zelaya was not taken out of the country against his will – he chose to go to Costa Rica to get political asylum there because he feared being prosecuted for violating the constitution at home.

I’m saddened to see that Hot Air has been lured into these faux arguments over this being a coup, by not checking all the facts.

Just ask yourself one question: why did they take him to Costa Rica?

Answer: because that’s where Zelaya wanted to go.

Seixon on June 30, 2009 at 4:15 AM

According to Article 42, which enumerates conditions in which a Honduran can lose citizenship, section 5 of the Honduran Constitution states that if you “Incite, encourage or support the continuity or re-election of President of the Republic”, you lose your citizenship. This happens with the confirmation by the courts, which obviously happened in this case.

Thus it looks like Zelaya was not only deposed completely legally, he was also extradited in accordance with the Honduran Constitution.

Seixon on June 30, 2009 at 4:52 AM

coldwarrior on June 29, 2009 at 8:00 PM
and FogW at 1202 PM and others…

Most of the people here have heard this, but you guys asked…

One of my favorite moves is to ask a libtard who is fighting my opinions about race politics is to ask how many minorities have been by their house for dinner of stayed with them for a weekend or so. Guilt factor squared.

The One functions on the level of a ninth grader with a strong dose of liberal brainwashing. Peple love the Affirmative Action Hero since they think he is Will Smith or Denzel Washington. And it has worked. It also helps to have our MSM spinning so fast that it stands straight up.

The New York Slimes just ran an article talking about high school valedictorians influenced by The One.

On these foreign policy issues (like Honduras), take heart! Within 24 months The One will be making President George W. Bush look like Prime Minister Churchill. Both statesmen whom he hates. While he begins to look like Neville whats his name. Keep it up, Barry.

IlikedAUH2O on June 30, 2009 at 5:03 AM

It’s difficult to make sense out of the foreign policy coming out of the White House under Barack Obama.

Not if you recognize that he is truly a fascist at heart.

Then it makes perfect sense.

Sic Puppy on June 30, 2009 at 5:26 AM

elduende on June 30, 2009 at 1:02 AM

thanks

maverick muse on June 30, 2009 at 6:38 AM

progressoverpeace on June 30, 2009 at 3:52 AM

my thoughts as well

maverick muse on June 30, 2009 at 6:38 AM

Obama simply wants to have gone on record supporting the actions of the Honduran ex-president for when he, himself, tries the exact same maneuver in a few years.

Theophile on June 30, 2009 at 6:50 AM

I guess the people rioting in the streets aren’t concerned whether you call it a coup or not.Another Obama hit piece from a party that is spiraling down. Must want to drag down anyone else it can grasp. GOP=deathnell. GOP young leadership…Barbour,Gingrich.

athensboy on June 30, 2009 at 7:22 AM

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/06/023930.php

During his campaign, President Obama made a big deal of criticizing leaders who are elected democratically but don’t govern democratically. He’s had a chance to show that it mattered in Honduras. He didn’t.

That’s the sorry story as Honduras’ now ex-president, Mel Zelaya, last Thursday defied a Supreme Court ruling and tried to hold a “survey” to rewrite the constitution for his permanent re-election. It’s the same blueprint for a rigged political system that’s made former democracies like Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador into shells of free countries.

Zelaya’s operatives did their dirt all the way through. First they got signatures to launch the “citizen’s power” survey through threats — warning those who didn’t sign that they’d be denied medical care and worse. Zelaya then had the ballots flown to Tegucigalpa on Venezuelan planes. After his move was declared illegal by the Supreme Court, he tried to do it anyway.

As a result of his brazen disregard for the law, Zelaya found himself escorted from office by the military Sunday morning, and into exile. Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Cuba’s Fidel Castro rushed to blame the U.S., calling it a “yanqui coup.”

President Obama on Monday called the action “not legal,” and claimed that Zelaya is still the legitimate president.

There was a coup all right, but it wasn’t committed by the U.S. or the Honduran court. It was committed by Zelaya himself. He brazenly defied the law, and Hondurans overwhelmingly supported his removal (a pro-Zelaya rally Monday drew a mere 200 acolytes).

Yet the U.S. administration stood with Chavez and Castro, calling Zelaya’s lawful removal “a coup.” Obama called the action a “terrible precedent,” and said Zelaya remains president.

Read the whole article…

Keemo on June 30, 2009 at 7:59 AM

He believes that Honduras’ grinding poverty stemmed from a constitution written in 1982 at the height of that country’s brutal repression of leftists. That rigs the game for the most powerful families and interests.

progressoverpeace: “Here you go folks. Pay close attention, because this is what the left’s argument is going to be for destroying Constitutional structures anywhere they can (with The Precedent even attempting to pull this, here). The President decides that he doesn’t like the constitution, so he just does whatever he wants, so long as he calls a vote, of some sort. They are going to be moving for this sort of mob rule, and trying to hide behind the idiocy of “Democracy”. I can see the argument here, in the US, that “natural-born” is a silly clause that no one should be bound to follow. This is pretty pathetic, but it is a real threat and it is coming. And they are even going to try to sell it as “American”, the fools.

Good work, progressoverpeace. This is exactly the tack that Obama is using to side with Zelaya, Chavez, the Castro boys, and Ortega.

The Lefties buy it in the name of “economic justice.” And Obama has been pulling this card out once too often to suit me and the believers in our own Constitution.

Obama is playing his same slick gaming of the language when he talks about “rule of law.” He ignores the rule of law rather blatantly himself (because he “won” and because he is “the only president”). Obama obviously is unfamiliar with the law and constitution of Honduras and relies on the ignorance of the media and the masses to drum up support for his point of view.

onlineanalyst on June 30, 2009 at 8:02 AM

Rasmussen: Obama Approval Index Falls Below Zero… Developing…

Front page @ Drudge…

Keemo on June 30, 2009 at 8:14 AM

athensboy: The citizens “rioting in the streets” have been whipped up by goons, the kind of goons (or community organizers) that Keemo cites from the powerlineblog piece:

Zelaya’s operatives did their dirt all the way through. First they got signatures to launch the “citizen’s power” survey through threats — warning those who didn’t sign that they’d be denied medical care and worse.

It’s rather obvious that Obama, who has “paid off” political supporters like the UAW or ACORN, Leftist PACs like the ones who went after the AIG execs at his subtle signal, proponents of Card Check, and propagandists for Cap and Trade/single-payer health care, supports the ousted Honduran president and agrees with Chavez. These Obama supporters would all probably form the core of the civilian army of enforcers that Obama envisions to secure “the economic and social justice” in his version of our Constitution.

athensboy: Don’t be a naive dupe, a useful idiot. Tyrants and dictators rely on such squishy romantics who haven’t learned from history.

onlineanalyst on June 30, 2009 at 8:25 AM

Why would BO intervene in behalf of Zelaya? Because in Obama-Think, Zelaya was doing what good governments do, trash the Constitution when it is inconvenient and praise it when it serves you to do so. If you think BO has any regard for Constitutional government, you haven’t been paying attention. He scorns it, he abhors it, he holds it in the utmost contempt.

BO’s only fear is that the US Military stands in his way of completely nullifying the US Constitution. They are the one element of the government and the culture that is sworn to uphold the Constitution and to defend it against its enemies (foreign and domestic) and they have the means to do so. I expect they will have enough of his assault on the Constitution eventually. Hopefully, they will return the government to the legislature (people) also.

4Bear on June 30, 2009 at 8:33 AM

Jimmy Carter deposed Samoza and installed Ortega in Nicaragua. He deposed the shah and installed the Ayatollah in Iran. Russia was so emboldened by his cluelessness that they invaded Afghanistan with impugnity (oh wait, we boycotted the Olympics).

Focus on the human misery in these circumstances, and remember: Obooba’s just getting started.

Akzed on June 30, 2009 at 8:55 AM

Unbelievable. I never thought I’d see the day when a U.S. President would line up with the likes of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.

I’m feel more Honduran than American today. And in reality, the Honduran government is acting more like our traditional American governments, than our own far left, glue-sniffing juvenile delinquents in the White House.

NoDonkey on June 30, 2009 at 8:57 AM

Obooba defended the mullahs in Iran after stealing an election, now he’s defending a man who tried to steal the presidency through an illegal referendum.

Hmmm… would he want illegal results for others, but eschew them himself?

Akzed on June 30, 2009 at 9:00 AM

Get ready….This is the kind of stuff we can expect once Obama passes amnesty. Latin America is corrupt and disorganized through and through. This problem is a reflection of the Latin state of mind. Willie nillie and let the rules be damned.

We don’t need any more of that mentality corrupting out voting public here in the States.

saiga on June 30, 2009 at 10:17 AM

Hey. They just hit the RESET BUTTON.

Smart Power.

bluelightbrigade on June 30, 2009 at 10:23 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4