Will the rule of law and the constitution of Honduras win out against its enemies—which seem to include our current president, Barack Obama?
No need for me to write a post on this, as so many others have covered it well. Here are the links:
A hard-hitting article in the WSJ criticizes not only Obama re Honduras, but the Bush administration for its soft line on Chavez in 2004. However, it doesn’t mention 2002, when Bush was criticized for probably undercover tacit support of a short-lived coup against Chavez. Interesting comments to the WSJ article, as well.
More from Fausta, who continues, through her knowledge of Spanish and Latin American sources, to have her finger on the pulse of Honduras. She reminds us that the party working against Zelaya’s return is his own party, which is still in power there.
Query: how many people in America are aware of what’s happening in Honduras? How many believe Obamaspeak that it’s an ordinary military coup, and that reinstating Zelaya would be following the rule of law?
Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely 
July 6th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Ousting Zelaya seems to have been a ‘defense’ of democracy — this will be interesting.
July 6th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
The most amazing aspect is that virtually our entire MSM lack the ability to analyze the inputs and draw logical conclusions. This failure discredits any remaining value that they might have had. No wonder they are struggling for an audience, they stopped doing their job. Without the WSJ and the Washington Times the “newspaper” industry would be totally worthless.
July 6th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
The only way most of America will become aware of the Honduras (even as to where it is located) is if Michael Jackson were going to be buried there and all the hoopla was holding up the parade.
If it weren’t for the fact I still live in America (and have some fond memories of how it used to be) I would just say, “You asked for it, you got it, now live with it if you can.”
July 6th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Here is Victor Davis Hanson’s take on the issue.
(Not to mention that Zelaya tried to fire the head of the Armed Forces for refusing to go along with his shenanigans, and by the Honduran Constitution, that may be done only with the consent of Congress.)
The problem is that in Latin America, few institutions are stong enough to stand up to a prospective caudillo/strong man. They were not in Venezuela and Ecuador. While Honduran institutions may not have acted in precisely the correct way, they were dealing as best they saw with a difficult problem.
The ballots for the illegal referendum were printed in Venezuela. The plane that unsuccessfully tried to take him to Honduras yesterday was Venezuelan. See a pattern?
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Apalling but utterly predictable that Obama remains clueless about the causes of Zelaya’s expulsion. No mention yet of how Zelaya illegally sought to rewrite the Constitution. I suspect nobody in the Obama administration reads the Wall Street Journal.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
I do not for one moment believe Obonga is clueless. Not at all. Perhaps more credible is that he simply does not care what happens beyond the borders of his kingdom. He’s taking really neat trips and revels in his “I won”. But he just wants stability, a minimization of distraction from his remake of America into a unionized workers’ paradise. He really has no hangups on Presidents-for-Life either, doubtless hoping and scheming with Raahm toward that goal for himself and Queenie-of-the Slim-Arms.
July 6th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Obama is not clueless. He has a natural affinity for the likes of Zelaya and Chavez.
The takeover of the census by the White House, Emmanuel, and ACORN should have set off warning bells in everyone’s head. He intends to rig the 2012 election as much as possible.
July 7th, 2009 at 12:59 am
zero is surrounded by too many people with extensive knowledge and contacts in Honduras to be ignorant.
He wants Zelaya back because he likes marxist presidents for life. Chavez and Castro, for starters.
Uribe,not so much.
July 7th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Thank you for passing along the fact that it is Zelaya’s own party trying to keep him out at this point. It’s one more hard-ground fact that’s important.
July 7th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Whenever Obama takes a “strange” position, he is forgiven for reasons of ignorance. (Remember when ignorance wa a bad, even disqualifying thing? Seems like only months ago.) When will he start being judged by his actions? He favors Zelaya because he FAVORS Zelaya. Leftward gains must never be given back.
July 7th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Obama is not clueless, he is worried that this would inspire others to do similar to leaders who overstep their constitutional mandate
July 8th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
This is a toughie. Zelaya seems to have gone off the deep end, from all reports. He seemed ready to crown himself King Hugo II. But shouldn’t we be at least a bit troubled that a leader selected in a legitimate election (or so I will assume, haven’t read any reports yet challenging Zelaya’s 2005 election) was driven out at the gunpoint of a military rifle, without any attempt at removal from office via due process?
Also, if I understand correctly, Zelaya’s crime was in making arrangements for a national referendum allowing a Constitutional Assembly to amplify the powers of his office (Chavez style), despite a ruling from the Supreme Court that this referendum would be unlawful. I’m a little uncomfortable about the fact that the poll hadn’t yet occurred; the crime was being planned, but hadn’t really yet happened.
According to various impressions out in the blogosophere, Honduras lacks a clearly defined impeachment procedure; there are some uncertain provisions in Articles 205 and 239 that might give the Supreme Court or the National Congress the power of removal. OK, but before the military guys are called out, I would have liked to have seen the Honduran Congress make a try at due process, especially if Zelaya’s own party wants him gone and controls the Congress. There didn’t seem to be any immediate / short-term danger in what Zelaya was doing.
Yea, I know that Honduras is not the USA or UK. But still, I can understand the USA and UK taking the position that there should have been at least some effort in finding and using due process under law in dealing with Zelaya (again, especially since there was evidence of political support for getting rid of Zelaya).
Due Process is as much a part of the American ideal that we’re trying to sell to the rest of the world as democratic elections are. Due Process is a sacred component of the Anglo tradition of government by law. If that means putting up with clowns like Zelaya and Chavez for a while, well . . . I believe that Thomas Jefferson would have agreed that’s the price of true Constitutional government.
(As David Bowie sang, “do you remember . . . your President Nixon . . .”)
July 8th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Jim G: get up to speed on Honduran due process. Zelaya was removed in accordance with the Honduran constitution, which he violated. And what Obama has been trying to do violates Honduran sovereignty.
July 8th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
cant stop someone who does not stop for due process by using due proccess… which is why it rarely prevents despotism and some usually gross act has to happen in some way.
July 9th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
NNC: Should we also get up to speed on Iranian democracy and due process? Or do we set a standard based on Anglo-American tradition and stick with it across all lines? Our system allows for deviations during emergencies (and I agree with many, if not all, of Mr. Bush’s post 9-11 deviations; and I wouldn’t close Gitmo). Zelaya was an impending disaster — as was Richard Nixon — but was not yet an emergency.
Nice blog, by the way. Lots of good work obviously goes into it.