Posted on 06/28/2009 10:28:53 PM PDT by Hillarys nightmare
The first military takeover of a Central American government in 16 years drew widespread condemnation from governments in Latin America and the world — including the U.S. — and Chavez vowed to overthrow the country's apparent new leader..........
(Excerpt) Read more at news.aol.com ...
You know we're screwed when the (So Called)leader of the Free World, comes down on the same side as Chavez and Castro!
Does anyone have to wonder any longer of just who this guy OBAMA really is?
0bama, Chavez, Castro - all great buddies. Who would have thunk??
“Does anyone have to wonder any longer of just who this guy OBAMA really is?”
No, because the majority of people that voted for Obama never asked or cared about the question to begin with. To those of us who had our ideas about him, they are only being confirmed. Once again, the other side just didn’t care.
They still don't. They are just waiting for the next round of "hope and change" to show up in their mailbox. We've become the country of, "What's in it for me?"
Don’t even have to read it. If Chavez, et al, are agin’ it...must be a great thing.
No doubt at all. Its amazing what this country has/is becoming. I hear stories about the Great Generation and would like to think we still have the true American Spirit that they did, but I have to be honest, I’m just not sure anymore. I still think there is a chance, but with everything that changes EVERY day and no one really challenges it, its hard to keep up that idea.
IMHO, The military HERE has a responsibility to overthrow OURS If they think the constitution is being tramped on. After all, they took an oath to defend our constitution, not our political parties.
Unfortunately, it can now be safely assumed the Chavez's "et al" will routinely include the President of the United States of America.
Obortion is guilty of high treason.
Really? I keep hearing this but so far the only countries that I've heard voice displeasure have been Venezuela and Cuber.
I safely assumed that ‘et alia’ was understood by all here to include our own dictator.
I can see why Ice Cream would find this so upsetting. A nation following its constitution could be -How shall I put this?- uncomfortable for our own dear leader.
Sorry there, 'bamster, but all political and social actors in Honduras DID respect democratic norms, the followed the rule of law, and they upheld the tenets of the IADC.
The fact it resulted in a Marxist being tossed doesn't invalidate these facts, even if it does upset your sense of "justice"...
Try this one for contrast: Honduras Defends Its Democracy
Does anything in the Constitution allow for a President to be selected or removed by the Army? You can't enforce the Constitution by violating the Constitution. The oath of enlistment reads as follows
I , _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,
“Does anything in the Constitution allow for a President to be selected or removed by the Army? You can’t enforce the Constitution by violating the Constitution.”
What you said makes no sense...
Doing something that the constitution does not tell you you can do is not violating the constitution.
And, if our politicians are tramping the constitution, it’s the responsibility of those who swore to protect it, to protect it. Furthermore, until zero produces a birth certificate, it’s unknown if he’s really the president. My guess would be that he is not.
** ...”Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General Motors. Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his right,” Chavez joked on a live television broadcast...
It's a sad day in the free world when you have trouble brushing off a statement like that as just the ramblings of a leftist clown.
**http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/chavez_obama_left_wing/2009/06/03/220946.html
I guess all the internacionalistas (communists and other assorted rojos) will be out on their asses, drinking Cafe Lindo in Nicaragua or Caracas and plotting their next steps.
So, when it comes time for individual states to vote to secede, Obama will just let them out of respect for “democratic norms” and “the rule of law”?
Zero is such a douche. He didn’t support the protestors in Iran for days saying he didn’t want to interfere in Iran’s politics. But he comes out and denounces the ouster of Zelaya within hours. Obviously he’s a liar and a Marxist pig....
Obama is just terrified that our military might frogmarch him from the White House when they discover he isn’t really an American citizen....
Well it does say domestic enemies. I believe someone who attempts to usurp power can be defined as a domestic enemy. Especially if he attempts to violate our own constitution.
If you believe in following the Constitution, there are two ways to remove a President from office: the ballot box and impeachment. Neither involves the military. In fact, the oath of enlistment requires soldiers to swear allegiance to the President as Commander in Chief.
Any military coup would clearly be in violation of the Constitution.
Soldiers can refuse to carry out illegal orders. But actively interfering in politics is an absolute no-no. There are civil institutions for that purpose. Civilian control over the military (and not the other way around) is what separates the US from all the banana republics out there.
Furthermore, until zero produces a birth certificate, it’s unknown if he’s really the president. My guess would be that he is not.
That's nice, and for the courts to adjudicate. If they don't, you can vote against him in 2012.
The Congress was preparing to impeach Zelaya. They should have done so. But a coup without an impeachment? That’s just tinpot gangsterism.
“Any military coup would clearly be in violation of the Constitution.”
The constitution and the bill of rights specify what the government (elected officials) can not do. It is not and never was to protect the government.
The Military is under the control of the elected officials but is not, in that sense, part of the government. As I said earlier, they took an oath to protect the constitution, not politicians.
Nothing that non-elected officials do can violate the constitution.
“Any military coup would clearly be in violation of the Constitution.”
The constitution and the bill of rights specify what the government (elected officials) can not do. It is not and never was to protect the government.
The Military is under the control of the elected officials but is not, in that sense, part of the government. As I said earlier, they took an oath to protect the constitution, not politicians.
Nothing that non-elected officials do can violate the constitution.
I did, and the writer did a much better job of putting the whole thing into proper prospective. It only confirms what I already thought was going on down there.
I just wanted to make everyone aware of just whose side Obama and Hillary decided to join. As you can see, it's never on the side of the people, and always on the side of the STATE!
Thanks
You are absolutely correct, and might I also add that as an officer, they are under no obligation to carry out the direct officer, if that order involves any breach of the Constitution or U S law.
As you can see, it's never on the side of the people, and always on the side of the STATE!
Zer0 is very consistent in that respect.
From what I’ve read the Honduran Congress did vote for Zelaya’s removal. The military there did not act on its own.
Go ahead and knock all you like. It doesn't bother me at all.
However, I posted the story, and I can comment, or not comment on it as I wish.
Who died and made you MOD?
WTH are you talking about?
Obviously I misunderstood your post. A little clarity on it would be appreciated please.
Well, I was making sure you understood that I wasn’t criticizing you as you opened your response with “I did...” which could be taken in more than one way. At least I thought I was making sure. Then I said “Zer0 is very consistent in that respect.” which was my way of agreeing with the last statement you made in post #28.
It was a much better written story and, and I do appreciate your posting the link.
Sorry I was so touchy, but I was having trouble understanding what it was you were saying.
Thanks again, and have a happy 4th!
Have a great 4th of July! :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.