The Roosevelt corollary does not say that we will intervene whenever we want to, but only to advance certain objectives, "orderly freedom" being first among them. And you're too late, I've already read Theodore Rex.
That's right. You are apparently taking the position that so long as someone is democratically elected, that person can't be a threat to orderly freedom. I don't think that's the test.
Sure, we'll just send Jimmy Carter down there to make sur the election isn't rigged. We can trust him! /sarcasm. Or maybe even Warren Christopher!
the right to intervene should any country in the Western Hemisphere act irresponsibly in erroding its own "orderly freedom[s]." Since the most important "orderly freedom" is the right to political self-determination...
You just don't get it. Communists don't believe in orderly freedom. When people are stupid enough to elect a communist, they kiss orderly freedom goodbye. Do you think every dictator who rides to power on a wave of mob hysteria has the right to treat his slaves how he pleases? I notice you don't jump up to defend Robert Mugabe from Zimbabwe. Well he is a perfect example of the insanity you are defending. According to your logic, he has every right to foment mass genocide and starve most of his slaves to death. If they don't like it, they can just vote him out, right?
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." - Alexander Fraser Tyler