Posted on 06/29/2009 12:49:44 PM PDT by pissant
Edited on 06/29/2009 2:53:07 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Well I’m a geezer and I remember the song and the movie. I just didn’t connect with the sentence. I wasn’t sure how to pronounce, but I would have gotten it had I figured out the vollingk(falling)..:)
Sorry, its the best I could do. I write my own stuff....
Actually it was quite good, the fault lay with me, not your comment!:)
So... howabout all those people who are sick of those neocon Republicans and their confrontational, hyperinterventionist foreign policy?
It seems to me that nobody’s hands are clean here - a democratically elected president attempting to manipulate his country’s constitution to solidify his own power and an army that kidnaps said democratically elected president in a coup. It seems to me that we shouldn’t be too quick to approve the methods here (coup), even if we like the outcome, and we shouldn’t be too quick to align ourselves with an ousted president whose claim to power is the very constitution he was trying to circumvent. Obama seems to have managed to pretty much make a mess of it. I particularly enjoyed his analysis today, namely that the coup was ‘not legal.’ NO sh*t Shirlock. This man taught law? An illegal coup, imagine it, LOL.
Yes, yes, and it has been always obvious.
Yeah, it hits very close to home for Obama.
obumpa
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. It was not a coup. The Supreme Court and Congress followed their constitutional procedures, up to and during the removal of Zelaya from office.
The army did not "kidnap" Zelaya; the army "arrested" Zelaya on constitutionally proper orders from the Supreme Court and Congress, for just cause.
Pain meds being kind to ya, Hillary?
Seriously, there is no restoration needed because the democratic process was followed, which is precisely why Zelaya is in Costa Rica. There is no "coup" in play here: Coups don't usually result in the Vice President assuming the Presidency. The military's role was narrow: to effect the order handed down from the Court, and part of the legal democratic process that was followed...
OBAMADONGA clearly supports South-American,Middle-Eastern...tyrans.
Sometimes a “coup” can be required against a straight tyran...(OBAMADINGA?)
“This WHOLE story makes Odumbo extremely nervous....”
BINGO!!!
Ozero is completely ignoring the Constitution from day one and now he is seeing a mirror image of himself. May have to go through a couple more smokes today.
I think this is easy to dismiss, but it has larger implications in Latin American politics than many might realize.
Chavez is generally regarded as an unstable populist who is ruining Venezuela. That statement, my opinion, is based on conversations with co-workers from Colombia, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Canada, India, and France; from conversations with Chilean taxi drivers, and friends. It also comes from Venezuelans. I have spoken with two Venezuelan companies in the last month, and they felt the unsolicited need to bring up the topic and apologize and express their discontent with their leader with me even though I’m a complete stranger. We have Venezuelans in the office who have come to Chile to get out of Venezuela.
Given that, the Honduran president who was abusing Honduras’ constitution, was supported by Chavez and Castro. He is currently being heavily supported by Chavez…and our president. So you have stabilizing forces in Latin America pushing for honesty, consistency, transparency, and democracy (Chile, Peru, Brazil, Colombia for example), who are generally opposed to Chavez, and by default, this deposed Honduran president (think Nixon). And these countries, like many in the world, look to the US as a powerful force in policy and influence, so it doesn’t take much imagination to imagine the general discouragement that comes from such a strong pose by Obama. Especially given his hands off policy for a similar situation in Iran.
It makes it harder for less powerful countries like Chile to stand up to the neighborhood bully when the community leader in the US is aiding and abetting his disruptive influences.
If you want to read a good explanation of this situation, the WSJ recently produced this opinion piece: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623220955866301.html
I’m perfectly fine with the method. It was a country exercising its constitutional rights. Hopefully, the same will happen in venezuala and the US.
The Honduran constitutional amendment process is not very different from ours here in the USA. Any proposal must be voted on jointly in the national legislature, which then authorizes votes in the states. Then when 3/4ths of the states ratify it,,it becomes law.
He’s the Honduran “coup” in American terms.
So imagine an Obama-type wants a third term as President. It is introduced in both houses, and they vote *against* allowing any state votes on his proposed Amendment to allow it. He goes to the Supreme court and they rule against him, because the constitution says it must first be approved by congress. At this point Obama actually calls Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to provide him ballots and other assistance to conduct a national election that his congress and supreme court have expressly forbidden.
Fearing removal for this outrage, he fires the main leaders of the US Military. The Supreme court rules they must be reinstated, but he refuses. Congress then votes that he must be removed from office. His own party does not even support his efforts to have Venezuela conduct his election. Acting on the authority of this vote and on a COURT ORDER issued by the Supreme court, The Military takes him into custody, sends him out of the country, and protects the civil government as his constitutional successor takes his post. The military never suspends the constitution or installs a Junta.
Ruling on the Honduran Constitution, Obama has called this action “unconstitutional” and “illegal”. Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro agree with him so far.
“I hope this may serve as a lesson or example for our own military.”
I like your spirit, but I’m sure you’re not serious.
I’m not, I’m sure there’s a provision for impeachment, which would have been the proper thing. I’m okay with the outcome, but not the method.
Perhaps I just haven’t seen the whole story. His arrest and expulsion from the country was ordered by the Honduran Supreme Court? There was a trial or judicial proceeding? This proceeding followed specific constitutional provisions? If your facts are right, then my conclusion is obviously wrong.
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.