Obama Blasts the “Hypocrisy” of Critics over the Handling of Honduras Coup

Obama is wrong on this. Zelaya violated the Honduran Constitution he swore to uphold. The Supreme Court ruled Zelaya had to be removed from office. The Army had to carry out the order. The same thing could happen here in the US if the US Supreme Court rules Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirement to serve as president. In like manner, the Army would be called in to remove Obama from office. This is democracy at work. It is the rule of law. Obama supports Zelaya mainly because he fears this happening to him. If the US Supreme Court decides to remove Obama from office, will that be called a coup also? Of course not!

I am from Honduras. My parents live in Honduras with a bunch of my siblings. I currently live in the US.
OBAMA RAMA, STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY'S BUSINESS!!!

You are stupid and Ignorant and don't have a clue what you are talking about. Zelaya is a drug lord, and the people of my country, including my parents are glad Zelaya is gone, and gone he shall remain!

Obama is just plain Wrong: A Citizen’s View. He is guilty of
meddling in other countries affairs and being “stupidly”
uninformed.

It was interesting to see the reaction to Heads of State of the
countries around the world when the corrupt President,
supported by illegal drugs from Hugo Chaves, was Legally
removed from office according to the Honduran Constitution.

Again, the President of the United States has spoken without
understanding the facts as he has done quite frequently.
President Obama has again stated that the removal of Zelaya was
illegal. Not quite so.

The President, Manuel Zelaya, was removed and replaced by the
President of the congress in accordance with the Honduran
Constitution. President Obama might well be advised to read
articles 42, 239, 244, 272, 278, 373, 374 of the Honduran
Constitution.

Using his own words, he once again has acted “STUPIDLY”, with-
out knowing the facts. Not only was the removal justified, but
done in strict accord to the Honduran Constitution. Zelaya, in
effect, removed himself from office by his illegal, unconstitutional
actions and lost his rights as a citizen, and therefore lost his
eligibility to be President.

“The rights of any citizen is lost if the citizen incites, promotes,
or supports the continuance or re-election of the president of
the Republic.” Article 42. (Note: They have a one-term restriction
as constitutional law)

The obvious reason this is so upsetting to the Heads of State like
President Obama is that he, too, on examination of his statements
and actions has, in my opinion, usurped his constitutional
authority, has violated his oath of office both as a U.S. Senator
and as President to uphold and defend the constitution, and has
infringed on the Peoples and States rights guaranteed in the U.S.
Constitution.

If we had a congress that represented the people rather that
name calling and labeling the people “un-American” we would
be impeaching President Obama, Our “Bill of Rights” has and is
being trampled. The problem is that many or most of congress
members on both sides of the ideological isle are equally guilty.

So it appears that Honduras is more of a ‘republic’ and a
‘democracy’ than the United States. I respect the actions of the
Congress and of their Military.

I'd like to know how the vast majority of a congress impeaching a president or a supreme court signing an arrest warrant equates to illegality. Zelaya was not removed from POWER illegally. He may have been removed from THE COUNTRY illegally. But that does not mean he gets the presidency back.

"President Obama said today that the US has been very clear that they believe Zelaya was removed from office illegally and that he should return to power."

Then president obama today verified yet again that he isn't a very smart individual. He would be wise to "have all the facts" about the Honduran situation before opening his capacious pie hole- one would think he'd have learned this lesson during skip-aquiddick.

Our ignorant president needs to acquaint himself with article 239 of the Honduran constitution before commenting stupidly on this topic again.

"The Honduran military defends the Honduran elite's interest along with foreing/US investment. The honduran military is also almost fully sustained by the US.... and if im correct the Honduran military did the ousting??"

The Honduran military swears an oath to the constitution, not the President...just like our military does. The military was ordered to remove him by the Honduran Supreme Court in that he violated the constitution. The military, since having an oath to the constitution, removed him from power and expelled him from the country.

Yes the Honduran military does get some assistance from the US, but not like you think. If you look up TSC (Theater Security Cooperation), you'll see the US does training and support with just about every military south of our border. So your allusion that somehow the US military controls their military, or has this great influence for them to remove the President, is ... well... ignorant.

"In my opinion, it is a type of "beer diplomacy" in which Obama jumped to a conclusion, made a big mistake with a statement, and then has backtracked."

Posted by: Karateka | Aug 11, 2009 12:24:11 PM

It's interesting to note in which direction he invariably jumps, no?

It seems that there is a great deal of double-speak on Honduras. In my opinion, it is a type of "beer diplomacy" in which Obama jumped to a conclusion, made a big mistake with a statement, and then has backtracked.

I've found that "La Gringa's Blogicito" and "World 4 Honduras" have better information on the situation than the regular media.

Im amazed at how ingnorant the average american is about politics.... ppl claim Obama wants Zelaya to become the next latin american dictator? Lets be serious, if the US/Obama really supported Zelaya, he would have been returned to power 2 days after he got ousted. The Honduran military defends the Honduran elite's interest along with foreing/US investment. The honduran military is also almost fully sustained by the US.... and if im correct the Honduran military did the ousting?? You put the "puzzle" together.
p.s. IF dont even kno how to spell honduras plese dont bother to comment... read a book ppl

"President Obama said today that the US has been very clear that they believe Zelaya was removed from office illegally and that he should return to power."

Rediculous. "removed from office illegally", do we have a staff of Honduran lawyers and judges to interpret this? Or are we applying our laws to their nation?

So our nations leader is taking the stance that...
The Supreme Court of Honduras acted illegally.
The Congress of Honduras is wrong.
The people of Honduras are wrong.
The military of Honduras acted illegally.

Maybe our President is wrong? Maybe we should just stay out of it?

Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution reads:

Article 239 — No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President.

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.

I'll get pasted for saying this but I have a theory. Posted by: KR | Aug 11, 2009 9:45:47 AM

Not from me you won't.

They also have to pick an enemy outside their own system and demonize it to keep the masses all focused on the enemy and working for the good of the system. Sound familiar?

" The referendum itself would have to have passed congress."

Not sure where your getting your info but its a bit off. The referendum was to change a portion of the constitution that cannot be changed. Honduran constiution has 8 articles that cannot be changed, term limits of the President is one of them.

Yehudit, I suspect that the State Department was perfectly well aware that Zelaya is a leftist thug trying to become the next Latin American Dictator for Life. But Obama either wanted to score some brownie points with the likes of his new BFF Hugo Chavez, or his instincts are way off kilter..

"Why in the world would an American President side with a two-bit would-be Dictator, Zelaya, Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro?"

I'll get pasted for saying this but I have a theory. Leftists all have one thing in common, a belief in the utopian society and the justice of socialism. Doesn't matter if your left in America or left in Cuba, its the same principled belief. In order to strive for this utopia, certain sacrifices must be made and they convince themselves and attempt to convince others using emotional based rationale. Meaning, we must all sacrifice for those suffering. The problem is however, that those in power end up being the ones that never have to sacrifice. Also human nature is the path of least resistance. No one will work harder for someone else's benefit. While it may work for a hive a bee's, it fails in the human society.

Yet, these leaders such as Castro, Chavez, etc all still believe it, or if they don't anymore, they are enjoying the power it gives. The end result is that there is only one power broker standing, and they make no sacrifices. They believe their system is dependent on a single cult of personality who can persuade the masses to sacfrifice for the good of all.

Enter Chavez, who rules on cult of personality and strong arms opposition to secure his popularity and power. Zelaya, wants to replicate Chavez's successes. The nation however, kicked him out.

Fidel Castro also rules on cult of personality. Questions loom over the future of Cuba after he dies. Chances are, a major crack down on opposition will occur to preserve Raul Castro's position of power. After he dies, it could be a free for all.

One thing is certain among leftists, they all admire what Hugo Chavez has done, essentially turning this democratic nation into a singularity power of the left and securing his place and role as the defacto leader. What Zelaya was doing was trying to replicate it.

Hate to say it but Obama has taken similar actions in his early career that Chavez did. Maybe its the blueprint for the rise of socialist/communist power. Time will tell. In any case, one would understand why those who defend Zelaya are probably a little motivated to preserve the strategy of a socialist/neo-communist take over from within.

The Honduras Supreme Court handled the situation correctly.

Obama and Hillary are so far left that they would like a communist dictatorship established in Honduras.

This is another example of Obama lying by using a strawman. No one, except Obama and other dictators in the region, advocated interference. We advocated non interference.

Either we have a President who cannot tell the difference between interference and non interference or we have a pathological liar as the President. I favor the latter explanation.

I'm all for calling out hypocrisy but it has more weight if you're not a hypocrite yourself.

What about Afghanistan and Iraq? The US under the leadership of George Bush followed a very near-sighted policy of occupying a country, depleting its resources and economy, and then deserting it when nothing is left. Why should Honduras be any different?

I am a simpleton. But if Chavez wants the guy back, and Castro wants the guy back, and the Leftists of South America want the guy back, then it would be in ours and the people of Honduras to not let him back. Anyone those leftist dictators approve of is bad medicine. The fact Obama is a leftist, I was not shocked he condemned the ouster. The beautiful part is when he was lampooned for that he backed off and finds himself in Mexico being lampooned by his leftist brothers. Oh what a tangled web we weave, when at first we practice to deceive. Obama is a rat, and even the leftists smell him.