Honduras Coup Poses Challenges, Questions for Obama, Congress

President Obama branded as "not legal" the the military coup in Honduras, where elected President Manuel (Mel) Zelaya was kidnapped and flown out of the country by soldiers bent on blocking an advisory vote on constitutional reform in the country.

Obama said a "terrible precedent" would be set if the coup were not reversed, adding that "We do not want to go back to a dark past. We always want to stand with democracy."

The president's statement -- which toughened up a tepid earlier announcement that he was "deeply concerned by reports coming out of Honduras" -- came as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described the crisis as "a test of the inter-American system's ability to support and defend democracy and constitutional order in our hemisphere."

"The United States has been working with our partners in the OAS (Organization of American States) to fashion a strong consensus condemning the detention and expulsion of President Zelaya, and calling for the full restoration of democratic order in Honduras," she said Monday. "Our immediate priority is to restore full democratic and constitutional order in that country."

As the military and civil officials behind the coup clamped down on communications in Honduras and soldiers used tear gas outside the Honduran presidential palace to scatter thousands of people protesting a coup, President Zelaya was scheduled to speak tothe United Nations General Assembly.

Senior aides to the Obama administration tell reporters that U.S. diplomats were working to ensure Zelaya's safe return. And the Wall Street Journal suggests that the administration may have worked behind the scenes to try and avert the coup.

But Roberto Lovato has been arguing that the U.S. should ramp up its response. The savvy expert on U.S. relations with Latin America writes:

President Obama and the U.S. can actually do something about a military crackdown that our tax dollars are helping pay for. That Vasquez and other coup leaders were trained at the WHINSEC, which also trained Augusto Pinochet and other military dictators responsible for the deaths, disappearances, tortures of hundreds of thousands in Latin America, sends profound chills throughout a region still trying to overcome decades U.S.-backed militarism.

Hemispheric concerns about the coup were expressed in the rapid, historic and almost universal condemnation of the plot by almost all Latin American governments. Such concerns in the region represent an opportunity for the United States. But, while the Honduran coup represents a major opportunity for Obama to make real his recent and repeated calls for a "new" relationship to the Americas, failure to take actions that send a rapid and unequivocal denunciation of the coup will be devastating to the Honduran people -- and to the still-fragile U.S. image in the region.

Recent declarations by the Administration -- expressions of "concern" by the President and statements by Secretary of State Clinton recognizing Zelaya as the only legitimate, elected leader of Honduras -- appear to indicate preliminary disapproval of the putsch. Yet, the even more unequivocal statements of condemnation from U.N. President Miguel D'Escoto, the Organization of American States, the European Union, and the Presidents of Argentina, Costa Rica and many other governments raise greatly the bar of expectation before the Obama Administration.

There is no question that Obama must be outspoken. This is a time when clarity is essential, and potentially influential.

There is also a role for members of Congress, who need to examine the timing and character of this coup -- which was carried out by military officers trained in the U.S. at the School of the Americas/Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC), in a country with a substantial U.S. military base (home to roughly 500 troops and air force combat planes and helicopters) in Soto Cano. It is difficult to imagine that the Honduran military would have moved against Zelaya without notifying U.S. military officials -- a prospect that, considering the sordid history of Washington's entanglements in the region, ought to be reviewed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Honest players on that committee, such as Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold, have a right and a responsibility to ask tough questions about the removal of a democratically-elected leader whose most serious "crime" appears to have been a determination to challenge the corrupt status quo in his country.

Zelaya, a businessman with a record of activism on behalf of decentralization of power and respect for indigenous peoples, was elected in 2005 as the relatively moderate candidate of the country's historically powerful Liberal Party.

Photographed in genial conversation with former President George Bush, he was not viewed as a particularly radical player when he took office. But Zelaya's left-leaning economic and social policies earned praise from labor unions and civil society groups, and he had forged regional alliances with the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas, which Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and other elected leaders in Latin America established as a counter to the neoliberal trade and security policies pushed by the U.S. under Bush.

That made relations with the U.S. somewhat more tense, especially as Zelaya wrangled with conservative forces over media, presidential succession and constitional issues.

Chavez has suggested that U.S. meddling -- and a Central Intelligence Agency tie -- enabled the coup.

School of the Americas Watch is following developments closely, and well -- lots of fresh photos and blogging on its site.

Comments (127)

1. If the US really worked behind the scenes to avert this coup, it wouldn't have happened. It will be useful to compare US politicians response to this stealing of democracy to their response to the alleged stealing of the Iranian election.

   Posted by lnh at 06/29/2009 @ 11:20am

2. Given the history of US interference in the governments in this region, what the US does may be less important than what the other democracies do. Heard on Bloomberg Lula announced Brazil would not recognize the new regime.

   Seeing the nations of the Americas acting responsibility to defend their own democratic development is fine to see, and those democracies do include Venezuela and Bolivia......

   Charlie M.

   Posted by cmsandia at 06/29/2009 @ 11:38am

3. We'll see how the Obama administration really views the situation in Honduras in a period of weeks or months, if the junta survives. If the Obama administration continues military cooperation with Honduras, or works with the new regime as if completely legitimate, it will be clear that the new "choice" of government is seen as acceptable.

   An interesting detail 0f the coup is that it was not purely military at all - the Honduran supreme court is legitimizing the coup, as has a majority of the Honduran parliamentary body. The military, congress, and high court all played together to depose Zelaya.

   Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 11:58am

4. The imperial legacy, the gift that just keeps on giving.

   Yes, it will be interesting to hear what, if anything, Obama has to say publicly to the coup's perps.

   Posted by sloper at 06/29/2009 @ 11:58am

5. I expect the Nation Magazine and people like Nichols to lie about events like this, but the MSM should be ashamed for buying into this leftist propaganda.

   Zelaya was not ousted in a coup. He was removed by order of the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress because of his attempt through the influence of Chavez to make himself a dictator in the image of his "jefe", Chavez.

   What we are seeing is the real influence of Chavez to spur marxist revolution throughout Central and South America. This is not something for speculation. Chavez is open about it. He already has his inner circle of marxist cohorts in Ortega and Morales. In the past 3 years, he added Zelaya.

   Fortunately, the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress were unwilling to let Chavez take over their country.

   <Zelaya, in office since 2006, was ousted in a dawn coup after he angered the judiciary, Congress and the army by seeking constitutional changes that would allow presidents to seek re-election beyond a four-year term. The Honduran Congress named an interim president, Roberto Micheletti, who announced a curfew for Sunday and Monday nights. The country's Supreme Court said it had ordered the army to remove Zelaya.

   Zelaya's bid to hold a poll on Sunday on changing the constitution to let presidents stay beyond one four-year term had set him in opposition to the army, courts and Congress and he tried to fire the armed forces chief, General Romeo Vasquez, last week over the issue. Zelaya was due to leave office in early 2010.>

   continued

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:04pm

6. Honduran govt removal of Zelaya continued

   <After Zelaya's ouster, the army guarded Congress as Honduran deputies unanimously elected Congress head Micheletti, a member of Zelaya's own Liberal Party, as interim president until after a presidential election in November.

   Micheletti defied world pressure to reverse the coup, saying: "I don't think anyone here, not Barack Obama and much less Hugo Chavez, has the right to come and threaten (Honduras).">

   http://tinyurl.com/lsjjvw

   Again, this was not a coupe. The military did not seize control of the country.

   And the Obama Admin is showing themselves to favor the marxists over the right of a nation to legitimately remove a leader who was attempting a Chavez style dictatorship.

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:07pm

7. Oh, joy, here come the ranting loony-right cranks.

   Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 12:26pm

8. The cause of Mr Zelaya's downfall was his attempt to emulate Mr Chávez by organising a referendum to call a constituent assembly. He seemed to hope that this would enable him to remain in power, perhaps by changing the constitution to allow him to stand for a second term in an election due in November. This embroiled Mr Zelaya in a conflict of powers. The Congress and the courts both rejected the referendum. But Mr Zelaya would not be stopped. He issued a decree for a consultative poll on Sunday, asking Hondurans whether they wanted presidential-election ballots in November to include a question about holding a constituent assembly. And he ordered the army to distribute ballot papers (which by one account came from Venezuela).

   When the head of the armed forces, Romeo Vásquez Velázquez, refused to carry out the directive, the president sacked him. The Supreme Court reinstated the general, and an independent electoral tribunal ordered the ballots to be confiscated. In response, Mr Zelaya himself led a group of supporters to an airforce base where they carted off the ballots.

   http://intermexfreemarket.blogspot.com/

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:27pm

9. Some light of truth against the lies of people like IlyaKuryakin

   <That Mr. Zelaya acted as if he were above the law, there is no doubt. While Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door does not lie with the president. A constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress.

   But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chávez ship him the necessary ballots from Venezuela. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

   The top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, told the president that he would have to comply. Mr. Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.

   Calculating that some critical mass of Hondurans would take his side, the president decided he would run the referendum himself. So on Thursday he led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order. The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

   It remains to be seen what Mr. Zelaya's next move will be. It's not surprising that chavistas throughout the region are claiming that he was victim of a military coup. They want to hide the fact that the military was acting on a court order to defend the rule of law and the constitution, and that the Congress asserted itself for that purpose, too.>

   continued

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:30pm

10. <Mrs. Clinton has piled on as well. Yesterday she accused Honduras of violating "the precepts of the Interamerican Democratic Charter" and said it "should be condemned by all." Fidel Castro did just that. Mr. Chávez pledged to overthrow the new government.

    Honduras is fighting back by strictly following the constitution. The Honduran Congress met in emergency session yesterday and designated its president as the interim executive as stipulated in Honduran law. It also said that presidential elections set for November will go forward. The Supreme Court later said that the military acted on its orders. It also said that when Mr. Zelaya realized that he was going to be prosecuted for his illegal behavior, he agreed to an offer to resign in exchange for safe passage out of the country. Mr. Zelaya denies it.

    Many Hondurans are going to be celebrating Mr. Zelaya's foreign excursion. Street protests against his heavy-handed tactics had already begun last week. On Friday a large number of military reservists took their turn. "We won't go backwards," one sign said. "We want to live in peace, freedom and development."

    Besides opposition from the Congress, the Supreme Court, the electoral tribunal and the attorney general, the president had also become persona non grata with the Catholic Church and numerous evangelical church leaders. On Thursday evening his own party in Congress sponsored a resolution to investigate whether he is mentally unfit to remain in office.>

    continued

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:31pm

11. <For Hondurans who still remember military dictatorship, Mr. Zelaya also has another strike against him: He keeps rotten company. Earlier this month he hosted an OAS general assembly and led the effort, along side OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza, to bring Cuba back into the supposedly democratic organization.

    The OAS response is no surprise. Former Argentine Ambassador to the U.N. Emilio Cárdenas told me on Saturday that he was concerned that "the OAS under Insulza has not taken seriously the so-called 'democratic charter.' It seems to believe that only military 'coups' can challenge democracy. The truth is that democracy can be challenged from within, as the experiences of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and now Honduras, prove." A less-kind interpretation of Mr. Insulza's judgment is that he doesn't mind the Chávez-style coup.>

    http://intermexfreemarket.blogspot.com/

    Cheers to the govt and people of Honduras who refuse to let Chavez take over their country.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:32pm

12. According to CNNI, the Foreign Minister was also detained, along with the Cuban Ambassador. The Ambassador was later released. This has nothing to do with a constitutional debate over presidential elections, and suggests a wider coup in progress. If the President was removed legally, there would be no need for his arrest and deportation. The actions of the Honduran military are unacceptable under Honduran and international law. Any foreign military aid from the U.S should cease and any U.S. troops in Honduras must be withdrawn!

    Posted by pjcasey at 06/29/2009 @ 12:35pm

13. So, we Must conclude that you are In Favour of the Coup???

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/29/2009 @ 12:33pm

    THERE WAS NO COUPE.

    that is the point from my postings. The Supreme Court and the Congress of Honduras removed Zelaya, not the military.

    The military is not running the country which would be a military coupe. A member of Zelaya's own party was appointed acting president by the Congress until elections in November.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:41pm

14. Wow, the misinformation of the The Nation!

    When the Attorney General and the Supreme Court, the (fired) head of the military, along with significant number of Zelaya's own party members declaring the VOTE as illegal and unconstitutional, one would think this is NO ORDINARY COUP.

    That they left Zelaya alive and transported him to Costa Rica, speaks volume about how they perceive their own actions in removing the man from office.

    POWER corrupts....in Honduras too!

    Posted by Happy at 06/29/2009 @ 12:50pm

15. Do you even understand WHAT a Coup IS???

    Dude, you are fucking Insane.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/29/2009 @ 12:46pm

    I think you have it backwards. I certainly am familiar with the term and this action by the govt to remove it's president was not a military coup.

    Encarta-Coup

    1. seizure of political power: the sudden violent overthrow of a government and seizure of political power, especially by the military

    http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/coup.html

    Or this?

    <A military coup (d'etat) is an organized action by the armed forces of a country ment to overthrow and replace its government. It can be successful (the former government is replaced by a new one controlled by the military) or not (the government stays in power), it can be temporary (the military relinquishes power quickly) or permanent (the military remains in control for lengthy periods of time), bloody or bloodless.

    It is different from a revolution, since a coup is a top-down action, controlled and generated from an existing structure of the state against another, rather than a bottom-up action of rebellion against the whole government coming from non-governament actors (as in the case of a revolution), as is different from a civil war (where two factions, typically a governmental and non-governmental actor fight for power in a bloody war for lengthy periods), since a coup can be both non-bloody and short in duration (such as the successful Thai coup of 2006).>

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_military_coup

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:56pm

16. Thanks for PROVING what I said, jackass.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/29/2009 @ 1:03pm

    Just as with the rest of your views, you have it completely backwards.

    this was the legitimate removal by the Supreme Court and Congress of a leader who refused to follow the constitution and was planning with the help of Chavez to install himself as marxist dictator.

    Fortunately, the govt and people of Honduras refused to let this happen.

    I applaud the brave action by the Honduran people to prevent this marxist takeover attempt by Chavez.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 1:11pm

17. "You are insane, "antisocialist"

    ...and clearly beyond reason. About as dis-informed as you are uninformed.

    You - and your Obamabots - are going to Lose this Coup."

    Hah ha... Anti an Obamabot? LMAO! Insane, maybe. But not an Obamabot. Funny funny funny.

    Posted by Extraneous at 06/29/2009 @ 1:23pm

18. Anyone who says this wasn't a coup is a total idiot. If what Zelaya was doing was illegal the government could have easily taken legal measures against him, which it had. There was no reason to kidnap him, beat up the ambassadors of Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, assassinate a leftist candidate (as reported by NarcoNews), and shut down TV channels and phone communications. This was almost identical to the 2004 coup in Haiti and the failed 2002 coup in Venezuela. Wake up people!

    Posted by Communard115 at 06/29/2009 @ 1:25pm

19. Posted by IlyaKuryakin

    I think you have some worthwhile comments, but the vulgarity and insults of your posts discredits any legitimate point you try to make. After reading some of your posts, even though I agree with much of what your saying I am tempted to add you to my ignore list due to the offensive, insulting, hatred tone.

    Posted by Extraneous at 06/29/2009 @ 1:43pm

20. Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:04pm

    So, Hugo was at the center of the coup-de-tat, that is, removing an elected leader prior to the end of his term, to keep out a "marxist" regime...

    but the FLMN is NOT a leftist communist/Marxist inspired political party?

    Go figure.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 1:57pm

21. THERE WAS NO COUPE.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:41pm

    "Zelaya, in office since 2006, was ousted in a dawn coup after he angered the judiciary,..."

    posted by antisocialist at 06/29/200 @12:04pm

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 2:04pm

22. Coupe? That's what champagne is served in, after the coup succeeds.

    And did you catch Hillary's anodyne remarks on behalf of democracy & THE RULE OF LAW ... & the implied assurance that the US won't lift a finger or even raise its voice as it has towards Iran. Forget invade/bomb, as in Iraq & Af/Pak, where we take democracy far more seriously.

    Change. Yes we can.

    Pity the poor beneficiaries of our crusades for democracy, as they bury their dead, war after war, decade after decade.

    Posted by sloper at 06/29/2009 @ 2:23pm

23. Coupe? That's what champagne is served in, after the coup succeeds.

    And did you catch Hillary's anodyne remarks on behalf of democracy & THE RULE OF LAW ... & the implied assurance that the US won't lift a finger or even raise its voice as it has towards Iran. Forget invade/bomb, as in Iraq & Af/Pak, where we take democracy far more seriously.

    Change. Yes we can.

    Pity the poor beneficiaries of our crusades for democracy, as they bury their dead, war after war, decade after decade.

    Posted by sloper at 06/29/2009 @ 2:23pm

24. I wish The Nation would do something about the ranting loony-right cranks that inhabit their web site putting up post after post after post after ...

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 2:49pm

25. Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 1:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Still waving your sign on the street corner?

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 2:50pm

26. AP: " Obama said he wanted to be very clear that President Zelaya is the democratically elected president."

    Good start. What next?

    Posted by sloper at 06/29/2009 @ 3:45pm

27. Good start. What next?

    Posted by sloper at 06/29/2009 @ 3:45pm

    Hopefully nothing more that backing a UN resolution condemning the coup. We are not going to do anything more with Iran and I hope we don't do anything with in Honduras. Personally, I think it its high time we let other countries do what they want. We let the Thai coup happen. No harm no foul. It is none of business, lets stay out of it.

    Posted by Extraneous at 06/29/2009 @ 4:25pm

28. but the FLMN is NOT a leftist communist/Marxist inspired political party?

    Go figure.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 1:57pm

    You keep repeating that line but I have never stated that.

    I said that Funes is not a leftist. He was recruited by the FMLN because they wanted to win and they knew they had to go outside of their own group. His wife is a Brazilian leftist and she appealed to him to run. He ran as an moderate pragmatist (and as he said, in the model of Obama). His cabinet is a mix of Arena and FMLN members.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 4:40pm

29. .....You - and your Obamabots - are going to Lose this Coup. Right now there Hundreds of Thousands marching in Honduras...but Because YOUR SIDE control the media, we won't see it. Gee, where have i seen That before?

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/29/2009 @ 12:42pm

    I'm jotting this one down. LvLiberty getting thrown in with the "Obamabots". This is good stuff.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/29/2009 @ 4:55pm

30. THERE WAS NO COUPE.

    Only a sedan was offered?

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/29/2009 @ 4:57pm

31. Honest players on that committee, such as Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold, have a right and a responsibility to ask tough questions about the removal of a democratically-elected leader whose most serious "crime" appears to have been a determination to challenge the corrupt status quo in his country. **************************************************************

    According to the WSJ Editorial page (Not the liberal "news" pages)

    1) [President] Zelaya acted as if he were above the law... A constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress.

    2) But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chávez ship him the necessary ballots from Venezuela. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

    3) Mr. Zelaya promptly fired [the top military commander]. The Supreme Court ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.

    4) [The P]resident decided he would run the referendum himself. So on Thursday he led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

    5) The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623220955866301.html

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 4:58pm

32. "According to the WSJ Editorial page (Not the liberal "news" pages)"

    Does this mean is it a better source. Or a source that is just going to lie in a different way?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 5:00pm

33. It seems calling an unconstitutional referendum, breaking and entering, inciting a riot, and defying the Attorney General and Supreme Court are more serious "crimes" than "challenging the corrupt status quo."

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:01pm

34. Does this mean is it a better source. Or a source that is just going to lie in a different way?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 5:00pm

    The WSJ editorial page editor and news page editor hate each other and don't speak. The editorial page is the most conservative of the dailies, but the news pages are every bit as liberal as the NYT or Washington Post. Most Liberals incorectlys condemn the entire WSJ enterprise as conservative.

    I noted this to a friend when the news page declared a "Coup" on the front page when in fact the military was acting on orders of the AG and Supreme Court.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:04pm

35. Oh, the acting president is the president of the Congress, not a military official. Just like if our President and Vice President are unable to perform the duties of office, the President Pro Tem (President of the Senate) becomes the acting President of the country. This is what is known as "the rule of law" or following the Constitution.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:07pm

36. So, we Must conclude that you are In Favour of the Coup???

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/29/2009 @ 12:33pm

    I'm in favor of the rule of law. If the Supreme Court says the President if violating the Consitution, the president must desist or be removed.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:12pm

37. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:04pm

    So your saying it will just lie to us in multiple ways?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 5:13pm

38. Amazing how many people are clueless about what happened.

    Obama has a tight rope to walk here...... The US is against Chavez/Morales/Ortega..... and Mel Zeyala was working to dissolve the Constitution .....followed by Congress....

    yet Obama and US can not support a military coup..as it goes against the democratic ideas...

    tough spot for US... at the end... mel Zeyala only has a few more months left .... and it obvious he doesnt have the support to run another term...................... although he could easily now justify to dissolve the Congress if he were to come back.......

    The left maintains in power in Honduras... so its ashame that the Congress/Military bungled this "coup"...

    Posted by expathonduras at 06/29/2009 @ 5:29pm

39. It's surprising how none of the analysis concerning what Zelaya actually did has seen much, if any, response. Like the part about him leading a mob in order to undertake illegal things? That seems kind of important. Whether he was democratically-elected is irrelevant; he can be democratically-removed as well. The fact that he was arrested by military troops doesn't make it a coup; that can just as easily be the country enforcing the law against a President who decides he doesn't really want to follow it.

    Posted by Thrawn at 06/29/2009 @ 5:29pm

40. "According to the WSJ Editorial page (Not the liberal "news" pages)"

    Does this mean is it a better source. Or a source that is just going to lie in a different way?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 5:00pm

    Multiple sources had the same information. I got the same info from a Central American blog.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 5:31pm

41. I am in Honduras now and there is very very small amount of protestors...

    The reason being that the Liberal Party is still in control of the government... the current president is a liberal party member. Elvin Santos the Liberal presidental candiate for the November election ( expected to win).... was also against Mel Zelaya.....and he was his vice president until he had to resign because of the presidental campagin he was involved in.

    There has been almost zero violence....because Mel lost the support of much of his party and people....

    Posted by expathonduras at 06/29/2009 @ 5:35pm

42. I am in Honduras now and there is very very small amount of protestors...

    The reason being that the Liberal Party is still in control of the government... the current president is a liberal party member. Elvin Santos the Liberal presidental candiate for the November election ( expected to win).... was also against Mel Zelaya.....and he was his vice president until he had to resign because of the presidental campagin he was involved in.

    There has been almost zero violence....because Mel lost the support of much of his party and people....

    Posted by expathonduras at 06/29/2009 @ 5:35pm

    Good to hear from you. My wife has lots of family in El Salvador and that is the information we are getting there also.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 5:41pm

43. .....You - and your Obamabots - are going to Lose this Coup. Right now there Hundreds of Thousands marching in Honduras...but Because YOUR SIDE control the media, we won't see it. Gee, where have i seen That before?

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/29/2009 @ 12:42pm

    Ah, yes. Wing nut lefties -- in the house!

    Anyone see the evil hand of Dole or United Fruit in here? Nope, didn't think so.

    Just wondering what criteria the left would deem adequate to oust a budding dictator. Supreme Court and Congress not enough for you?

    The Chavez criteria is enough for me. If Hugo is crying like a baby about his ousted protege, it must have been a good move for Democracy.

    Posted by twillie at 06/29/2009 @ 6:00pm

44. It's just sad, the spectacle of just how idiotic and puerile the comments on this web page largely are. The loony right cranks babbling here - I am actually embarrassed for you. None of us is in Tegucigalpa, none of us has serious knowledge of the inner workings of Honduran politics, at this point professional journalists living in working in news bureaus in and around Honduras cannot get basic information as to what as happened. The US presidential administration is reacting as if surprised and is engaged apparently in high-level activities within Honduras that none of us are aware of, and that are based on information none of us have access to. And yet the loony right cranks babble here as if professional experts with real information. Most of you couldn't point to Honduras on a map of Central America right now if you were told to.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 6:11pm

45. "President Obama condemned as illegal the the military coup in Honduras, where elected President Manuel (Mel) Zelaya was kidnapped and flown out of the country by soldiers bent on blocking an advisory vote on constitutional reform in the country. "

    ..bent on blocking an advisory vote on constitutional reform in the country?

    He was removed by orders from Supreme Court on the basis he did not have constitutional power to become a Chavez or Castro...

    and Obama takes the side of anti constitutional forces backed by Chavez and Castro?

    and Obama wants to talk about democarcy? Rule of law?

    You gotta be shittin us...who really believes this?

    The gall of the left here is never ending..

    Posted by YourJomamma at 06/29/2009 @ 6:14pm

46. "Zelaya was not ousted in a coup. He was removed by order of the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress because of his attempt through the influence of Chavez to make himself a dictator in the image of his "jefe", Chavez."

    But in a democracy, don't the people decide whether an ELECTED official stays or goes as a result of the government's performance? Seems to me another denial of the popular choice if a court can tell the military: "Oh, we don't like this guy's policy. Depose them." But the fascists here love the idea....

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 06/29/2009 @ 6:21pm

47. Oh for Christ's sake the US Secretary of State and US President have unequivocally denounced the coup in Honduras as such, a coup. You fucking twits are living in an alternate universe. Grow up. While you babble on and on about some sort of "leftist" conspiracy or propaganda the real world is leaving you behind. Try to come in from the outer limits where you reside.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 6:29pm

48. It's useful to reverse or apply scenarios before we condemn.

    If Bush held a referendum that could lead to making him ruler for life.... how should Congress react?

    On Iran... they have a supreme leader who declared the election legit. We have a supreme court justice who did Bush's work for him. If US citizenry demonstrated to the extent those brave Iranians have done, how long before the trigger-happy republicans would send out the army to 'keep the peace'

    When we dispassionately answer these.... only then can we propose solutions.

    Posted by trinitruth at 06/29/2009 @ 6:36pm

49. Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 6:29pm

    Good point. I just don't get why anti and fat troll care. Seems to me the military was trying to stop a vote? I thought that voting was a sign of democracies in action so the coup was counter democratic. But maybe that is why anti and fat like it, it pleases their facist desires.

    They would love to be able to stop votes if they did not like what was being voted on. Facist, facist, dictator, facist. And they think Chavez is a threat. Good grief.

    As far as it not being a coup if anti or fatso can link me the Honduras constitution and show that this was the proper course of action then maybe i'll believe it.

    Posted by Extraneous at 06/29/2009 @ 6:40pm

50. "Mrs. Clinton has piled on as well. Yesterday she accused Honduras of violating "the precepts of the Interamerican Democratic Charter" and said it "should be condemned by all.""

    This should scare everyone. When the US S of S asserts that the "Interamerican Democratic Charter", whatever that is, should take precedence over a sovereign country's CONSTITUTION, we should sit up and take notice. And then, run her out of town.

    It's just sad, the spectacle of just how idiotic and puerile the comments on this web page largely are. The loony right cranks babbling here - I am actually embarrassed for you. None of us is in Tegucigalpa, none of us has serious knowledge of the inner workings of Honduran politics, at this point professional journalists living in working in news bureaus in and around Honduras cannot get basic information as to what as happened. The US presidential administration is reacting as if surprised and is engaged apparently in high-level activities within Honduras that none of us are aware of, and that are based on information none of us have access to. And yet the loony right cranks babble here as if professional experts with real information. Most of you couldn't point to Honduras on a map of Central America right now if you were told to.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 6:11pm

    Well now, expathonduras just provided us with some on the ground info that refutes most of the left wing babble on this thread. Now, who's the "fucking twit"?

    Posted by twillie at 06/29/2009 @ 6:48pm

51. Multiple sources had the same information. I got the same info from a Central American blog.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 5:31pm

    Oh I'm not commenting on the situation. I know nothing about it. I will get my update tonight at some point. Just that one source is not really more legitimate than another just because it is considered right wing or left wing.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 7:02pm

52. And the Obama Admin is showing themselves to favor the marxists over the right of a nation to legitimately remove a leader who was attempting a Chavez style dictatorship.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:07pm

    Anti - If you what you say in your post is true then I (mostly) agree with you (imagine that!). (Was that the sound of my liberal card being shredded?)

    However, your last sentence went too far. You don't know that he was "attempting a Chavez style dictatorship." That's an assumption on your part. What we know is that he wanted to extend the Presidential term limit and that the Army stopped "an advisory vote." I don't even know what "an advisory vote" is. However, extending terms limits is legal in democracies. Up until FDR, we had no Presidential term limit, and I know that during Reagan, some people wanted him to stay on for a third term...as some did after Clinton, too. So in essence, you're suggesting that anything different from what any country has RIGHT NOW, is somehow "attempting dictatorship?" That's stretching things.

    Now, if the proposed term limit was never ending, then yes, I would agree with you completely.

    The fact that the Honduran Supremes, as well as their Congress had something to do with it is VERY interesting and to me, means one of two things:

    1. You're absolutely right and he was trying to pull a power trip, or...

    2. The political, military and financial "elite" of the country (regardless of whether they are left or right on the political spectrum), don't like his policies and wanted to see him gone.

    Neither one is a good choice in my opinion.

    Just so you know, I'm anti-Chavez...and not that it matters, but it's because of his moves toward dictatorship, not his politics.

    Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 06/29/2009 @ 7:04pm

53. Most of you couldn't point to Honduras on a map of Central America right now if you were told to.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 6:11pm

    aren't you the arrogant one..It lies east of El Salvador.. just a nice couple hour drive from San Salvador in fact.

    Some of the best retirement property in the Western Hemisphere is located there (Roatan).

    http://www.roatanliving.com/

    http://www.roatanpropertymanagement.com/

    Honduras is a beautiful country.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 7:29pm

54. The fact that the Honduran Supremes, as well as their Congress had something to do with it is VERY interesting and to me, means one of two things:

    1. You're absolutely right and he was trying to pull a power trip, or...

    2. The political, military and financial "elite" of the country (regardless of whether they are left or right on the political spectrum), don't like his policies and wanted to see him gone.

    Neither one is a good choice in my opinion.

    Just so you know, I'm anti-Chavez...and not that it matters, but it's because of his moves toward dictatorship, not his politics.

    Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 06/29/2009 @ 7:04pm

    We certainly have good indications that Chavez was manipulating this situation.

    Chavez furnished the ballots

    Chavez has threatened to use military force to reinstate Zelaya

    Chavez picked up Zelaya in Costa Rica and flew him to Nicaragua for a meeting of the marxist cabal, strategizing their next step.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 7:33pm

55. "Zelaya was removed from his home hours before a vote was due to be held on whether a national referendum should be scheduled late this year on extending the tenure of the president beyond the current single four-year term limit.

    His desire to change the constitution – mirroring similar moves by Chavez and another regional leftist, Bolivian President Evo Morales – angered other institutions of the state, and the Supreme Court declared the referendum plan illegal.

    Last week, military chief Gen. Romeo Vasquez refused to help administer Sunday's pre-referendum voting exercise, saying he would be violating the law to do so. The president fired him.

    The Supreme Court then ordered Zelaya to reinstate Vasquez, but he refused.

    On Sunday, the court in a statement said it had ordered the army to remove the president, "to defend the rule of law." The National Assembly later in the day voted to appoint the legislature's leader, Roberto Micheletti, as acting president until next January, when Zelaya's term would have ended. Micheletti, a member of Zelaya's party who had opposed the referendum plan, pledged to ensure that elections would be held, as previously scheduled, in November."

    Tells us a lot when you consider the marxist Chavez blaming the U.S.A. and in chimes Hillary and the Obamanation that makes desolation going along with all the other marxist and supporting them!!!

    Yep, good socialist and commies one and all!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 7:57pm

56. "WHINSEC, which also trained Augusto Pinochet and other military dictators... "

    technically, Pinochet himself was not trained at SOA - only his officers

    Posted by rich_in_brooklyn at 06/29/2009 @ 8:05pm

57. An interesting detail 0f the coup is that it was not purely military at all - the Honduran supreme court is legitimizing the coup, as has a majority of the Honduran parliamentary body. The military, congress, and high court all played together to depose Zelaya.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 11:58am

    It's just sad, the spectacle of just how idiotic and puerile the comments on this web page largely are.....yet the loony right cranks babble here as if professional experts with real information....

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/29/2009 @ 6:11pm

    We know that Nichols reposted his comment w/unknown changes!

    Me wonders what kinda of Michael Jackson-like CHANGE took place for "friendly" between noon and 6 pm....LOL!

    Posted by Happy at 06/29/2009 @ 8:08pm

58. Responding to Syfriendly:

    So if Congress voted to impeach and convict Obama, and the Supreme Court went along, and then Obama resisted and we somehow needed to troops to back the rest of the government up...that's a coup?

    Posted by Thrawn at 06/29/2009 @ 9:31pm

59. "the marxist cabal".

    Larry is in fine form now. He has just enough innuendo and pieces of news to make this into a hemispheric marxist plot. Of course, he finds many of the same plots in the gilded halls of investment bankers and the broom closets of janitorial unions.

    You must be in heaven Larry! Your wildest nightmares have come to pass, and you don't even really know what's going on yet.

    You do realize that Zelaya could have executed the Unitary Executive theory, right?

    Boy, if Chavez supplied ballots and support, that would be awful! Why,... a third party government interfering with a Central American government and election would be.... American history.

    -----------------------------------------------------

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 7:57pm

    Are you doing your impression of the Tower of Babble?

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 9:39pm

60. A representative of the American Enterprise Institute, a neoconservative think tank, appeared on ABC news supporting the removal and exile of the President by the military. About the same time as the CIA coup in Iran, there was another one in Guatemala. I am very tired of right wing coups in Latin America support by multinational big business and conservative American governments overthrowing freely elected governments. In Guatemala's case, United Fruits interests were threatened. Among John Foster Dulles' many international clients, all over the world was United Fruit!

    Posted by pjcasey at 06/29/2009 @ 9:41pm

61. It looks to me like there is a case for the Court to rule against Zelaya's referendum, but is there an impeachment process that was followed?

    Which body is responsible for impeaching a president, under Honduran law? Is there language that allows the court to remove an elected president?

    If there is, then no coup.

    But, sending troops into the street and having the president whisked away by the military certainly creates an impression of a coup. If the process was not explained to other leaders, then I can understand the quick reaction to what they could easily have seen as another in a long line of Southern Hemisphere coups.

    We may see Obama backing off as more info becomes available. Still fun to watch the neo-cons complain about knee jerk reactions from a president though!

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 10:03pm

62. Are you doing your impression of the Tower of Babble?

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 9:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Its Babel, you know Babylonian or now Iraq! Just another fact you overlook.

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:03pm

63. Didn't Bush violate Article 4?

    didn't the Supreme court rule against him on several issues?

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 10:09pm

64. Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:03pm

    Nope, pretty sure I meant Babble.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 10:13pm

65. Obamanation desolation prophetic symbolism demons and satans favored offspring.

    Babble

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 10:14pm

66. Here is another CLEAR account in accordance with Hondurian law!

    "While Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door does not lie with the president. A constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress.

    But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chávez ship him the necessary ballots from Venezuela. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

    The top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, told the president that he would have to comply. Mr. Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.

    Calculating that some critical mass of Hondurans would take his side, the president decided he would run the referendum himself. So on Thursday he led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

    The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

    It remains to be seen what Mr. Zelaya's next move will be. It's not surprising that chavistas throughout the region are claiming that he was victim of a military coup. They want to hide the fact that the military was acting on a court order to defend the rule of law and the constitution, and that the Congress asserted itself for that purpose, too."

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:45pm

67. Hondurus is being pressured to restore the authoritarian Mr. Zelaya by the likes of Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hillary Clinton and, of course, Hugo himself. The Organization of American States, having ignored Mr. Zelaya's abuses, also wants him back in power!

    It is real clear that the Obamanation that makes desolation and Hillary like all good leftist have no respect for the constitution and rule of law of other democratic countries, much LESS out OWN!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:47pm

68. The problem I see with this whole situation is that they didn't handle this a very democratic method. Here if a President does something we disagree with, if it is illegal he is brought to trial and impeached, if it is not illegal he is just told no.

    The Congress there disagreed with what he did but instead of going about his non-illegal action in the democratic method they just sent in the military to remove him from office.

    Basically the Congress disagrees with the President and instead of voting it down they use the military to oust him. If things worked that way here Bush wouldn't have made it through his second term.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 10:51pm

69. The truly democratic solution would have been that if the President's idea was unpopular, to let it get voted down. Also if the President was committing such an unsought after action then why are people in the country protesting his removal?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/29/2009 @ 10:53pm

70. Something seemingly missed by our media is that the guy in power now cannot be president as he was born in Italy, and the president must be born in Honduras.

    I like antisocialists idea of freedom, which really is typical of our governments regardless of who is in power: you are free to do what we want you to do. It's really so like Jesus too.

    Posted by onthehelm at 06/29/2009 @ 11:33pm

71. Good background information on the increasing tension between Zelaya (a 60% hike in the minimum wage is a Good Thing) and the Honduran elite that led to the coup:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/kozloff06292009.html

    Even better review of the popular and successful fights, over elite opposition, in a number of Latin American countries to amend or replace Cold War-era constitutions:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/ross06292009.html

    Posted by cka2nd at 06/29/2009 @ 11:54pm

72. What should the US do know?

    Actuslly follow the lead of the majority of democracies in the region, who finally show they are perfectly capable of resolving this situation and maintaining stability without US "leadership". That includes not only the ALBA nations, but also Brazil and Argentina.

    It is utterly laughable to accept the US does not wan't to declare a coup because that would trigger an aid cutoff to an "impoverished" country, as reported by the Washington Post. The history of US intervention in Honduran affairs has been deep and long, particularly virulent during the eighties and the wars in El Salvador and Nicaragua. It clearly has no interest in removing itself from the internal affairs in Honduras with its connection with mililtary.

    If The US wants to do anything positive, it could shut down WHINSEC and end the hostile interventions not only in Honduras, but the region overall.

    Should be obvious that if it doesn't US commitment to popular movements will look selective and self serving. Different for Iran than the Americas where democracies have moved to a different social democratic political economy than the US is comfortable with.

    Charlie M.

    Posted by cmsandia at 06/30/2009 @ 12:39am

73. Zelaya was not ousted in a coup. He was removed by order of the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress because of his attempt through the influence of Chavez to make himself a dictator in the image of his "jefe", Chavez. Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:07pm

    Your willful ignorance is astounding.

    Please explain how removal by order of the Honduran Supreme Court would include being forced onto a flight out of the country?

    Chavez is open about his support for Zelaya, as he has for all left wing leaders, but these is no evidence of wrongdoing on his part. Chavez, Zelaya, Ortega and Morales have all been democratically elected, much to the disdain of the right wing.

    Zelaya's bid to hold a poll on Sunday was perfectly legal. In fact, the fact that he held a poll and didn't force it through the government illegally, demonstrates his respect for democracy. Chavez tried the same stunt and was defeated, and he accepted that outcome.

    Being upset at Zelaya is not a legitimate basis for a coup.

    Yes this was a coup. It was not conducted by court order by state police and Zelaya was not imprisoned but rushed onto a plane and sent to another country. The military most certainly did seize control of the country.

    The whole world is condemning this coup and your the one complaining about Chavez style dictatorships, while defending fascism?

    Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 03:41am

74. It is real clear that the Obamanation that makes desolation and Hillary like all good leftist have no respect for the constitution and rule of law of other democratic countries, much LESS out OWN!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:47pm

    I'm doubt there is anything in the constitution that mentions breaking into the home of a political leader, kidnapping him and forcing him onto a plane out fo the country.

    Like it or not, Chavez has been democratically elected 6 times and still enjoys overwhelming support in Venezuela and Latin America.

    The fact that you don't like it doesn't make it doesn't make it a dictatorship.

    Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 03:46am

75. Here is another CLEAR account in accordance with Hondurian law!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:45pm

    Why are you so afraid to cite your sources BigPasture? Are you worried that they might prove to be non credible like your usual propaghanda?

    Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 03:50am

76. Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 10:47pm

    DO you have any idea of how hypocritical you are? I know you don't, you rarely have ideas. Back in 2003 you would have called your list of "authoritarians" the "coalition of the willing".

    ----

    "Chavez, Zelaya, Ortega and Morales have all been democratically elected, much to the disdain of the right wing. "Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 03:41am

    That is what drives the neo-cons nuts, that the people of these countries get a voice over that of the "intellectual elites" that the neo-cons usually rail against. The ncons have no shame, but they do have buckets of double standards, and of course the MARXIST CABAL!! Buwahahahahaa..

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 06:11am

77. "WASHINGTON, Sept. 6 -- Under the measure that President Bush proposed on Wednesday, Khalid Shaik Mohammed and other major terrorism suspects would face trials at Guantánamo Bay in military tribunals that would allow evidence obtained by coercive interrogation and hearsay and deny suspects and their lawyers the right to see classified evidence used against them.

    The proposed tribunals would largely hew to those that the Supreme Court rejected in June. The measure says Congress would, by approving the proposed tribunals, affirm that they are constitutional and comply with international law, which the Supreme Court said they did not."-NYT

    NPR-"The White House was forced to revise its scheme for military tribunals after the Supreme Court rejected the original plan in June. In its ruling, the high court suggested that Congress, not the executive branch, should devise such tribunals. Still, the Bush administration, not lawmakers, drafted the latest plan.

    ..."I'm not aware of any situation in the world where there is a system of jurisprudence that is recognized by civilized people," he said, "where an individual can be tried without -- and convicted without -- seeing the evidence against him. And I don't think that the United States needs to become the first in that scenario."

    The judge advocate generals of the Army, Navy and Air Force who also testified all agreed with Walker. Some also objected to the commissions' admissibility of evidence obtained under coercion that falls short of torture."

    Where were the cons when Bush was opposing our very own Supreme Court? I don't seem to recall any calls from them to have the military roust Chimpy out of his government housing and truck him off to Britain.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 06:24am

78. Sorry, above quote "I'm not aware..." was from a known member of a leftist cabal, Gen. James Walker, staff judge advocate of the U.S. Marine Corps,

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 06:27am

79. Want to clarify, I am neither fer or agin what is happening in Honduras, I don't have all the info required yet.

    But, I am ROFLMAO at the cons that are calling out Obama for doing what Bush did for years, acting on little information

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 06:29am

80. Chavez may have made some strides, but he is still a nutter. A democratically elected one, but still feels like a coconut. His attempts to silence media is very disturbing. He ain't what the neo-cons make him out to be, but then few are.

    I am still laughing at "Marxist cabal". HAR!

    Time will tell how this plays out, but any attempts to call it "as it is" at this point is cherry picking from tiny amounts of information.

    If only Honduras had a "Curveball" and some forged documents!!

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 07:05am

81. <i>Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 07:17am </i>

    Venezuela is the most tolerant in the world towards the media? Are you kidding me? 'Cause no media can call Bush "worst person in the world" while he's still President...oh wait, Keith Olbermann exists.

    Posted by Thrawn at 06/30/2009 @ 07:52am

82. United Fruits interests were threatened. Among John Foster Dulles' many international clients, all over the world was United Fruit!

    Posted by pjcasey at 06/29/2009 @ 9:41pm

    PJ O'Rourke wrote a book, I believe it was called "Eat the Rich". The book looked around the world and observed that there were "good" countries that people wanted to live in and "shitty" countries that people wanted to escape from.

    The "good" countries had four characteristics in common: democracy, liberty, rule of law, and property rights. The "shitty" countries lacked some or all of these characteristics.

    I know this can be confusing. One would think that free housing, free health care, free food, and free education would be the four characteristics of a great place to live. But they are not. There are economic realities that prevent things from being free. Trying to make these things free only perverts people incentives to be productive and promotes wide-spread poverty.

    Too many in South America think that there is a "short cut" to prosperity. "If only we trample the property rights of the people who fail my personally subjective view of having 'too much' we can create prosperity" is the thinking of the South American dictator. But it is a chimera. That prosperity never materializes. Since 1958, Cuba has been expecting that proserity any day now and they are further away today than they were 50 years ago.

    Trampling the property rights of United Fruit will not bring prosperity, either.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/30/2009 @ 08:10am

83. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/30/2009 @ 08:10am

    Nice general all around condemnation of...what again?

    Are you in favor of international conglomerates having more power than indigeonous citizens? Are you in favor of dictators running people off of their ancestral lands? That was the reality for a long time in many places. And in Cuba, a dictator was in charge before Castro took power. While I despise Castro, I thought yuse guys were against dictators. Or is it just left wing dictators that rile you up?

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 09:03am

84. I am hearing reports that the government in Honduras is closing media outlets, jailing foreign journalists and shooting at people in the streets.

    Sounds like Chavez tactics.

    But that is OK, if they are anti-Chavez in intent?

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 09:05am

85. Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 09:16am

    Breathe......breathe...

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 09:19am

86. overall i think the prospects for latin america are bright, with increasing development and rejection of the dictates of the world satano-aynrando financial establishment.

    honduras is one of the poorest countries in LA and i don't think this is a sign of events to come...at least not in the more developed parts of the region.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 10:21am

87. Question: are you a stooge of the status quo, or are you FREE? Simple: yes or no.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 09:55am

    What's your answer Crabs? Illie may have escaped from a lunatic asylum but that doesn't mean you don't have to answer the question. Illie obviously is FREE. At least until those guys in white jackets call for him. But what about you?

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/30/2009 @ 10:24am

88. Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 09:16am

    Ilya has presented us with his standard of what is good in govt.

    Chavez and Achmadinejad, Venezuela and Iran in his view are the two models of govt for everyone else to follow.

    That just about settles it that Mask was wrong; this is not Plunger revisited.

    I think this is the love child of Hugo and "Imanutjob"

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 10:46am

89. viva don hugo!!!

    the same folk who decry chavez's most unforgivable sin (shooting US the finger)...

    SEEM 100% BLIND AND OBLIVIOUS TO CENTURIES OF HORRORS COMMITTED BY LATIN AMERICA'S VICIOUS CONSERVATIVE, ARISTOCRATIC, RIGHT WING...

    action/reaction, guys. not so hard to grasp.

    but regardless, vainglorious power-of-priders, we are no longer the boss of them...

    good for us, better for them. perhaps they can make their own strides forward as well as mistakes without big brother gringo hypocritically fucking with the process to protect our interests while hollowly and mouthing platitudes to freedom, democracy and the satano-aynrando way...

    VIVA DON HUGO!!!!

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:01am

90. "the same folk who decry chavez's most unforgivable sin (shooting US the finger)...

    SEEM 100% BLIND AND OBLIVIOUS TO CENTURIES OF HORRORS COMMITTED BY LATIN AMERICA'S VICIOUS CONSERVATIVE, ARISTOCRATIC, RIGHT WING... "

    all too often supported by you know who...

    seriously, its a miracle that more hugo has not unleashed vengeance upon the right wing thugocracy of his country's history. he has, in fact, shown remarkable restraint and for all his fiery rhetoric, appears to have NOT done precisely what his loudest domestic detractors would LOVE to do...

    school of americas style murder, repression, and tin pot fascism...

    VIVA DON HUGO!!!

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:09am

91. I note that there is not a single story on the fireman's victory over discrimination yesterday,thanks to the courts.

    By contrast the Right is doing every thing it can to give it front page news, which is equally partisan.

    I must say though,it is good to see real justice take precedence over social justice for a change.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/30/2009 @ 11:11am

92. Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/30/2009 @ 11:11am | ignore this person | warn this person

    yeah...gotta agree.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:19am

93. #

    personally i don't think sotomayor IS the greates thing since sliced bread, white, brown or jewish rye...

    mmmmm...jewish rye bread...yum...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:23am

94. Question: are you a stooge of the status quo, or are you FREE? Simple: yes or no.

    Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 09:55am

    What's your answer Crabs? Illie may have escaped from a lunatic asylum but that doesn't mean you don't have to answer the question. Illie obviously is FREE. At least until those guys in white jackets call for him. But what about you?

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/30/2009 @ 10:24am

    I ain't free. I have a standard shop rate.

    I have been called a stooge, My typical response is "Hey Moe!".

    ----

    So CHIP, had Sotomayor, in a tiny written opinion, decided against the City Council, would you have been for or against that judicial activism and her disregard for Supreme Court precedent?

    And do you think multiple choice questions are the BEST way to test leadership capabilities?

    This case really, really puts "core values" to the test. In order to be against Sotomayor, and another appellate judge who never seems to get mentioned, the neo-cons have to turn only 1/2 of their previous stances on their heads.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 12:22pm

95. How many of Justice Thomas opinions as a circuit court, district court or appellate court judge were overturned?

    0

    Why did he have such an unblemished record?

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 12:27pm

96. The Imperial Spread that anti, darin & lr continue to apply to our bread & attempt to export can be exemplified by a character in that fine TV series of 25 years ago called The Jewel in the Crown.

    Any one of the three above mentioned could be encapsulated in the persona of the British military officer named Ronald Merrick in that drama. Suggest all you cons view this production to get a clearer idea of what your world view is really all about.

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/30/2009 @ 12:30pm

97. Bernie Madoff has hired a "prison consultant" to help him get into a "better" prison.

    Equal justice for all!

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/30/2009 @ 12:36pm

98. Posted by Sorelish at 06/30/2009 @ 12:30pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    that was a great production. thanks for reminding me of it.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 12:39pm

99. Suggest all you cons view this production to get a clearer idea of what your world view is really all about.

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/30/2009 @ 12:30pm

    If you believe that then you cannot even begin to understand me.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 12:50pm

100. Posted by crabwalk at 06/29/2009 @ 9:39pm

     Funny!

     Regarding the situation in Honduras, I have to say that I am personally confused. If the Honduran Supremes and their congress wanted this guy gone, then....hmmm what to do? It's a constitutional crisis (so to speak) and the fact they elected another guy from the same party seems to belie the whole, "We don't like him so we'll take over" meme. It does seem to stem from a "he was trying to do something illegal, so we have to block him" point of view. However, was removing him the only way to block him? We'll never know because the deed is done.

     However, removing an elected President from office through the use of force is not something a democratically elected Congress (or the Supremes) should have the ability to do in a democracy. I do not believe the situation (an advisory vote) justifies the removal of an elected official, but if said elected official was doing something illegal (as viewed by the Supremes), then....

     It's a conundrum. I am a die-hard liberal, but don't like what Chavez has become...yet another in a long line of South American leftist dictators. Don't get me wrong, I hate the South American rightist dictators, too.

     Politics requires a balance. Dictators of either stripe are unwelcome, and ultimately destructive. If Zelaya was working toward a more representative form of government and needed more than four years to do it, then what he was doing wasn't bad. However, if he WAS trying to grab power (a la Chavez), then I support the coup....in a way. As I said, I am confused and feel I don't have enough info to make a call.

     Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 06/30/2009 @ 1:02pm

101. Politics requires a balance. Dictators of either stripe are unwelcome, and ultimately destructive. If Zelaya was working toward a more representative form of government and needed more than four years to do it, then what he was doing wasn't bad. However, if he WAS trying to grab power (a la Chavez), then I support the coup....in a way. As I said, I am confused and feel I don't have enough info to make a call.

     Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 06/30/2009 @ 1:02pm

     Congrats...a very honest and open response.

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 1:17pm

102. Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:41pm

     I just want to be clear here. Are you saying that the Constitution in Honduras allows for the military to remove the President from office?

     Let's accept the claims around the non-binding referendum and whether it was illegal for Zelaya to remove the army chief for refusing to distribute ballots. It seems strange to me that forcible removable of the President by the army is a lawful Constitutional practice. No criminal proceedings? No impeachment? But forcible removable?

     I don't pretend to know anything about the situation nor am I willing to read the cut and paste jobs you are doing here. But, your claims have the smell of something funky in them.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 4:58pm

     If your getting your news primarily from the WSJ EDITORIAL pages, you are likely deeply misinformed on many topics.

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:01pm

     Doesn't Honduras have a police force? If so, why isn't he facing trial for these crimes?

     Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/29/2009 @ 5:07pm

     But, if the President pro temp is working with the military and removes the President and Vice President from office, is that too following the rule of law?

     Posted by Thrawn at 06/29/2009 @ 5:29pm

     Is there evidence for this claim?

     Posted by trinitruth at 06/29/2009 @ 6:36pm

     Wouldn't he have just been arrested or impeached? Flying Bush to another country, seems like a strange move to me.

     Posted by BigPasture at 06/29/2009 @ 7:57pm

     "The Supreme Court then ordered Zelaya to reinstate Vasquez, but he refused."

     Does the Supreme Court in Honduras have the Constitutional power to make the President reinstate people?

     Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 1:35pm

103. The bottom line is the Google/WSJ editorial page punditry doesn't know what is going on, and no one here has the facts. So, the appropriate thing to do is shut up. Or, at the very least, tone down the arrogance of your speculation.

     Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 1:39pm

104. Yeah Ibble, Brit tv, the best.. and the worst.

     Posted by Sorelish at 06/30/2009 @ 2:22pm

105. Actually, Crab, this issue has nothing to do with SotoMayor, at least not for me.This is about unwritten but well known policies whereby those perceived to be or who have been victimized in the past are given preferential treatment, or at least "extra chances" until they get it right, in the interest of "social justice" or achieving "equalness."

     Trouble is, all men are not created equal: Many have to work harder than others to accomplish things, and such a social fact cuts across racial lines.

     Holding back one group until the other catches up is not doing either group any good, but this has been the basis of the lib's policy for over 30 years now. Such a policy was even declared openly at one point by an old Johnson appointee, a sort of private comment that went public.

     We've been punishing ourselves over our past for some time now, some of us anyway, and its time we stopped. It's unnecessary, it's ridiculous, and this kind of ruling is a good place to start.

     Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/30/2009 @ 2:25pm

106. Posted by antisocialist at 06/29/2009 @ 12:41pm

     I just want to be clear here. Are you saying that the Constitution in Honduras allows for the military to remove the President from office?

     Let's accept the claims around the non-binding referendum and whether it was illegal for Zelaya to remove the army chief for refusing to distribute ballots. It seems strange to me that forcible removable of the President by the army is a lawful Constitutional practice. No criminal proceedings? No impeachment? But forcible removable?

     I don't pretend to know anything about the situation nor am I willing to read the cut and paste jobs you are doing here. But, your claims have the smell of something funky in them.

     Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 1:35pm

     that's not what happened and certainly I never stated that the military removed him from power.

     The Honduran Supreme Court and Congress removed him from power.

     since you don't know their constitution (and neither do I), how can anyone state that the Supreme Court and Congress acted illegally?

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:28pm

107. Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:28pm

     "...that's not what happened and certainly I never stated that the military removed him from power."

     Any explanations as to how Manuel Zelaya ended up in Costa Rica?

     BBC reports: "The day's drama began at dawn on Sunday when soldiers stormed the president's residence in the capital, Tegucigalpa, an hour before polls were to open." Even that would have some air of legitimacy, if it weren't for the strange Costa Rica deportation. If someone does something illegal, isn't jail followed by some kind of judicial proceeding what one does under the rule of law?

     "The Honduran Supreme Court and Congress removed him from power."

     Again, is there some kind of provision for Honduras political leaders to be deported by the army as part of the Constitution? I doubt it. Impeachment or criminal proceedings, I get that. Assassination or deportation? That more like a coup.

     "Since you don't know their constitution (and neither do I), how can anyone state that the Supreme Court and Congress acted illegally?"

     This argument is equally valid if you change the last word to legally.

     http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8123126.stm

     Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 4:19pm

108. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 06/30/2009 @ 08:10am

     This isn't really complete. People don't want to escape from Switzerland, which is a socialist government. One example easily destroys this study because it relies on the belief that everyone wants democracy and capitalism. They don't they just want a well run government. The governments of South America are typically not well run and typically run by dictators, even the so called democracies. You're point seems to be that all people want to escape socialism but there are many examples world-wide of people who live under socialist governments that like it.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 4:22pm

109. You're point seems to be that all people want to escape socialism but there are many examples world-wide of people who live under socialist governments that like it.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 4:22pm

     Just goes to show that either not every wants to live in liberty or that they don't know what it really means.

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 4:43pm

110. Just goes to show that either not every wants to live in liberty or that they don't know what it really means.

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 4:43pm

     I think it's that some people prefer their systems to ours. They don't view our system as truly free. I think in educated places they know what it really means. Don't snub your nose at people because they don't agree with your political system.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:30pm

111. Just goes to show that either not every wants to live in liberty or that they don't know what it really means.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 4:22pm

     What fascist liek you can't accept is that given the freedom to chose, many cultures will not chose the American version or the one you feel is best.

     How coudl you knolw what liberty means when there is little or none in the US either?

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 5:37pm

112. that's not what happened and certainly I never stated that the military removed him from power.

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009

     Had it not been for the paramiltary actions of the military, breaking into the leader's home and forcing him onto a plane, he would stil be in power.

     If the Hunduran Supreme Court and Congress had removed him from power, then why did they need the military to cary out these extreme measures? Surely all they needed to do was pass a law and dethrone him?

     You are desperatel doing all you can to avoid aknolwgeding the elehphan tin the room, but the case is prety clear.

     This was an illegal miliatry coup by right rwing extremists with ties to the School of the Americas.

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 5:42pm

113. What fascist liek you can't accept is that given the freedom to chose, many cultures will not chose the American version or the one you feel is best.

     How coudl you knolw what liberty means when there is little or none in the US either?

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 5:37pm

     That was actually a quote from anti. I didn't say that. So no I am not the fascist. Neither is Anti.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:54pm

114. If someone posts a comment with a name under it that tends to be a quote.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:55pm

115. I think it's that some people prefer their systems to ours. They don't view our system as truly free. I think in educated places they know what it really means. Don't snub your nose at people because they don't agree with your political system.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:30pm

     How coudl you knolw what liberty means when there is little or none in the US either?

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 5:37pm

     I've been to 32 countries and I've yet to see one that equals the US in freedom and opportunity.

     what basis are either of you arguing from other than conjecture?

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 6:17pm

116. I've been to 32 countries and I've yet to see one that equals the US in freedom and opportunity.

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 5:37pm

     Freedom from what? The same freedoms in the US exist in at least a dozen other countries I have been to.

     "what basis are either of you arguing from other than conjecture?"

     We have a militarized state with the biggest prison population per capita in the world and one of the highest rates of illiteracy in the developed world.

     Shall I go on?

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 6:37pm

117. That was actually a quote from anti. I didn't say that. So no I am not the fascist. Neither is Anti.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:54pm

     Thanks CCC-

     see, I noticed and noted that you defended a conservative!

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 6:39pm

118. Any explanations as to how Manuel Zelaya ended up in Costa Rica?

     Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 4:19pm

     Which is exactly what happened in the coup against Aristide. But antisocialist and co would have us believe that it is by pure coincidence.

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 7:00pm

119. I've been to 32 countries and I've yet to see one that equals the US in freedom and opportunity.

     what basis are either of you arguing from other than conjecture?

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 6:17pm

     Or maybe you are only looking at the surface. I have been to a few countries myself even in my short time. I have noticed that people in certain countries enjoy their lives on average more than many Americans. In these liberal countries you speak of they have more nationalism than Americans. Maybe what you view as oppressed is not actually as such.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 7:29pm

120. Thanks CCC-

     see, I noticed and noted that you defended a conservative!

     Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 6:39pm

     Thank you. I only ever called you a fascist when you called me a socialist. And with wasn't to insult, more to just make a point.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 7:31pm

121. Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 6:17pm

     What are you using as a metric? Even conservative scores like The Heritage Foundation's 2009 Index of Economic Freedom places the U.S. sixth, after Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, Ireland and New Zealand. Even "socialist" Canada places 7th. And this kind of ranking is very problematic.

     Australia and Singapore have authoritarian controls of freedom of expression that are certainly less than the United States.

     It's much easier to set threshold criteria and rank countries into groups like Free, Partially Free or Not Free like Freedom House does.

     And the comparative issues Shingo raises regarding quality of life are also valid. Arguing you are the most free when you have the most people in your prisons and where the state still uses capital punishment presents some problems. As do other issues like Gini coefficients, infant mortality rates and so forth.

     I think if you were a black man in this country, you'd have different ideas about whether we were the most free nation in the world, which suggests we might not be.

     http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking.aspx http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/fiw09/ FIW09_Tables&GraphsForWeb.pdf

     Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 7:36pm

122. Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 7:36pm

     Thanks for injecting some reality into the debate srjenkins.

     A recent study of the best cities in the world to live in include very few American cities.

     Posted by Shingo at 06/30/2009 @ 8:05pm

123. Facts will nor sway Larry from his conclusions.

     Nice try, though all.

     What's funny, again, is that Larry has been railing against Obamas "taking our freedoms" for 6 months now, but he is still here. He is not in leftist S. America as he promised.

     What would be REALLY funny, is if Larry , disagreeing with your link SRJ, called The Heritage Foundation a "well known leftist site with links to communism"...because he disagrees. And it is well established that if you don't agree with Larry, you are a Marxist.

     Posted by crabwalk at 07/01/2009 @ 07:52am

124. But in a democracy, don't the people decide whether an ELECTED official stays or goes as a result of the government's performance?

     no, the people don't decide. in england, for instance, it is parliament which issues a no confidence vote, which means the end of that gov't.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 11:28am

125. Honduras? why not do what we've done many times in the past:

     send the marines.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 11:59am

126. if it were a left wing coup, the marines would be on their way.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:07pm

127. if it were a left wing coup, the marines would be on their way.

     Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:07pm

     And the right wing would be attacking Obama for not being decisive and not invading.

     Posted by Shingo at 07/01/2009 @ 7:31pm