Obama joins fellow socialists in supporting constitutionally ousted Zelaya., page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 1-7-2009 @ 07:05 PM by Hemisphere
June 29th, 2009

US President Barack Obama has again shown his affinity for socialist regimes by calling for reinstatement of former Honduras President Manuel Zelaya. Obama joined the ilk of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, Nicaraguan dictator Daniel Ortega and Cuban dictator Fidel Castro in backing the ousted Zelaya.

Hondurans this week emphatically showed their love of country and democracy by unceremoniously tossing Zelaya who was attempting to rule by decree. Former President Zelaya had ambitions to be “El Presidente para vida”, president for life following in the tyrannical footsteps of Chavez and Castro. In a stand that would have made the US founding fathers proud, the Honduran army, courts and Congress performed their constitutional duties and at least for the short-term kept their country free from the neo-Marxists already controlling Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay and Venezuela.

Soon to be serving out the remaining 7 months of Zelaya’s term, Roberto Micheletti, the head of the Honduran Congress has stated that Zelaya’s ouster was constitutional and legal. He has accused the former president of violating the constitution by sponsoring a referendum outlawed by their Supreme Court that would have over ridden constitutionally stated presidential term limits.

I ask you, will President Obama help to overthrow one of the few remaining democracies in South America?

Viva Honduras! Viva la revolucion!

World leaders denounce Honduras coup


reply posted on 1-7-2009 @ 07:54 PM by grapesofraft
reply to post by hallucinogen


I do not think what he says was a bit racist. All he said was that Obama uses his skin color to his advantage. How is that racist?



reply posted on 1-7-2009 @ 08:38 PM by Hemisphere
It's well known that Zelaya and Chavez are thick as thieves.


Both the referendum and the firing of the military chief have been declared illegal by the Honduran Supreme Court. Nonetheless, Mr. Zelaya intended yesterday to use ballots printed in Venezuela to conduct the vote anyway. - Hans Bader


I would think there are capable printers in Honduras. At least the former president was not protectionist.

Where does the Jeffersonian inspired Cato Institute stand on Zelaya's removal?


Even the Cato Institute, which espouses antiwar positions and a dovish, liberal foreign policy, approved of Honduras’s removal of its oppressive ruler. Cato’s Juan Carlos Hidalgo notes that “the removal from office of Zelaya on Sunday by the armed forces is the result of his continuous attempts to promote a referendum that would allow for his reelection, a move that had been declared illegal by the Supreme Court and the Electoral Tribunal and condemned by the Honduran Congress and the attorney general. Unfortunately, the Honduran constitution does not provide an effective civilian mechanism for removing a president from office after repeated violations of the law, such as impeachment in the U.S. Constitution. Nonetheless, the armed forces acted under the order of the country’s Supreme Court, and the presidency has been hastily bestowed on a civilian figure — the president of Congress — as specified by the constitution.” - Hans Bader


The entire Hans Bader report:

Obama Backs Dictatorship in Honduras

Regarding the Cato Institute


reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 07:38 AM by Southern Guardian
Why on earth that on all accounts of some situation in another nation do the "know it alls" 1000's of miles away come out of the garbage cans? Do you know the actual situation down there? since when did every rebellion in every election constitute some BS "constitutionalist talk" in favour for one side?

How the heck do you know this is the consensus of the majority of Hondurans? As far as I can see it, its a faction who disagree, that being said whos doing any good here shutting down one side in favour for another? Who gave you that right?

Whether many of you like it or not President Zelaya still is constitutionally the elected president there, the issue was over his supposed intention to extend his term, nevertheless such a measure was not taken prior to him being ousts and to be frank nobody has the right to jump the gun and kick a democratically elected leader out because they dont agree with something that leader "is going to do".

Do you think conflict in politics should always be resolved by the coup? Is every group justified to a coup? Whats this about socialism? Can we cut this garbage now? We are talking about the rights to both sides of honduras.

I tell ya the amount of tools of the rightwing mouthpieced media. I remember over the last 20years when the majority of folks who marched for freedom didnt even get an inch of attention by the typical rightwing suspects and people of these united states, all because these folks were left. It appears the only time and rightie gives a damn about a voice of a fact is when its against a leftwing government. Freedom has no boundaries, the rights of a voice applies to both sides, maybe folks should get a clue and begin supporting the rights of freedom across the lines.

[edit on 2-7-2009 by Southern Guardian]


reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 09:26 AM by Hemisphere
reply to post by CRB86


Saul Alinsky was a socialist. Barack Obama is an Alinsky disciple.
Barack Obama is a socialist. And not just the armchair, philosopher variety.


Liberal Democrats used to be normal Americans before the Boomer Left rose to power. Hubert Humphrey and Harry Truman had a strong sense of American morality. They despised the Stalinist Left and fought to keep them out of the Democrat Party. They were sensitive to ordinary shame and guilt, the emotions that make us civilized. When Bob Dole asked "Where is the shame?" in the 1996 presidential election, the answer came out: Not in the modern Democrat Party. People without guilt or shame make merciless power mongers. - James Lewis, September 25, 2008 American Thinker


That is the key. Castro, Chavez, Zelaya, Clinton, Alinsky and Obama are merciless power mongers. Castro had many of his own supporters killed shortly after his rise to power. Do you think he felt any guilt? Obama idolizes Castro and Chavez. He plays to them constantly. Why? Obama has no guilt, no boundaries, no contributions, no loyalty to this country that nurtured him, no constitutional right to be president of the United States, and like Zelaya, that constitution has and will not stand in his way.


"Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents." - Bill Ayers, Obama mentor & Weather Underground Terrorist


Obama's mad his parents were never parents. They abandoned him for their own selfish interests. This country served as his parent and enabled him to prosper. He will kill the country in their stead.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



On why America is in denial and Ron Paul will not be elected
  Posted 18 days ago with 21 member flags
Study says racists and conservatives are dumb
  Posted 8 days ago with 16 member flags
Is ‘anti-Canadianism’ the new ‘anti-Americanism?’
  Posted 17 days ago with 8 member flags
Clarification on the definition of "natural born citizen"
  Posted 15 days ago with 7 member flags