Obama the meanie - to cut off humanitarian aid to one of poorest countries in area

Status
Not open for further replies.
There it is again...the word "coup" as way to exact the unnecessary hyperbole into a situation that was done legally and lawfully through the Honduran Congress and Supreme court. A Democracy in action, ironically, and not a coup. The word "extra-legal" is a fancy word for "outside of legal control or authority; not regulated by law." This is false since removal of Zelaya was lawful and legal.

Obama likely to cut off aid to Honduras, based on legal mistake and misreading of the law

Interesting that the article (deafskeptics') doesn't mention where Zayala's ballot came from when the Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite but that power does not belong to the president.! Understand? 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 which was illegal to begin with the design in mind of usurpation of Democracy of Honduran law in the attempt for dictatorial control over the Honduran govt. What parts do you not understand people?
 
Foxrac said:
Not Bill Clinton because acquitted in senators, that what I means so Bill Clinton isn't officially impeached.
Click to expand...

Bill Clinton was impeached though. Andrew Johnson wasn't convicted, does that means he wasn't impeached because Clinton was acquitted?

Impeach means "to make accusation against," "to charge with improper conduct," "to challenge." Based on those definitions, Bill Clinton was impeached. It just that the charges against him were dropped. You seem to be confusing "impeached" with "convicted."

Richard Nixon wasn't impeached because... well... if you were convicted after an impeachment trial, then you would be asked to step down. He resigned before he could be called upon for an impeachment trial.
 
Last edited:
souggy said:
Bill Clinton was impeached though. Andrew Johnson wasn't convicted, does that means he wasn't impeached because Clinton was acquitted?

Impeach means "to make accusation against," "to charge with improper conduct," "to challenge." Based on those definitions, Bill Clinton was impeached. It just that the charges against him were dropped. You seem to be confusing "impeached" with "convicted."

Richard Nixon wasn't impeached because... well... if you were convicted after an impeachment trial, then you would be asked to step down. He resigned before he could be called upon for an impeachment trial.
Click to expand...

Fine but Clinton don't stepped down or leaving the office.
 
just how many millions of the taxpayers money were spent to reach the of the ordeal over a blowjob?


what was the grand total?
 
I don't know but I'm sure it left a big stain afterwards.
 
I admit to make mistake about Clinton isn't impeached until I understand about how article of impeachment works but he isn't convicted yet.

For situation with Honduras, I know it was order by judge to arrest Zelaya but some media considers as military coup, its just their opinion so I do consider about military coup too if you don't agree, unless many countries and world organization recognize new Honduran government.
 
kokonut said:
Apparently you don't follow news closely or understand how events happened and what Democracy is really about. Yes, he was elected by his people but then he began to abuse his power. Hence, he was *LEGALLY* removed. No shots were fired. No coup took place. He was *LEGALLY* removed from power just like how impeachments are done here in the U.S. There is a time and place in a Democracy govt (i.e. Hondura) when power becomes abusive to the point of over-riding the Constitution, continual corruption, suppression of the people, refusal to sign laws legally adopted and passed by Congress and so and so forth.
Click to expand...

Definition of a "coup" as defined in Miriam Webster:

•coup d'etat: a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force

Therefore, what occurred can be accurately described as a coup, or to use the proper vocabulary, coup d'etat. Size of the group is not a criterion for the definition of a coup d'etat.

No, he was not removed from office following an impeachment procedure.

Regarding your last sentence, yes it does remind me of someone in the U.S. Richard Nixon would be his name.
 
No coup took place. It was done legally and lawfully under Honduran law....not U.S. law.

End of story.
 
kokonut said:
No coup took place. It was done legally and lawfully under Honduran law....not U.S. law.

End of story.
Click to expand...

What's your comment about most countries and world organization don't recognize new Honduras government.

Ahmadinejad and Chavez are far more threat and enemies than Zelaya does, however Zelaya is leftist leader but not worse as Chavez does.

Chavez is very terrible, I hope their economy is fucked up with very high inflation rate like 100% in 1 year.
 
If Bush does it, he is a savior. If Obama does it, he is a meanie. Welcome the shallow end of the thinking pool.
 
Source: BBC News - Zelaya warns US support for Honduras election divisive

US support for Sunday's presidential election in Honduras is creating a grave, undemocratic precedent, ousted president Manuel Zelaya has said.
Mr Zelaya told Reuters the US position had "divided the Americas".
The Obama administration had indicated it would not recognise the election unless Mr Zelaya was restored to power.
But the State Department said this week it backed the election process as an "essential part" of the solution to the five-month political crisis.
"It's important that these elections be seen as free, fair and transparent and are monitored by a credible international monitoring process," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said on Tuesday.
"And that's exactly what we're supporting."
Mr Kelly said they were unable to judge the outcome of something that had not yet taken place.
"But the process that we see in place is a process that we are supporting," he said.
Several Latin American nations, including Brazil and Argentina, have said they will not recognise the result.
'Position changed'
Neither Mr Zelaya nor interim leader Roberto Micheletti is standing in Sunday's election. The favourite is conservative Porfirio Lobo from the National Party, with Elvin Santos from the Liberal Party considered his nearest rival.
Mr Zelaya, who was forced out of the country on 28 June, told Reuters it would be undemocratic if the US backed an election held by a post-coup government.
"The United States changed its position. Its priority was the restoration of democracy and then elections, now they put elections as the priority," he said in a telephone interview from the Brazilian embassy, where he has been holed up since slipping back home from exile in September.
Mr Micheletti is set to step down from office from Wednesday until 2 December.
The move aimed to allow the elections to proceed "peacefully and transparently" and rule out any suggestion of undue interference, his spokesman said.
Mr Zelaya said the step was a trick by Mr Micheletti, who was a "stain on democracy".
The Honduran Congress is set to decide after Sunday's poll whether Mr Zelaya should be reinstated to serve out the rest of his term until 27 January.
Mr Zelaya was sent into exile on 28 June after trying to hold a vote on whether a constituent assembly should be set up to look at rewriting the constitution.
His critics said the vote, which was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, aimed to remove the current one-term limit on serving as president and pave the way for his possible re-election.
Mr Zelaya has repeatedly denied this and some commentators say it would have been impossible to change the constitution before his term in office was up.
Click to expand...
 
Hey thanks for giving us this wonderful example of your bias.
You are always telling us that Obama is spending too much money....but you can't resist putting a spin on this news story in which he does the opposite and reduces spending.
It shows us that in your mind he can never do anything right.And will never do anything right...because you are totally biased.And the way in which you present your political post is biased spin.
Italso exeplifies the fact that you areseeking any news story regardingObamaandyour intention is to put a negative spin on it regardless of content.
Yeah like saywhatkid say....if your pal did it you would say the opposite. And you know it's a fact.
You're really overplaying your hand pal. You only look silly.
 
The court found that the charges against Zelaya that led to his forced exile in June were based in law. Although the full text of the ruling has not been made public, a Supreme Court source was said to have supplied the information.

The court's decision will be sent to Honduran parliament ahead of its December 2 meeting on Zelaya's reinstatement, to be held three days after the presidential elections.

Neither Zelaya nor interim leader Roberto Micheletti will take part in the polls.

Zelaya was bundled out of Honduras on June 28 by the military, acting on instructions from the Supreme Court and parliament, over efforts to seek an unconstitutional second presidential term.
Click to expand...
Honduran Supreme Court dismisses Zelaya's reinstatement claim | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire

Forcing himself through for a 2nd term is an unconstitutional act in Hondura. Nuff said.
 
That's for those believing Zelayo didn't abuse his power to circumvent the Honduran constitution. Even a Senator from the United States who visited the country agree. Everything done legally and by the Supreme Court of Hondura that ousted Zelaya.
 
You are trying too hard to dig up controversy. Pulling things out of the archives now. You are far too obvious in your motives.:wave:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top