Friday, October 30, 2009

The Mouse That Called Obama’s Bluff. . .

Want some actual news you haven’t heard anywhere: Honduras just won. Seriously. Funny that the MSM hasn’t mentioned this. Image, the entire world, standing shoulder to shoulder. . . led by the greatest power the world has ever known. . . guided by the greatest leader that country has ever produced. . . a man so compelling and hopeful that he deserves the Nobel Prize just for being. . . and Honduras just humbled them all.

Here’s the set up: In one corner, we have the current government of Honduras. They tossed their former president (Manuel Zelaya) out of the country when he tried to make himself into a Hugo Chavez-like dictator. (If you don’t know the background, or why this was not a coup, then read my prior article: HERE. I’ll wait for ya.)

In the other corner, we have the world. . . literally. Every other country in the world is doing their internationalist best to demand that Honduras allow Zelaya to return to power.

Here’s the twist: On November 29 of this year, there will be an election in Honduras. That election was already scheduled to take place before Zelaya got expelled, and will be between two men who had no involvement in the “coup.” The winner will become the new President, ending Zelaya's term. Democracy at work.

The current government in Honduras hopes that this election will make the Zelaya issue moot, and that the world will leave them alone thereafter. The international community, however, has loudly proclaimed that it will not recognize the results of that election unless Zelaya is first returned to power to serve out his term.

Except. . . Team Obama has now signaled (very quietly) that they will accept the election and move on. Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooaal!!!!!

Honduras wins! Honduras wins! Honduras wins! Honduras wins!

Oh, the humanity!!!

This represents a truly humiliating moment for Team Obama and for the internationalists. For years, the internationalists have told us that international pressure could solve any problem without the need for evil, dirty force. War was history, international law had killed it. Team Obama bought into that hook, line and sinker, and based their entire foreign policy on talk and hope. Now tiny Honduras, with its seven million people, has exposed that policy in all its gloriousless impotence.

** Update: Speak of the devil, this morning they announced a "deal" where Zelaya gets to appeal directly to Congress (which opposes him 5-1) to be restored. In exchange, we, the US, will recognize the election later this month. Annoyingly, but not unexpectedly, the AP is calling this total surrender an "Obama victory" even though it gives the Hondurans everything they wanted and Obama achieved none of his goals!

Here’s a little background on how this debacle developed. . .

From the outset, every single country in the world declared that they would do their able best to force little Honduras to accept the return of then-President Manuel Zelaya. They would (and did) blockade the country in violation of their treaties and their obligations under the World Trade Organization. They would stop sending aid and tourists. They warned that the coup leaders would be arrested. Chavez threatened to invade (he's a little sweet on Zelaya). All unless the evil coup plotters (leftists now described as “conservatives”) promised to immediately restore Zelaya to power and to submit to his terrible wrath.

And Honduras responded, “Bite me.”

Thus began an interesting series of negotiations between Micheletti, Zelaya and the International Community. (As an aside, as you read this, keep in mind the following quote from Zelaya about Micheletti: “I have no confidence in Micheletti. He changes his attitude from one minute to the next.”)
Micheletti’s Position
From the beginning, Micheletti took the position that Zelaya may not return to Honduras, unless he faces charges for what he’s done -- like stealing several million dollars from the Honduras Central Bank. Micheletti also declared that he will serve out the remainder of Zelaya’s term until the election scheduled for November 29.

On August 28, Micheletti changed his position slightly, saying that he would agree to allow Zelaya to return to Honduras under an amnesty if Zelaya renounced his claims to the presidency. Micheletti also offered to step down as President as part of the deal.

That’s it. Funny, I don’t see the attitude changing Zelaya does, perhaps I’m missing something? Let’s see how Zelaya did. . .
Zelaya’s Positions
Zelaya took the initial position that he needed to be restored immediately to serve out his full term and that the coup plotters had to face punishment for their crimes. He then went about making threats.

July 15: Zelaya asserts that “Hondurans have a right to insurrection.” Hey, who doesn’t?

July 18: Zelaya’s foreign minister, Patricia Rodas, says that Zelaya was returning to wage a “final battle” against those who ousted him. Let’s get ready to rumble!

July 21: Zelaya says that he would return soon and that “It is impossible to sustain a regime with bayonets. The world will not allow it, starting with the United States.” Oh oh, is that reliance on Obama I’m hearing?

July 23: Saying that United States sponsored talks have broken down, Zelaya declares that he will cross the border into Honduras. He dismisses concerns about the possibility of violence.

When the United States warns that it does not support this trip to the border (“Any step that would add to the risk of violence in Honduras or in the area, we think would be unwise.”) Zelaya responds: “Defending our rights is not an act of violence. . . we are going to seek dialogue.”

July 24: Zelaya bravely arrives at the border between Nicaragua and Honduras. . . on the Nicaraguan side. He stays only thirty minutes and only symbolically steps into Honduras. He explains: “I am not afraid, but I’m not crazy either. There could be violence and I don’t want to be the cause.” I guess encouraging an insurrection is not promoting violence?

He goes on to note that: “The best thing is to reach an understanding that respects the will of the people.” Though he also calls on the United States to not accept the results of the November 29 election unless he is restored to power first. So I guess “will of the people” doesn’t mean the Honduran people?

July 26: After Hillary “Yoda” Clinton calls his move “reeeeckless,” Zelaya responds that she should “stop avoiding the issue. Secretary Clinton should confront the dictatorship with force.” So much for not being the cause of violence.

July 30: Man of peace Zelaya suggests that the Honduran military should rebel.

August 1: Zelaya vows to return to power through peaceful means and denies that he’s rallying groups of armed supporters. Assures Zelaya: “We do not use arms. I am not forming any armed military force, although I have the means to do it.”

August 5: Zelaya tells the Mexican Senate: “The United States is the one that really has the power to impose measures that go beyond diplomacy.” Which begs the question, what lies beyond diplomacy? The answer is usually war, isn’t it?

September 21: Zelaya bravely sneaks across the border in the trunk of a car and beats cheeks for the Brazilian Embassy.

September 27: Uber-Pacifist Zelaya, a virtual modern day Gandhi, declares over the radio: “I call on you to mobilize throughout Honduras, and that everyone who can come to Tegucigalpa to fight in the final offensive.” Thereafter, we get an answer to the old hippie refrain: “what if we had a war and nobody came?” Answer: Idiots end up living in other people’s embassies.
The International Community’s Incredible Shrinking Posture
Finally, we take a look at how the international community, led by Barack “The Second Coming” Obama demonstrated its impotence.

July 21: The United States gets off to a muscular start, declaring that it wants “the constitutional order” in Honduras “restored. . . now.” By this, they meant they wanted Zelaya returned to power immediately.

To make this happen, Obama cut $16.5 million in military aid to Honduras -- that will teach them. Obama also revoked the diplomatic visas of the four top members of Honduras’ government, preventing them from clubbing in Miami on weekends. The United States also sent President Oscar “The Grouch” Arias of Costa Rica to negotiate a resolution with both parties.

July 21: Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim adds to the pressure, warning that these talks are taking too long. Another Brazilian diplomat warned that “the negotiations must not reward a coup.”

July 22: The United States ups the ante by warning Honduras that it would impose tough sanction if Zelaya is not returned. Harrumph harrumph.

July 23: Then things start to go squishy. Upon learning that Zelaya was planning to return to Honduras from his luxury suite at the Venezuela Hilton, the United States suddenly announces that it doesn’t support this move: “we think [this move] would be unwise.”

Jose Miguel Insulza, secretary-general of the Organization of American States, added his voice of caution: “It’s important to make an effort to avoid a likely confrontation.” Cluck. . . cluck.

July 24: Hillary Clinton states that: “President Zelaya’s effort to reach the border is reckless.” Cluck. . . cluck. . . bwak!

August 5: The United States heroically softens its stance, stating that no further sanctions would be coming. Run away! Run away! Whimpers Richard “The Vermin” Verma, of the State Department, “we reject calls for crippling economic sanctions and made clear that all states should seek to facilitate a solution without calls for violence and with respect for the principle of nonintervention.” Nonintervention? Except of course, when it comes to deciding who should rule Honduras.

September 21: Zelaya sneaks across the border even after Team Obama specifically told him not to do this. The United States responds by warning all sides to exercise caution, but takes no action.

September 27: In response to claims that the dastardly Honduran military surrounded the Brazilian embassy and “blasted music” at the building (like the US did in Panama), the United Nations Security Council condemns the Honduran government, but takes no action.

And now, Team Obama decides to give in to the mean old Hondurans. So much for the magical power of dialogue.


MegaTroll said...

Wow, that is great news! You're right too, I haven't heard this anywhere yet, not even Drudge. I look forward to seeing the MSM catch up to you!

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Mega. You'd think this is the kind of story that some bright young eager reporter working for the MSM would want to dig into. . . but they don't. It's too hard and people don't care about foreign affairs, and it makes Obama look bad -- would rather cover the latest Britney Spears controversy.

LoneWolfArcher said...

Good news. Though the legitimacy of Honduras' elections was never really a question, even if the Obamacracy didn't recognize it.

The fact that he took the side he did scares me. I think he'd like to become Chavez like himself.

Joel Farnham said...

Wow!! This is good news. Only one month left and Honduras will have accomplished another stinging defeat of Obama. This time Obama cannot shrink away.

AndrewPrice said...

LoneWolf, I've been reading the AP articles this morning and what I find interesting is how uncritically they accept the idea that Zelaya is "returning to power" or that this is a victory for Obama.

The deal (which didn't exist when I wrote the article the other day) actually provides that Zelaya gets to appeal to Congress. They are not required to take him back -- this is something Micheletti has been proposing for a couple weeks now. The Congress is opposed 5 to 1 to his return according to everything I've read.

In exchange for allowing this "appeal", the sanction are being dropped and everyone will recognize the election results.

That's a total surrender by Obama. That's no victory. When one side gets everything it asks for, that's usually considered a victory for them and a loss for the other side. I guess we just changed the definition of victory?

(By the way, even if he somehow pulls this off in the Congress, he's only going to serve a couple weeks -- though I don't see that happening.)

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I am thrilled for the people of Honduras and we should all be laughing at Obama and his internationalist friends, BUT, I am already annoyed that this new deal is being treated as a victory for Obama.

Joel Farnham said...


Not by you and I am sure not by the Blogasphere. The truth will out, and again Obama and MSM will have egg on their collective, Maoistic, Anti-American faces. :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I agree. (Not by the State Department either which first tipped me off to the change of policy by Obama.)

They lost, pure and simple. Honduras won.

And, like I said, even if somehow Zelaya gets reinstanted (which I don't see as possible) it will be a symbolic reinstatement for a couple days before the newly elected President replaces him.

ArmChairGeneral said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

AndrewPrice said...

ACG, We have an open thread coming up later this afternoon. If you don't mind I'm going to move your comment to the open thread when it opens up.

Libertarian Advocate said...

ACG: Brilliant find that. Many thanks!

StanH said...

Andrew: Barry is a weenie! Stand up to him or his ilk, and they will run for cover, screaming …quit it…quit it! The MSM will do anything and everything to protect their Manboy Messiah. “Bite Me,” …hmm… I love your use of high brow legalese. LOL!
Right on Honduras!

ArmChairGeneral said...

Andrew not a problem. I didn't mean to hijack this thread but that really irritated me when I read it.

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, Highbrow legaleze! LOL!! Yeah, I try to keep it as technical as possible. ;-)

I'm thrilled for Honduras. This is really a victory for Democracy and for the power of little countries to stand up to the power of leftist "world pressure."

This should also be a wake up call for anyone who thinks that we can just talk our way out of the problems in Iran and North Korea and other places.

ArmChairGeneral said...

To post something relevant to this thread. Obama is a surrender monkey and he is a wizard of sophistry.

Writer X said...

I just turned on the TV news. The anchor was breathlessly reporting a story coming out in the New York Times concerning an interview with the Obamas where they talk about their marriage. Yawn.

No mention of this. Anywhere.

Thanks for keeping us informed, Andrew! Good for the Hondurans. And the gall of the Obama administration to even think about taking credit when they tried to sabotage it in the first place! Typical.

AndrewPrice said...

ACG, No problem. The open thread comes up at 4:00 pm today. If you want to repost then, that would be great. If not, I'll repost it and credit you.

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, Who cares about foreign affairs issues that highlight the huge flaw at the center of Obama's foreign policy. . . when we could be talking about his perfect marriage!

By the way, I think that this entire issue would have been ignored right past the election (maybe a one inch column in the NYT just after the want ads), until they reached this agreement this morning.

Now the MSM can declare an Obama victory (unless they actually look at the facts staring them in the face), and then they can move on to anointing him for some future award.

USArtguy said...

Many thanks for the update.

What's been amazing is the insanity of it all, governments calling up "down" and down "up".

An elected president decides to thwart the constitution of the Honduran nation by wanting to ignore term limits and threatens to cause a civil and miltary uproar if he doesn't become president for life (read "dictator"). The Honduran Supreme Court declares he is in violation of their constitution, steps in and orders the military to remove him so they can have democratic elections on time like their supposed to. Seems perfectly logical-- leader violates constitution and is punished for it.

The insanity starts when the Obama administration says the Hondurans are wrong for following their constitution by removing a man who would be a despot, claiming they are ignoring democracy. Much of the rest of the world governments, who suck at the financial teats of the US, go along lock step. Followed of course by the fawning main stream media.

As I write this, a couple things occur to me. Obama has ignored US and State constitutions for most of his political career (37 unelected Czars answerable only to him for example), except when it benefitted him directly (taking advantage of Iowa's open caucus rules and packing meetings with out of state supporters). So it shouldn't be a surprise he would support another leader who, like him, wants power for power's sake.

My other thought is how the UN warned Iraq 14 times (passed 14 resolutions) to comply with International law and the rules set up after their first defeat at the hands of the US after they invaded Kuwait, all the while Hussein continually ignoring them. The world was only upset when George Bush decided to actually enforce them. The parallel is the Hondurans decide to enforce their constitution and suddenly they're the bad guys. Looking at other governments around the world I see the same: people are good at election time, bad when they hold politicians accountable.

I hope the Hondurans continue to embrace all of democracy, including the parts about accountability.

BevfromNYC said...

I read about this on the elevator news this morning. (I get much of the breaking news on the elevator news monitor...) The short blurb said that Zeylaya would be returning to Honduras after "a military coup that ousted him from power". I proclaimed loudly that Zeylaya was not ousted by a military coup, but by the rightful Honduran Constitution. However, no one was on the elevator to hear me.

Joel Farnham said...


It probably is a good thing you were alone when you uttered that. You never know when there will be an Obama supporter lurking around to report you. ;-)

AndrewPrice said...

USArtguy, Great points, as always.

Go back and read my article on the Obama Doctrine -- HERE.

I think that highlights what you're talking about. The world takes the position that talking is all we need to do. We wag a finger now and then, and soon everyone will see "reason". But if you cause a stink and make people take action or you take action yourself, then you're bad.

What they don't understand is that "reason" is not how foreign policy works. Foreign policy works on "interest" because different countries have different interests and goals and it's reasonable for them to pursue them.

BevfromNYC said...

Joel, LOL! I live in NYC. I just assume that everyone around is an Obamaniac until informed otherwise. However, it doesn't stop me.

AndrewPrice said...

Yeah Bev, you need to be careful -- you could have been sent away for re-education! ;-)

If you read the AP stories closely, you will see something interesting. They talk about "the deal to return Zelaya to power" and the headline screams that he's returning. Then they talk about how great this is, big victory for Obama. . . blah blah.

Then, lower down, they mention that he's not returning, but he's going to be allowed to ask the legislature to return him. The article fails to mention that they're opposed to him 5-1 (at least according to the last informal poll). Then the article concedes that IF they approve his return, then the Supreme Court also has to approve his return as well. The article fails to mention that the Supreme Court has already said no twice.

So what are his chances?

And even if all of that happens, he only gets to sit in the chair. The military will answer to the Supreme Court. The election goes on as planned. And he gets to do nothing but sit in the chair until he is replaced.

Victory? Hardly.

LawHawkSF said...

Andrew: When you ran your initial post past me a couple of days ago, I was very excited. We've both been following this in previous posts, but your take on the situation this time was way ahead of the pack.

I'm also glad you put that AP update in when the news was announced (after you had already told me about it and completed your post). AP is so deep in the tank for Obama that they're drowning. This is a clear, unquestioned and unequivocal victory for a genuine democratic/republic over the forces of one-man rule and constitution-shredding. So naturally, AP decides to make it look like a win for Obama. He lost, big time, and democracy won.

As I see it, it's another example of "surrender, and declare a victory," only this time it actually came out right. Game, set, match. Honduras wins!

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Lawhawk. It's fun to scoop the MSM. ;-)

I think you're right about the AP on this. They want this to be a victory, so they will accept his declaration of surrender as a victory and never mention Honduras again.

But I'll bet that countries like Iran and North Korean will take note of just how easy it is to beat Team Obama. . . just say no and wait for Obama to give up.

USArtguy said...

"Foreign policy works on "interest" because different countries have different interests..."

Yup. Back when I first started listening to talk radio there was a guy (something Kendall?) who often said "nations do not have friends, people have friends... nations have interests". Yesterday a coworker, who I thought knew better, fessed up to voting for Obama. I asked if even he could see what a farce the Peace Prize was. He said "well a lot of nations are friendlier to us now". urgh.

AndrewPrice said...

USArtguy, Well said -- people have friends, nations have interests. The whole idea that somehow Obama has made other countries friendly or that people around the world means nothing. Liking us will not prevent any other country from acting in their own best interests.

BevfromNYC said...

USArtGuy - Of course they like us! Every despot in the world knows that Obama is not going to do anything to stop them now. He's spineless. Hell, Obama can't even make the decision to LOSE a war! How long did it take all of the world's "evil-doers" to start flexing their nuclear muscles? About as long as the Inauguration parties lasted. Also point out WHO the MSM says likes us now - Chavez, Kim Jong Il, Putin, Castro, Ahmadinajad, Norway, and for all we know the MSM has been asking Bin Laden!

Individualist said...

I am really glad for the Honduran people. When I consider Obama' insane support of Zelaya I wonder to my self about what "interests" as USARTguy points out Obama is supporting. Exactly what is the interest for America in having another communist dictator take over another Latin American country. Are Bolivia and Venezuela not enough. Must we have three on the continent. How does this support anyone even the American left.

This really disturbs me because I get the feeling that Obama and crew have an agenda that is counter to the country as a whole. It just seems insane to me.

I make a habit of reading the El Nuevo Herald, the spanish language version of the Miami Herald in order to improve my Spanish language skills. I would gravitate to articles on South American poltics since they cover that extensively in that paper online. I would use babelfish for words I don't know.

I read an article which described a statement Chavez made in his radio show "Alo Presidente" that stuck with me. He was angry at the opposition for not running a candidate against him. He said this was an attempt to make him look like a dictator. He threatened that if the opposition did not run a coandidate he would suspend all six year elections and he listed each one until past 2040. This is the guy calling Goerge Bush a devil and who Obama trades books on the evils of the USA.

Something is definitively wrong when we even have this debate over the fate of Honduras.

I just am at a loss to truly understand the motivations.

Thanks for posting this Andrew

AndrewPrice said...

Individualist, You're welcome. I understand the reflex that many in South America had to this. They've gone through decades of military coups, and this looked like another coup in a country that had only just become stable. So they wanted to put a halt to it before it started another wave.

Guys like Chavez obviously wanted friends.

I think that when Obama heard that everyone was opposed to this, he just went with the crowd. That plus, as I noted before, I think he wants to do whatever it takes to avoid taking action.

What's interesting to me now is how they are trying to spin this into a win for Obama and the internationalists, when the reality is it was a total loss. I may even do another post just to outline how bad the deal is for Obama.

Libertarian Advocate said...

AP, You wrote: "I may even do another post just to outline how bad the deal is for Obama"

Please do, it would be most helpful for those of us who don't follow Latin American politics very closely.

AndrewPrice said...

Libertarian Advocate, I'll see what I can do. I've been reading about the "deal" all day and it's not at all what the MSM is portraying.

Joel Farnham said...


Congratulations!!! You beat WSJ by at least a day with your accurate assessment.:-)

Here is the article.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Thanks for the link! We do out best here! :-)

I've got another piece ready to go tomorrow morning wrapping up the whole Honduras thing, which talks a little more about Clinton et al., trying to claim this is a victory.

Joel Farnham said...


I look forward to reading it. :-)

Post a Comment