One other thing. Impeachment is the proper method in OUR government, as established by OUR constitution. I don't know the details of how it is supposed to work in THEIR government. Do you?
Once again, I ask you to consider the hypothetical scenario I mentioned above - substitute the US for Honduras, George W. Bush for Zelaya, and 2007 for 2009. Sure, impeachment is the right way to go under normal circumstances in the US. But suppose the situation was NOT normal - suppose this hypothetical power hungry Bush had made it plain he intended to overthrow the constitution and set himself up as President for life, and suppose further (as happened in Honduras) that both the Legislative and Judicial branches of government were united in PREVENTING that disaster from happening.
Would you still feel that the legal formalities of impeachment - which we all know from experience takes a LONG time and is by no means assured of success - was the right way to to prevent the constitution from being destroyed? Speaking for myself, if a president - ANY president, whether Bush or Obama or any other - did the things that Zelaya did in this country, I would FULLY support the military in giving the SOB a boot print on the arse and a one way ticket to anyplace else.
When a "leader" is trying to game the system and give himself more power - as Zelaya was CLEARLY doing - there isn't time for niceties. Action must be taken to prevent catastrophe. The people of Honduras know this a lot better than we do - we've never lived under a military dictatorship, but they have. They know what it's like to have a repressive government, and that's WHY they have such severe term limits (Presidents are limited to a single, 4 year term) to begin with.
I hope the military, the legislature, and the judiciary of Honduras stick to their plan and tell Obama and the other socialists calling for Zelaya's reinstatement to go pound sand. They'll be glad they did, and if they cave in and reinstate the SOB, they'll be sorry.







