Newt on Honduras

Newt on Honduras,

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. And we’ll switch gears to Honduras, this part – this neck of the woods in Latin America. What about the situation in Honduras? Is that – is that big deal or not?

N. GINGRICH: I think it’s a very big deal because, you know, as a lawyer, the Honduras Supreme Court followed the Honduran constitution. Zelaya is in fact the president of the country, was in fact trying to become a strong man in the Chavez tradition. The Honduran constitution specifically blocks that from happening and says if you try to extend your term, you automatically have to resign.

The Supreme Court voted 15 to 0, with the majority of the court coming from Zelaya’s party. The person who is appointed the interim president was the Speaker of the House from Zelaya’s party, properly announced he would not run. They’re going to have elections this fall which will be more honest than Afghanistan, more honest than Iran, more honest than Venezuela, and actually, (INAUDIBLE) has been bizarre.

VAN SUSTEREN: So why – why is the United States backing Zelaya, who is currently hiding out in the Brazilian Embassy in Honduras? Why – why – if it’s as you say?

N. GINGRICH: Because the sympathy for the left in this administration is unending, and the fact is Zelaya is the Castro, Chavez candidate to be the strong man of Honduras. The fact is in Nicaragua, Somoza’s trying to change the constitution so he can be a lifetime leader like Chavez, and you’re seeing the redictatorship of Latin America from the left, from people who are both anti-American and anti-rule of law.

How to make friends, be overthrown, sneak into Honduras, and influence people

Full Comment brings you a regular dose of international punditry at its finest. Today, Honduran President — if you can still call him that — Manuel Zelaya, continues to hide out inside the Brazilian embassy to Honduras, where he and his wife have sheltered since Sept. 21. Since being overthrown and ejected from the country by his own troops, Zelaya has been trying to win international support for his return to power. Makes sense…but he should probably scratch Israel off the list of governments to get on the blower with.

7 Responses to “Newt on Honduras”

  1. Kathy Says:

    I respect Newt Gingrich and his opinions, but I don’t think he has a full handle on why there is such a support for Zelaya by the current US administration. Being a socialist sympathizer is not a good enough reason to destroy democracy in Honduras. Another explanation I have heard is that Mr. Obama is embarrassed by his immediate and wrong response to the situation and is just sticking with it to save face. Both are inadequate and superficial reasons.

    So I am still searching for why. I guess only time will tell.

  2. Pat Patterson Says:

    I’m assuming that Gingrich meant that Ortega is trying to extend his term not Somoza?

  3. Conrad Says:

    Wow. You actually believe that Zelaya, who was elected and taken out of power at gun-point, is the dictator…?! Little school lesson: if the president of a country is removed by force this is THE definition of a coup d’état.

    Suspending civil rights, arresting people arbitrarily, etc is not what most thinking people would call democratic. Democratic is not just a synonym for people you agree with.

    A side point: Obama is not a socialist. You listen too much to poltitians like N. Gingrich who call see socialist under every book and crany. In Canada, he would fit best with our right wing political formations-definitely not the left!

  4. Marcio Says:

    I don’t know if there is a nomination for the most democratic personality of the year, but if there is, surely Mr Micheletti highly deserves it…

  5. John Says:

    Pat, Correct. Newt meant to say Ortega.

  6. Pat Patterson Says:

    Using Conrad’s definition if the police come to your house with a warrant that means it is a coup d’etat. This is correctly termed a pronunciamento as the military may indeed have taken Zelaya away but they still take their orders from civilian authorities.

  7. marc in calgary Says:

    In Canada, Obama is seen as a socialist, because what defines a socialist isn’t where he is, but what he wishes to do to the poor saps that voted him into office. The argument of where a socialist fits into Canada’s political spectrum reminds me of the cliche, “trying to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end”.