In using the above title, I do not mean to be offensive to Americans and their great nation. The title is meant as a criticism (spelled out more fully in the posts referenced below) focused on the conduct and attitudes betrayed by the present president of the United States.
In fact, I - a German - feel privileged and I am grateful for being embraced by my American friends amongst the contributors and the readership of RedStateEclectic to participate in this blog.
The sources and the base of my specific criticism, but also of my general views on politics and society, are largely of American origin - the American Constitution, the great tradition of freedom and libertarianism in America, and the rich offerings of analysis and commentary provided by American institutions and authors, in the absence of which I might well be endorsing the very convictions and views that I have learned to apply a critical mind to.
There is no better place than America with her freedom-loving people and excellent sources to understand liberty - and to feel liberty's real pulse.
On Honduras and Obama, the Coyote Blog has the below post:
In my July 4 post, I wrote that many Americans make what I think of as a mistake in elevating voting and democracy as the primary wonders of the United States. In that post, I argued that — 1. The Rule of Law 2. Protection of Individual Rights and 3. The Subordination of the Government to the Citizenry — were all more important than voting.
It seems this was a timely post, as Obama appears hell-bent on making the same mistake in Honduras:
"Again and again Obama stresses the fact that Mel Zelaya was “democratically-elected”. But the same could be said about many of today’s dictators. Elections are only one part of the democratic process. The other, and the one that sustains the electoral process, is the rule of law. Focusing only on the fact that Zelaya was “democratically-elected” but ignoring the fact that he has attempted to subvert Honduran constitutional principles that ensure such democratic elections is bad enough."
"However, continuing that line of criticism after being apprised of the constitutional arguments and the process which led to Zeyala’s ouster is completely unacceptable. Yes, we back the right of people to democratically elect their leaders. But we must also back their decision, driven by the rule of law, to remove a leader when he refuses to follow the law he is sworn to uphold. Why is it that Obama, the “Constitutional law professor, doesn’t appear to “get” that?"
In Honduras, Obama is siding against the rule of law, against the legislative branch, and against the Supreme Court, but for Executive power and for an enemy of liberty. Hmm, maybe he is consistent after all.
In his comment on the (QandO) post referenced in the Coyote post above, a certain Jeff Medcalf, offers an interesting discussion of how a similar scenario might play out in the United States.
For valuable further (background) information make sure to read Hans Bader's article, where he states:
