Clinton, Castro, Chavez, Ortega, and Obama v. Honduras' Constitution

Sorry about Saturday's snafu. The blog is online, but I don't think the correct version was sent. Anyway, who cares.

Honduras Defends Its Democracy

Fidel Castro and Hillary Clinton object.

By Mary O'Grady for WSJ

Hugo Chávez's coalition-building efforts suffered a setback yesterday when the Honduran military sent its president packing for abusing the nation's constitution.

It seems that President Mel Zelaya miscalculated when he tried to emulate the success of his good friend Hugo in reshaping the Honduran Constitution to his liking.

But Honduras is not out of the Venezuelan woods yet. Yesterday the Central American country was being pressured to restore the authoritarian Mr. Zelaya by the likes of Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hillary Clinton and, of course, Hugo himself. The Organization of American States, having ignored Mr. Zelaya's abuses, also wants him back in power. It will be a miracle if Honduran patriots can hold their ground.

That Mr. Zelaya acted as if he were above the law, there is no doubt. While Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door does not lie with the president. 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. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

The top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, told the president that he would have to comply. Mr. Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.

Calculating that some critical mass of Hondurans would take his side, the president decided he would run the referendum himself. So on Thursday he led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

It remains to be seen what Mr. Zelaya's next move will be. It's not surprising that chavistas throughout the region are claiming that he was victim of a military coup. They want to hide the fact that the military was acting on a court order to defend the rule of law and the constitution, and that the Congress asserted itself for that purpose, too.

Mrs. Clinton has piled on as well. Yesterday she accused Honduras of violating "the precepts of the Interamerican Democratic Charter" and said it "should be condemned by all." Fidel Castro did just that. Mr. Chávez pledged to overthrow the new government.

Honduras is fighting back by strictly following the constitution. The Honduran Congress met in emergency session yesterday and designated its president as the interim executive as stipulated in Honduran law. It also said that presidential elections set for November will go forward. The Supreme Court later said that the military acted on its orders. It also said that when Mr. Zelaya realized that he was going to be prosecuted for his illegal behavior, he agreed to an offer to resign in exchange for safe passage out of the country. Mr. Zelaya denies it.

Many Hondurans are going to be celebrating Mr. Zelaya's foreign excursion. Street protests against his heavy-handed tactics had already begun last week. On Friday a large number of military reservists took their turn. "We won't go backwards," one sign said. "We want to live in peace, freedom and development."

Besides opposition from the Congress, the Supreme Court, the electoral tribunal and the attorney general, the president had also become persona non grata with the Catholic Church and numerous evangelical church leaders. On Thursday evening his own party in Congress sponsored a resolution to investigate whether he is mentally unfit to remain in office.

For Hondurans who still remember military dictatorship, Mr. Zelaya also has another strike against him: He keeps rotten company. Earlier this month he hosted an OAS general assembly and led the effort, along side OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza, to bring Cuba back into the supposedly democratic organization.

The OAS response is no surprise. Former Argentine Ambassador to the U.N. Emilio Cárdenas told me on Saturday that he was concerned that "the OAS under Insulza has not taken seriously the so-called 'democratic charter.' It seems to believe that only military 'coups' can challenge democracy. The truth is that democracy can be challenged from within, as the experiences of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and now Honduras, prove." A less-kind interpretation of Mr. Insulza's judgment is that he doesn't mind the Chávez-style coup.

The struggle against chavismo has never been about left-right politics. It is about defending the independence of institutions that keep presidents from becoming dictators. This crisis clearly delineates the problem. In failing to come to the aid of checks and balances, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Insulza expose their true colors.

Birds of a feather....

Pig in poke....

Some animals are more equal than others....

------------

Rod - note Animal Farm is dystopian.

Animal Farm is a dystopian novel by George Orwell. Published in England on 17 August 1945, the book reflects events leading up to and during the Stalin era before World War II. Orwell, a democratic socialist^[1] and a member of the Independent Labour Party for many years, was a critic of Joseph Stalin and was suspicious of Moscow-directed Stalinism after his experiences with the NKVD during the Spanish Civil War. In a letter to Yvonne Davet, Orwell described Animal Farm as his novel "contre Stalin".^[2]...
...

Overview

The novel addresses not only the corruption of the revolution by its leaders but also how wickedness, indifference, ignorance, greed and myopia destroy any possibility of a Utopia. While this novel portrays corrupt leadership as the flaw in revolution (and not the act of revolution itself), it also shows how potential ignorance and indifference to problems within a revolution could allow horrors to happen if smooth transition to a people's government isn't satisfied....

The Venus Blog: the not stream of consciousness version

I have no idea why the prior blog published. So, read this one. That one was thoroughly stream of consciousness. Now, I am rushing to get this out. Life is so complex.

Now it looks like my second effort didn't publish. Oh, well.
_____

Is it "meethane" or the U.S. "meth-ane?

Anyway, I wrote to Murphy, our dilettante Representative, last week to offer my opinion that anyone who votes for the "cap and trade" bill is an idiot. After hiding, he eventually voted for it. I think the translation from Nuremberg is: "I was under orders."

I raise this as I was explaining the bill had nothing to do with global warning, etc, etc, that it had to do with state control and central planing and the environment hysteria is a pretext. I joked that if we are really concerned about greenhouse gasses, then we should kill all the cows. (They puff out methane, which makes CO2 pale as a greenhouse gas.)

Well, shut my mouth. They are going after cows. Insanity can be consistent, you know. Anyway, as I mentioned in my letter, this vote is a water shed. he voted for the bill, he is the enemy, period. Life is easier then you no longer can find "gray."

CAP AND TRAITOR

I hear there was no bill in the House, in the sense of a physical document, so I wonder if the vote is legal. I can't imagine a representative voting on nothing other than what they are told to do. They should, at least, pretend to have read it. Anyway, this is hearsay.
---

All this came up because I wanted to comment on a National Geographic show and a few neurons fired.

I have noticed the Weather Channel, contrary to its founder's opinion, and Nat Geo are part of the consensus knowledge crowd. Indeed, I suspect there is a propaganda aspect to their reporting.

I wanted to learn about Venus.

Early on, during the show, I hear that solar wind, which I mentioned, via Greg, a few weeks ago, is what dried up Venus' ocean. (Venus was like Earth, in many ways. Not that long ago, some scientists thought Venus could be a tropical planet. ) The theory is that water vapor was broken down into H and O2 in the atmosphere. The solar wind then pushed that out into space, as well. Over the millions of years we are talking about, the highly active volcanoes, there being no relief valve like tectonic plates covered large parts of the planet, along with magma finding its way to the outside, so did spewed-out New Jersey air.

Heat broke down the Jersey air into sulfuric acid, which is the substance that composes the atmosphere - a cover of clouds that are host to storms, including lightening resulting from SO2 action.

OK, interesting. Now comes the voice over person, with his serious voice, said that Venus was destroyed by run-away global warming and that the earth will become like Venus, it is just a matter of time. I was amazed; I could sense millions of nodding heads and could imagine the grabbing of towels to wipe drool off the chin.

Venus was destroyed by greenhouse gases, was the inane comment. There was further comparison with "global warming" here on earth, such as the famous 2 degree Celsius increase in earth's temperature in the next 50, no 40, no 35 years. Venus, by the way, is 900 degrees C.

So, just keep the information in RAM. Solar wind, which affects us, took out the water which broke down in the heat into H and O2, then blew away. The atmosphere was filled with sulphur dioxide's by the planet-wide volcanic activity. THIS acted to keep heat in, both the close sun and the volcanic activity.

There now cows on Venus.


Hope this is OK, I went through it quickly.

Science Guy

I had to link to this. I can add nothing to the power of Bill Nye The Science Guy vs. Professor Lindzen debating Global Warming on Larry King's CNN show. Only in America.

Textbooks and scientist vs. Groupthink and comic/TV personality. Nye does look smart in a bow tie. Not.

Some people don't get implants, or whatever they call them, from YouTube, if need be you can click on the title to secure the video. Be sure to have a piece of paper and a crayon when the debate starts.

Of course, it is absurd to go out and use him as a counterpoint to Dr. Linden, who sounded so authoritative in his articles, according to the great Larry King. Don't bother to defend Nye because he may be on your team, no one can consider him of any relevance to a dialogue; after all, he's not Al Gore who once got C+ in earth science.

My blog's philosophy is you can't judge the truth of a message by any particular messenger. Thank god, I now have this video to use as the perfect example of how ill-advised it is to merely attack people, invoke a mystical parliament of scientists, or count votes to make an argument. If there were a hall of 24,999 Bill Nyes and 1 Lindzen, only an idiot would say the truth is settled by a vote.

Can you imagine the producer actually calling?

"Say, we need an equal time person to talk about how there really is a global warming crisis, you in?"

"Wow, that is great."

"You gonna wear a bow tie?"

"Of course."

"Perfect. So the guy you will oppose is some Holocaust denier from MIT who thinks the whole global warming idea is hysteria. He was once quoted by the UN's people as voting for their report, but he came forward and said they lied, but who cares."

"Huh? Does he read?"

"I am afraid so."

"That's OK, the viewers will be on my side."

"Yeah, just a few one liners will do it."

"You mean there is more?"

"Not really, I will have someone call to arrange the time."

Nye actually believes he can sit at the table and discuss something; not only that, to attack Lindzen, which he did because the next thing he said is he didn't want to, which is an old ruse of the feeble. He says the number of scientists against Lindzen is 100,000 scientists to one.

The theme is: Lindzen recommends pulling back from hysteria and looking into things like physics, on one hand. On the other paw, Nye's approach, and some woman I didn't identify, is that Lindzen must be crazy. So there.

They say that because there is no comeback for: if you want to stop the Gulf stream, you have to stop the earth from rotating. Obviously mad. (Nye said the stream will stop because it is caused by salt.) CNN played Greenpeace video and its own throughout to make sure the CNN audience got it newspeak. They didn't show people laughing, only polar bears, which we have been programmed to believe are drowning (in the water they fish.)

There was some British guy, Julian Morris, who was thoroughly ignored, especially since he used long sentences, to explain even if there were global warming, its no big deal. We should worry about starving children, not unknown ideas of the future.

His crazy theory is the population of the world will see a dramatic increase in annual income (and education and lower birth rates, if I may make an addition) so if there was an inch or two increase in the sea level, who cares. People will be able to deal with things. (Obviously, crazy)

When you look at the YouTube comments you get insightful observations like how the writer grew up watching Bill Nye, a former stand up comic, and how Nye really "owns" Lindzen. My question is whether mass stupidity is a new phenomenon.

I don't think so. When I was watching TV as a child, we had Mr. Wizard to watch Saturday morning and no one thought of him as the Pied Piper. He was a guy on TV with cool experiments, sort of a teacher. We hadn't been indoctrinated in the power of Big Brother on TV, which could explain the brain gap.

I just looked up Mr. Wizard and found he was an English major who went into WWII and became a B 24 pilot, receiving the Distinguished Flying Cross. You wouldn't base your philosophy of life on him as he was neither a professional scientist or a stand-up comic.

So, don't forget, the lady said Global Warming is a fact because the UN said so, having lied about Mr. Lindzen's views.

Tommorow is KGB Day

Just a quickie. I got this from a group that is lobbying against the Pelosi control bill on for tomorrow. Numbers are disparate, for example the Heritage Foundation is using a $3,500 increase in family expenses by 2035, assuming we don't have rampant inflation (right, we may not.) However, the point is not so much the exact amount, which to me is a distraction. It is not how to approach this maze.

We should ask what the hell are these people doing? Worse, how is it our sheeple just watch TV as their freedom is capped? They fiddle as Rome burns. The bill exists because the statist want to control everything by claiming a natural gas is killing the earth. If it were true, we would kill all the cows as they produce methane and far outstrip the alleged impact of CO2. .

Oh, the list didn't add any cost for the unemployment.

If you're wondering what to tell them, here are some points* to bring up. The energy tax would:

1. Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $9.6 trillion
2. Destroy an average of 1-3 million jobs, every year
3. Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation
4. Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
5. Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
6. Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500 annually
7. Increase the federal debt by 26 percent, which is $29,150 per person

===

Oh, the KGB reference is to prior information. In the 1960's the KGB, as a retired officer writes, accomplished its finest feat in supporting the green movement. It managed to kill off nuclear power in the U.S. (the French are that stupid) and now will kill off our economy, rather than the cows. Kruschev was right, all along.

I am following UNG a provider of natual gas. You may want to look at it, as gas will take off in the mid term. In the meantime, we are gathering wood, the kind that gives off CO2 when yo burn it, but that is alright because all plant matter givers back the CO2 it took in during life. I am sure burning wood will be illegal. Ecuador is looking good.

There was an idiot representative, Boucher from Virginia, on TV this morning, on CSpan. He expressed surprise at the callers' distress saying, if you read the bill there is not one tax raised and the additional cost for each family will be $77.

I thought he was one of the liar socialist masterminds until he said the Senate is doing "prepatory" work on their version. So, we know he is an idiot. Only an idiot could think what he said made sense or could con people.

We can only blame ourselves and high school drop outs for voting in the idiots. Our revenge is to withdraw and disappear.
----------

Oh, Iranian protesters are being killed in the street. If I had a good joke about that I would have put it in here.

As America Sleeps

Yesterday, there was an hour long press conference between Mr. Obama and the press corp with their prepared questions. It was a rollicking good time, jokes a poppin'. In the entire performance, there was no mention of Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, or North Korea.

In case you are relying on the media, I put in a video link. If it isn't there, just click on the headline:

Narcissism

Dali - Metamorphosis/New Narcissus. Stare at it a long time. The eye is easily tricked. It would be a good exercise to get a huge version. For example, see the people in the center? See the man in the water?

==

Tom read an email to me that I thought was interesting. It was from some crack-pot organization, as I didn't know it, and detailed the elements of narcissism, which is hard for me to spell. I hadn't realized there was a detailed break down of the elements of the recognized psychological dysfunction.

Less than 1% of the population suffers from narcissism and of that 75% are men.

Intro:

The onset of narcissism is in infancy, childhood and early adolescence. It is commonly attributed to childhood abuse and trauma inflicted by parents, authority figures, or even peers.

There is a whole range of narcissistic reactions - from the mild, reactive and transient to the permanent personality disorder.

Narcissists are either "Cerebral" (derive their narcissistic supply from their intelligence or academic achievements) - or "Somatic" (derive their narcissistic supply from their physique, exercise, physical or sexual prowess and "conquests").

Narcissists are either "Classic" - see definition below - or they are "Compensatory", or "Inverted" - see definitions here: "The Inverted Narcissist".

The detail was fascinating, but I won't say why. You are on your own.

An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behaviour), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria must be met:

Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalledbrilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion

Firmly convinced that he or she is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions)

Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation - or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply)

Feels entitled. Expects unreasonable or special and favorable priority treatment. Demands automaticand full compliance with his or her expectations

Is "interpersonally exploitative", i.e., uses others to achieve his or her own ends

Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with or acknowledge the feelings and needs of others

Constantly envious of others or believes that they feel the same about him or her

Arrogant, haughty behaviours or attitudes coupled with rage when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted

Some of the language in the criteria above is based on or summarized from:

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition, Text Revision (DSM IV-TR). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

The text in italics is based on: Sam Vaknin. (2003). Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited, fourth, revised, printing. Prague and Skopje: Narcissus Publication.

OK for the morbidly curious:

Inverted Narcissist

Also called "covert narcissist", this is a co-dependent who depends exclusively on narcissists (narcissist-co-dependent). If you are living with a narcissist, have a relationship with one, if you are married to one, if you are working with a narcissist, etc. - it does NOT mean that you are an inverted narcissist.

To "qualify" as an inverted narcissist, you must CRAVE to be in a relationship with a narcissist, regardless of any abuse inflicted on you by him/her. You must ACTIVELY seek relationships with narcissists and ONLY with narcissists, no matter what your (bitter and traumatic) past experience has been. You must feel EMPTY and UNHAPPY in relationships with ANY OTHER kind of person. Only then, and if you satisfy the other diagnostic criteria of a Dependent Personality Disorder, can you be safely labelled an "inverted narcissist".

There is a dot below. Go figure.