Why is Obama trying so hard to fight the legitimate exile of wannabe Honduran strongman President Manuel Zelaya? Maybe it's because he sees his future plans unraveling:
...imagine that Barack Obama announced that he was going to hold a referendum on legalizing a third term for himself. Imagine that even his attorney general, Eric Holder, advised him that it was illegal. Imagine that the Supreme Court ruled that holding the referendum was unconstitutional. In spite of that, let's imagine that Obama coerced the FEC into holding the referendum anyway.
Then - let's further imagine -- we found out that Venezuelan strongman Chávez (who has pulled off a similar power grab in his own country) was financing the referendum. What should the Joint Chiefs do in such a case? And if they removed Obama from office, would they be destroying the Constitution or preserving it?
This is exactly what has occurred in Honduras, to a tee.
And if Obama can de-legitimize this lawful protection of a nation's freedom by re-defining it as a "coup", he can do the same thing here, should our other two branches of government legally decide at some point that The One has overstepped his constitutional boundaries. An impeachment would become a "coup", just like he claims it is in Honduras.
The media, of course, parrots the administration's line completely - investigating and explaining the complexities here would take too much effort, spoil a simple narrative, and would require much more thought and work than just repeating Obama's talking points over and over.
Obama's counting on that, as well. He'll need their co-operation if/when he tries to pull a Chavez here in 3-8 years...
Obama is on the same side as Chávez, Ortega and the Castro brothers.
And the mullahs of Iran. What side does that put him on the opposite of?
So what will he do with ours?