Lost In Translation: Obama Called a "Little Black Man"

Here's a little-noticed news item from AP:

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras (AP) — The foreign relations minister in Honduras' interim government says he has sent a letter to Barack Obama apologizing for a racial comment he made about the U.S. president.

In a TV interview, Ortez said Obama "is a little black man who doesn't know where Tegucigalpa is located."

This is a good example of terrible reporting. "Little black man" sounds horrible in English, as it should. In Spanish, however, speakers liberally sprinkle such diminutives throughout their conversations. Little black man, "negrito" in Spanish is a common term of endearment among people of all skin shades.

In this case, the Honduran Foreign Minister was not using it as a term of endearment, but neither was this a "racial comment." If our president were Oriental, Ortez would have called him a "Chinito." They have a myriad of words for white people, from "fulo" to "rabi-blanco" (white-tail, or more vulgarly, white-ass), and they use all of these politically-incorrect words in routine conversation, with no racial bias intended and no offense taken.

Yes, the foreign minister was speaking contemptuously of our president, but it was not racial. Little things like this, where I have personal insight, are what lead me to conclude that much of our press is ignorant. They may be educated, but they lack the real-world experience to put what they report in proper context; and without context, their reportage is just a bunch of words.

I thought this would be a huge story, what with Honduras being in the news and now adding in a racial controversy. Anyway, I'm pleasantly surprised it has gone largely unnoticed.

Google-AP - Honduras
El Tiempo - Cisma
El Tiempo - Se Excusa

Obama Enhances our Latin America Standing

... With communists like Chavez, Ortega, and Castro.

Our state-run media has really bit the big one on the Honduras story. Reflexively, they gobbled up what propaganda minister Gibbs fed them and dutifully regurgitated it. Where is the in-depth analysis? Where is the historical context?

Instead, we get warmed over professors and analysts talking about Obama's stature in the region and how this affects the US. I haven't been in Honduras in years, but I've got news for you: Obama and the US are not at the forefront of Hondurans' minds right now. And this story is not about us or our dear leader: It is about a nation trying to do the right thing in light of their constitution.

RCP at least provides a list of quotes from various "experts" on the situation. Like any such compilation, all points of view are represented and those on either side can find something they like,

Latina Lista, no right-winger, provides some insight from Honduras that The ObamaMedia has proven itself incapable of providing:

But every Honduran-focused blog that I was able to find (Pensieve, La Gringa's Blogcito, Honduras Living,) were telling a different story. In fact, at one point, the bloggers were trying to unite to send a message out to their readers to send a message to Obama to explain to him the "real situation" in Honduras.

The people there in the country are saying that the media is presenting a one-sided look at the situation and is actually filing a lot of information that is not entirely accurate.

To get some historic perspective on the region, I suggest Ryszard Kapuscinski's tragicomic "The Soccer War." It is a highly entertaining read. You will gain a much greater understanding from this book than you will from listening to all the so-called Latin American experts from Taco Bell U.

Obama: Sycophantic Neophyte?

Why a Sycophantic Neophyte? Cause Ass-Kissing Noob just seems too harsh and disrespectful of the office.

Sucking up seems to be what it is all about these days, the administrations actions have less to do with supporting democracy and more to do with supporting the status quo, all the while applying liberal lip-action to the derrieres of the Chavenistas in the misguided belief they will suddenly start liking us.

An elected president, in a vain attempt to stay in power, attempts to amend the countries constitution outside of the established and legal methodology. The country's Supreme Court rules his actions unconstitutional and the country's democratically elected congress votes to remove him due to "repeated violations of the constitution and the law", this action is also supported by the country's Supreme Court.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8124154.stm

Obama's response is "We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the president of Honduras." So how exactly do you figure that, Mr. President? Sounds like democracy is working just fine in Honduras. Let us take it from a slightly different perspective. If the US Supreme Court ruled your actions "unconstitutional" and you were impeached by our congress, would your removal be legal? Would the UN be clamoring for your return? Would the whole process be "democratic"?

I am dismayed at the pandering and short sightedness of the administration's position, the people of Honduras have spoken through their Supreme Court and duly elected representatives, they have removed a potential dictator who was illegally attempting to consolidate his grip on power. Let me ask you this Mr. President... will your calls for his return be met with just as vehement calls for his ousting upon the termination of his constitutional term?

The handling of this affair has been clumsy, misguided, and have set a bad example to the rest of the world about what democracy is all about.

~Finntann~

Does Obama Speak Honduran?

Honduras is following its constitution, Ex-Presidente Zelaya was not. The Obama administration is wrong again. If we can't do the right thing, then we at least need to butt out.

We sided with the Mullas in Iran, and now we're siding with the Chavistas in Central America. Tyranny is on the march, and Clinton and Obama are out in front twirling the baton and beating the drum...

Honduran Ex-President Zelaya wanted to pull a Chavez by changing the constitution in an unconstitutional way. The Supreme Court and Congress told him it was illegal and the court issued an order to halt the voting. When the President refused to follow the law, the military stepped in. All constitutional. Fausta, Latin America blogger extraordinaire, sums it up here.

Mary Anastasia O'Grady explains in her WSJ article, why the Obama Administration is wrong yet again on an important foreign policy question:

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.

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.

Maybe President Obama can get on the phone and impress the Hondurans with his eloquence. He probably doesn't speak Honduran though...

Fausta - Honduras
WSJ -O'Grady - Honduras Protecting its Constitution