Allahpundit says he’s taking a chance on “exploding what little right-wing blog cred I have left,” but hey, I still love the big lug. Maybe I can explain things to him in a relatively snark-free way. The setup:

Just days after reestablishing diplomatic ties with Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez is accusing the U.S. of staging a coup in Honduras as President Obama expressed concern over President Manuel Zelaya’s arrest…

Chavez, who succeeded on his second try to push a similar referendum that allows his indefinite re-election, lashed out at the U.S. and Obama in Caracas, alleging “the Yankee empire had a lot to do” with the “coup d’etat” against his fellow leftist leader.

“I call on the president of the United States to issue a statement as we have, rejecting this affront, which not only goes against Honduras but against all the peoples of Latin America,” Chavez said.

AP’s punchline:

At the risk of exploding what little right-wing blog cred I have left, I can’t believe The One would align himself with Chavez without some compelling reason. Even if you believe the worst conservative suspicions about him, i.e. that he’s some lefty dictator fanboy, the political price he’ll pay for doing this is too steep to justify it unless there’s a greater good he’s aiming at. Witness Drudge’s headline right now (“Obama lashes out at Honduras; sides with Chavez, Castro”) or Krauthammer in the clip below offering a useful rule of thumb for Latin America. Barry’s going to eat a ton of shinola for this — but why? What’s the strategic benefit?

Leave aside for the nonce the latest excruciating example of the God-Emperor’s willingness to suck up to dictators in hopes of fostering a better opinion of the US exploding in his face — again. Barry’s going to eat a ton of shinola, all right — from Drudge, Krauthammer, me, and a handful of other Right-leaning observers and pundits. Nobody believes for a moment that he or his Lefty lemmings give a tinker’s dam about that, do they? Do they really?

As the merest of examples, let’s check in on the WaPo article I cited yesterday for the MSM spin:

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Soldiers ousted the democratically elected president of Honduras on Sunday and Congress named a successor…

The first military takeover of a Central American government in 16 years drew widespread condemnation from governments in Latin America and the world…

President Manuel Zelaya was awakened Sunday by gunfire and detained while still in his pajamas, hours before an unpopular constitutional referendum many saw as a power grab…

“Many saw” a naked, illegal, unconstitutional power grab as a naked, illegal, unconstitutional power grab. “Many saw.” With all the sneering contempt for rightwingnazineocon knuckledraggers that statement so strongly implies. “Many saw” — but not us reasonable, intelligent, sophisty-cated types, who are capable of savoring the sweet, creamy nectar of nuance, in which we marinate all our so-subtle rationalizations and obfuscations.

Looky here: it fucking well WAS a power grab. The military acted on the instructions of the Supreme Court, in defense of the Honduran Constitution, with the support of the legislature and most of the would-be dictator-for-life’s own friggin’ party. Every democratic institution in Honduras supported the move to oust this megalomaniacal cretin. It was their last hope for maintaining the rule of law in their country, in opposition to the depredations of a two-bit tyrant intent on doing away with it.

And yet the WaPo, following their master Obama’s lead, tries every weasel-word and loaded statement they can gin up to create the right idea in the minds of their liberal readership: ie, that this was some sort of “military coup,” an outrage against the very rule of law it was intended to uphold.

I haven’t seen a lot of other MSM reportage on this, simply because I haven’t looked; I know well enough what their spin will be. And so should you, and so should Allahpundit. There is simply no reason whatsoever to think — to blindly hope — that the NYT, the networks, the CNN/MSNBC axis, or any of the other usual propagandist suspects are going to depart much (if at all) from the Obama-approved line here, any more than they have anywhere else.

His ouster came hours before polls were to open on a constitutional referendum that Zelaya was pushing ahead even after the Supreme Court and the attorney general said it was illegal. The constitution bars changes to some of its clauses, such as the ban on a president serving more than one term, they said.

“They said.” Look, this too is pretty damned simple: either it does, or it doesn’t. And it does:

The constitution may be amended by the National Congress after a two-thirds vote of all its members in two consecutive regular annual sessions. However, several constitutional provisions may not be amended. These consist of the amendment process itself, as well as provisions covering the form of government, national territory, and several articles covering the presidency, including term of office and prohibition from reelection.

Pretty effective at waving away the fog generated by Obama and his media sycophants, innit? The only coup launched here was the one attempted by the president. It failed, after conscientious and correct efforts on the part of the legislature, the courts, the military, the church, the people, and Zelaya’s own party to get him to see reason and abandon his dictatorial ambitions. Ahh, but let’s have another look at the terrible, terrible political price the media will exact from Obama for his remorseless support for dictators:

Latin Americans suffered at least three dozen military coups d’etat from the 1960s through the end of the 20th century. They believed they had put that unsavory history behind them with a wave of democratically elected civilian governments, and for the most part they had, until Honduras returned to that bygone era this week with army tanks in the streets, the president ushered into exile at gunpoint — in his pajamas — and the Congress waving a phony resignation letter before naming a new president. This was a coup, and it must be reversed.

Ooh, that’s gonna leave a mark — one that looks a lot like lipstick, right on the ass of our Supreme Leader.

Obama is — demonstrably and undeniably — no friend of liberty, democracy, or the rule of law; if his efforts to subvert our own Constitution didn’t make that plain enough, his unflinching support for Left dictators like Chavez and Castro, his refusal to condemn one of the most monstrous tyrannies in the world for the slaughter of its own peacefully-protesting subjects until he could no longer avoid it without embarrassment, his obvious antipathy for our democratic allies the world over, and his eagerness to lend aid and comfort to this Honduran brigand immediately after a week-long refusal to denounce Iran’s murderous regime in terms anywhere near as strong as he’s applied to his domestic political opposition certainly ought to clear up any misconceptions.

He is a hard Left would-be despot himself; it should not surprise anyone with open eyes that he sides with the thugs, communists, and dictators every time he thinks he can get away with it — which, so long as he has the butt-suck media backstopping his worthless ass, is all of them. Obama needs “some compelling reason” for doing this? All flailing and floundering about to avoid recognizing the obvious aside, he has one: he’s on their side.

Reality is not altered by anyone’s refusal to look at it, and being surprised each time it grabs you by the lapels and gives you a good shaking doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have seen it coming.