President Obama recently declared that the military removal of Manuel Zelaya, the president of Honduras, was illegal. This despite the fact that Zelaya violated the Honduran constitution, ignored a court order to stand down, led a mob to break into the place where ballots were held for a referendum, began distributing them, and was arrested by the military, whose leader was acting under a court order and in accordance with the law and constitution of Honduras. The congress of Honduras has also asserted as much.
What does this tell us about President Obama's view of the law? In this case, it would appear that he considers a government official to be above the social contract. The governments of the United States, Honduras, and many other countries exist under contract with their people. These contracts are the Constitutions of these lands. If President Obama respected this basic principle of governing free peoples, he would not support Zelaya after he acted clearly outside his authority and in direct opposition to the document which grants him that authority.
In Honduras, the people have the guts to stand up and resist the president's actions. Fortunately, the military leader acted in accordance with the law and submitted himself to its jurisdiction. This was not a coup, it was the proper and legal removal of a criminal official.
Here in the United States, we are not nearly as gutsy. Go read the Tenth Amendment, then tell me what we should be doing.