It must be anti-Chavez day at the Washington Post.
But I'm confused, or maybe I'm just missing something.
Isn't the very pro American Colombian president--or at least his honchos in his rubber-stamp legislature--trying to ram through a constitutional amendment to allow him to run again, for a third consecutive term, which is unconstitutional?
Shouldn't we be supporting a military coup in Colombia to prevent such an undemocratic and unconstitutional thing from happening, like we did in Hondurus?
How could The Post not have thought to mention this to us?