The right wing blogs are abuzz with the same argument: Zelaya acted illegally in pushing for a referendum to get a 2nd term. (Conservatives reflexively support military coups in Latin America).
Except the referendum would not give him a second term. It was a non-binding referendum to decide on a vote in this November's Presidential election to hold a "National Constituent Assembly" (like a Constitutional Convention)
Yes, the same Presidential election where Zelaya's successor would be elected.
So, how the hell can Zelaya be furthering his stay in office by this referendum? It doesn't make sense. Not plausible.
The wingers are pointing to articles 239 and 42 in the Honduran Constitution. And on the face of it, it seems like a powerful argument. But they refuse to show how this referendum keeps him in power.
Again: He can't run for re-election by the Honduran Constitution and he wouldn't be allowed on the ballot. So, how in blue blazes is he furthering his stay in office?
They cannot and will not address that!
Here's a link to a more lucid argument on articles 239 and 42 (it is creepy how they have replicated this argument so rapidly on the blogosphere):