-
- 7,117
Copy of official Letter : http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/102709_letter.pdfAs critics continue to mull over whether President Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite says the U.S. Constitution does not allow him to accept the award without the consent of Congress.
In a letter to Obama delivered on Monday, Brown-Waite, R-Fla., along with Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, claim the president is obligated under the Constitution to obtain Congress' approval before he formally accepts the prize.
Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution, the emolument clause, states: "And no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince or foreign state."
The five-member Nobel commission, which awarded Obama the prize earlier this month, is elected by the Norwegian Parliament -- the Storting. The award is therefore made by a group representing a foreign state, the writers argued.
"As the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a committee appointed by the Parliament of Norway, the Storting, the prize is clearly subject to the requirements set forth in Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution. Obtaining permission from Congress should be straightforward," Brown-Waite wrote in the letter.
"I urge President Obama to affirm his devotion to our Constitution and seek the consent of Congress before accepting the award in Oslo, Norway, on December 10," she said.
Does anyone know who #2 is to receive the NPP if Obama is declined the privlage of getting the award?10-28-09 08:38 AMLike 0 -
- 184
Obama is actually the third sitting president to win the Nobel Peace Prize (Obama Says He Sees Nobel Prize as ‘Call to Action’ (Update1) - Bloomberg.com). So there is precedent.
Personally I think it is total B.S. that they picked him and continues to show that this whole presidency is a total shame. But I doubt there is anything in the constitution that prevents him from winning.10-28-09 08:47 AMLike 0 -
- 7,117
Obama is actually the third sitting president to win the Nobel Peace Prize (Obama Says He Sees Nobel Prize as �€˜Call to Action�€™ (Update1) - Bloomberg.com). So there is precedent.
Personally I think it is total B.S. that they picked him and continues to show that this whole presidency is a total shame. But I doubt there is anything in the constitution that prevents him from winning.
the Congress has to approve him for accepting the the award. that is what is stated in the article and the letter.. .. .. there are "rules" and guidelines in place for such an event.... even if he is the 3rd to "win" it.... congress may prevent him from accepting it. 2 tottally different things.Last edited by mjneid; 10-28-09 at 09:49 AM.
10-28-09 09:47 AMLike 0 -
- 676
...I swear I'm only posting once...
I tought...hey...there is no way fox could mess this up...
So I broke out the old paper and looked at it...
"And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."
Damn...sounds air tight...until you read the whole line...
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.
Nobility, Title of
Nobility is technically a station in society that is had simply by being born into the right family. The class of persons, well-characterized by the aristocracy of Great Britain, were considered to be higher in status and power because of the family name. A title of nobility indicated that status, where a person was a king, queen, prince, princess, count, countess, duke, duchess, baron, or baroness; these titles were granted by the monarch at some point in the family history and passed from parent to child. The Framers wished to ensure that no such system of heredity developed in the United States and specifically prohibited any state or the federal government from granting any title of nobility.
The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
LII: Constitution10-28-09 10:36 AMLike 0 -
- 25,381
amazinglygracelessRetired ModFor heavens sake. Both of these Congressmen should be sent packing for abject
stupidity. It is not a surprise that FOX would pimp this BS. It is even less
surprising as to who posted this drivel (no offense)
Article 1, Section 9:
The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.
No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one state, be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another.
No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.
The President is NOT being granted a title , he is NOT receiving a gift,
office, or emolument (which simply means product of (as in salary) employment.
He is being given an award that TWO OTHER sitting Presidents received.
The Nobel Organization, regardless of how it is formed is NOT a King, Prince,
Foreign State, and is not acting on behalf of any of the aforementioned.10-28-09 10:39 AMLike 0 -
- 7,117
What about the cool million that goes along with the Nobel Peace Prize.For heavens sake. Both of these Congressmen should be sent packing for abject
stupidity. It is not a surprise that FOX would pimp this BS. It is even less
surprising as to who posted this drivel (no offense)
Article 1, Section 9:
The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.
No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one state, be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another.
No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.
The President is NOT being granted a title , he is NOT receiving a gift,office, or emolument (which simply means product of (as in salary) employment.
He is being given an award that TWO OTHER sitting Presidents received.
The Nobel Organization, regardless of how it is formed is NOT a King, Prince,
Foreign State, and is not acting on behalf of any of the aforementioned.
no offense taken - i just have to maintain my "troll" status.10-28-09 10:45 AMLike 0 -
- 708
-
- 7,117
IIRC it is a million dollars.....and this is right from their site
The Nobel PrizeEvery year since 1901 the Nobel Prize has been awarded for achievements in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature and for peace. The Nobel Prize is an international award administered by the Nobel Foundation in Stockholm, Sweden. In 1968, Sveriges Riksbank established The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, founder of the Nobel Prize. Each prize consists of a medal, personal diploma, and a cash award.10-28-09 10:51 AMLike 0 -
- 708
-
- 25,381
amazinglygracelessRetired ModYou mean the cool 1.4 million dollars that EVERY news organization (and FOX)
has reported he will not accept but donate to charities? What about it?
Even IF he did accept it, it is not a gift, it is a prize / award.10-28-09 10:56 AMLike 0 -
- 9,472
-
- 113
Lmao they are not "pimping" this story in the slightest merely reporting that it is happening. Instead of burying it and looking the other way like the rest do.
Anyway nothing is going to stop him from accepting it.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com10-29-09 12:56 AMLike 0 -
- 25,381
amazinglygracelessRetired ModYou cannot possibly be serious. The second you start with the FOX is right
and the rest is doing the Presidents bidding meme, you lose all credibility
because any objective viewer KNOWS that Fox will air anything they think
will damage the left and if they can't find it they will just make it up, quote
out of context, skew their editing to suit their agenda.
This story got no traction anywhere else but on FOX, right wing talk radio
and publications because every reputable news organization knows it is a
non story.
And to your previous comment: The NPP is now worthless and has no
credibility because you disagree with the current recipient. Way to respect
the deserving prior winners. You people may think you are all "Great
Americans". I will be charitable and withhold what I think.10-29-09 01:18 AMLike 0 -
- 11,402
It's like I said before. The left had their time to moan and complain for basically a decade and now it's the right's turn. I hate getting into political threads, eventhough in a way this wasn't started as one but became one.
As to the post about FOX news reporting fair, give me a break. If you put FOX news on in my house, my whole house falls to the right.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com10-29-09 01:33 AMLike 0 -
- 25,381
amazinglygracelessRetired ModThat is the problem with political discourse in this country. It is all about
scoring political points the country be damned. That to me is shameful.
I beg to differ. Given the fact that this issue is raised by TWO politicians,I hate getting into political threads, event hough in a way this wasn't started as one but became one.
parroted by the most politically ideological "news" organization in the world,
and (I'm calling it the way I see it) posted by a member who will always post
those things that he feels shows the current President of the United States
in the worst possible light, it was meant to be politically incendiary.
How anyone watches that channel and believes they are getting unbiasedAs to the post about FOX news reporting fair, give me a break. If you put FOX news on in my house, my whole house falls to the right.
"news" speaks to their cognitive disabilities more than anything will.10-29-09 02:38 AMLike 0 -
- 5,852
This seems like a simple question, and I've asked myself this as I constantly flip through all the available "news" channel offerings... which one is the most unbiased. None I've seen yet are completely uncolored in every aspect of reporting or journalism. None can seem to simply report the news and move on. I tend to watch Fox more because they usually report and then will often have both sides on to debate, allowing the viewer to actually hear more than one point of view. They will also report on the events that none of the other networks will even pretend exist. The White House Communications director, Anita Dunn, has plainly admitted that virtually every news tidbit that goes out is exactly what the White House expects them to air. How is that reporting?
"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," Dunn said, admitting that the strategy "did not always make us popular in the press."10-29-09 06:40 AMLike 0 -
- 25,381
amazinglygracelessRetired Mod@ Trucky. I am not going to quote your post as in my mind it really does not
warrant a second view.
I will take on this part though: [Have you lost your whole entire mind. First of all FOX does NOT report. They skew,Originally Posted by truckyI tend to watch Fox more because they usually report and then will often have both sides on to debate, allowing the viewer to actually hear more than one point of view. They will also report on the events that none of the other networks will even pretend exist.
lie, selectively edit, show misleading and incendiary chyrons,etc... Name me
ONE actual reporter or journalist on FOX. I'll wait.
That's right. Shepard Smith (who I respect) and that is it.
Instead of actual journalism FOX is a commentary outlet
and an extremely biased to the right one at that, or as I prefer to call it
Republican rehab (D!ck "toe sucking hooker loving" Morris, Oliver "I broke the law
and all I got was a show called 'War Stories' North", Rick "man on dog" Santorum,
Anne "the Nazi Barbie doll" Coulter, Rev. Jesse Lee "I hate my race" Peters, etc...
As to their "reporting" have you actually watched those 3 morons on Fox and
Friends and the way they twist things. Or Glenn Beck, who uses Vapor-Rub to
help him cry on demand, or Hannity who at one point (and may still) have a
close relationship with Hal Turner, one of the most racist people on earth, or
Bill O'Reilly (too much to cover here) or Cavuto or...............................
Yeah Fox is fair and balanced.
As to your White House comment, where were your complaints when the Bush/Cheney
White House was pushing talking points to FOX and talk radio by the hour. Right,
nowhere.
And you cannot be in any way serious that FOX allows a serious and fair debate
of any issue. Watch Hannity on any night. It will ususally be Hannity, rabid right
winger accompanied by two others taking on one person from the left. That sure
is unfair and unbalanced.
CNN does not do that. But then again CNN employs ACTUAL journalist, not failed
political hacks or other whose only goal in life is to carry water for their
political "sugar daddies"10-29-09 07:31 AMLike 0 -
- 7,892
All I can say is ugh. With the notable exception of AG (sorry if I inadvertently include or exclude someone) this pretty much Obama detractors saying "nah nah nah nah nah, you can't have it". Just more of the same from the "NPP is worthless" thread.
Hereks a cautionary thought, how much long before the rest othe enlightened world just puts the US on the ignore list?
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com10-29-09 10:21 AMLike 0 -
- 676
I know I said I'd post once but...All I can say is ugh. With the notable exception of AG (sorry if I inadvertently include or exclude someone) this pretty much Obama detractors saying "nah nah nah nah nah, you can't have it". Just more of the same from the "NPP is worthless" thread.
Hereks a cautionary thought, how much long before the rest othe enlightened world just puts the US on the ignore list?
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
I said the same thing AG did...
no one loves me *sniff*
Also...
I'm dying squirtle...
You don't know what the other side is do you? Also report events? I'm not sure they didn't fund the 9/12 bull. If anything Fox is just as yellow as Hearst.
Also I think you confused Fox with CNN10-29-09 10:35 AMLike 0 -
- 170
CNN, you're kidding me right. You mean that so called news organization that's ranked fourth out of four among cable news outlets. Even CNN Headline News ranks ahead them. Get off your high horse, we know you're a hard-core liberal, that's why you don't like FOX News and neither does this administration. Do you realize that if it wasn't for FOX News and talk radio, this administration would own all the so-called journalists in what they report...CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC are all in the tank for Obama. So we know who the water bearers are.@ Trucky. I am not going to quote your post as in my mind it really does not
warrant a second view.
I will take on this part though: [
Have you lost your whole entire mind. First of all FOX does NOT report. They skew,
lie, selectively edit, show misleading and incendiary chyrons,etc... Name me
ONE actual reporter or journalist on FOX. I'll wait.
That's right. Shepard Smith (who I respect) and that is it.
Instead of actual journalism FOX is a commentary outlet
and an extremely biased to the right one at that, or as I prefer to call it
Republican rehab (D!ck "toe sucking hooker loving" Morris, Oliver "I broke the law
and all I got was a show called 'War Stories' North", Rick "man on dog" Santorum,
Anne "the Nazi Barbie doll" Coulter, Rev. Jesse Lee "I hate my race" Peters, etc...
As to their "reporting" have you actually watched those 3 morons on Fox and
Friends and the way they twist things. Or Glenn Beck, who uses Vapor-Rub to
help him cry on demand, or Hannity who at one point (and may still) have a
close relationship with Hal Turner, one of the most racist people on earth, or
Bill O'Reilly (too much to cover here) or Cavuto or...............................
Yeah Fox is fair and balanced.
As to your White House comment, where were your complaints when the Bush/Cheney
White House was pushing talking points to FOX and talk radio by the hour. Right,
nowhere.
And you cannot be in any way serious that FOX allows a serious and fair debate
of any issue. Watch Hannity on any night. It will ususally be Hannity, rabid right
winger accompanied by two others taking on one person from the left. That sure
is unfair and unbalanced.
CNN does not do that. But then again CNN employs ACTUAL journalist, not failed
political hacks or other whose only goal in life is to carry water for their
political "sugar daddies"10-29-09 11:23 AMLike 0 -
- 11,402
-
- 676
lulzCNN, you're kidding me right. You mean that so called news organization that's ranked fourth out of four among cable news outlets. Even CNN Headline News ranks ahead them. Get off your high horse, we know you're a hard-core liberal, that's why you don't like FOX News and neither does this administration. Do you realize that if it wasn't for FOX News and talk radio, this administration would own all the so-called journalists in what they report...CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC are all in the tank for Obama. So we know who the water bearers are.
They aren't pulling the ratings fox is therfore they much be wrong.
Also why does FOX have those stories? They. make. ****. up. Or take it out of context to get a better story. IE: OP
Other stations report the info they get MY GOD!?10-29-09 01:01 PMLike 0
- Forum
- CrackBerry Community
- Rehab & Off-Topic Lounge
Obama may not be able to accept N.P.P.
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD