Posted on 03/16/2009 4:39:15 AM PDT by wombtotomb
The goal of the prohibition is to prevent officials of the U.S. government from being bribed by foreign princes and states. No reason the founders would have thought it ok to bribe members of Congress.
Better read it again. The constitution also states that unless they have the consent of congress they can't accept any type of present, Emolument, office or title of any kind from any King Prince or foreign State. I guess you are one of those that only reads what you want from the constitution or other document and disregard what you don't like. That is how the liberals and communist treat our constitution.
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.
I believe his contribution to peace in Northern Ireland consisted of withdrawing his support for Sinn Fein/IRA over the murder of Robert McCartney....
That’s MY shrubbery, and you can’t have it.
It’s a pity knighting.
I didn’t hear either way. Did they or did they not even take it up?
Then Every President including George Washington has violated the Constitution. Because they all accepted presents/gifts from foreign states.
An Honorary Knighthood lays no claim, nor requires no sworn allegiance its just a Royal "attaboy" for a job well done.(The Cermony is nothing more than presenting yourself to the Queen and dropping to one knee then she whacks you about the head with her Dad's Sword and sez you are a knight.)
Its like when we the Congress gives a Congressional Gold Medal or Congressional Freedom medal to a Non-U.S. Citizen. It doesn't mean they have any more rights in the U.S.A. It just that the Congress thinks they deserved recognition.
Ted Kennedy is not the First American Politician to receive one and he will not be the last.
To Whom it Concerns,
I can not find a direct e-mail address for the Queen anywhere on your web site. I wanted to ask Her Majesty a question regarding the Knighting of U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy. Please forward the following wuestion to Her at your earliest convenience:
Will you please tell me exactly what U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy did to bring peace to Northern Ireland (the stated reason for his recent Knighthood)? Did he drink up all the Irish Whiskey on the island so no one could get drunk and riot, or something?
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Wayne
-
-
- I will let you know if/when I get a response.
Wow! I’m sure that broke their backs once and for all.
Would you necessarily hear about the Congress taking up a minor matter such as this?
Especially a majority DemoncRATic Congress.
Especially with near death's door Ted Kennedy being the recipient?
Sorry, but this is a non starter.
accepting gifts on behalf of the american people, as well as giving them, is a job of the President as our collective representative to foreign nations.
“accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”
The words “of any kind whatever” would necessarily mean honorary, regardless of their meaning.
We do not prohibit the awarding of the congressional medal of honor, therefore it is not comparable.
These seperations were put there for a reason. We should not become cafeteria constitutionalists. It has not served the Catholic Church well in practice, and it will not serve the American people well either.
You use "of any kind" in your refutation of Honorary Titles then ignore it for the President and others accepting gifts. BTW all politicians and government employees are covered under this clause and are forbidden to accept presents/gifts etc. yet the Government has a form to fill out that is a declaration of gifts from foreign entities.
Clearly the clause is a stopgap to combat Foreign Entities from currying favor with Presidents and Congress Critters. Look up the history of England. They would grant Title and Land to people in order to garner favor so they could coerce them. The Founding Fathers were aware of such.
Honorary Titles have no grant of land or any other perk except you get a three letters after your name, and a medal.
Your point is well taken, however, I reverse it. I say that a form filled out to get those foreign gifts is just as much in violation as the honorary or otherwise titles. Too much goes on up on that friggin hill that should not.
People need the outrage to build so that they will fight all the abuses, not just the ones they don’t like.....
The Government set up rules on those presents and as such they are limited to gewgaws and books and such. They aren't allowed to be of significant value and must be declared as taxable income.
The other point on Knighthoods is that being Honorary you don't even get to be called "Sir" (or "Dame" as in the case for Women) to be called "Sir" or "dame" you must be a Citizen of the UK or Ireland.
And its not automatic either. If after you get your Honorary Knighthood you become a Citizen of the UK or Ireland you have to petition for an upgrade and if I understand correctly its not always given.
Oh, I guess its all ok then.
Of such little things, bigger ones are made. IMHO.
Kennedy has earned the right to be addressed as Sir Booze Blossom.
It is only an honorary title, and so it not strictly unconstitutional. But is certainly a violation of the spirit and understanding in which Article 1 Section 9 was written.
It is absolutely disgraceful. I wouldn’t expect Ted Kennedy to have the wits, decency or courage to politely, discreetly and diplomatically demure.
He could have declined by citing America’s long and brilliant history as a nation in which political royalty has been justifiably banished from our land.
It was good enough for George Washington to step down and prove to the world that America would never be ruled by a royal political class.
So why shouldn’t Ted Kennedy — or his staff — have taken an opportunity to assert that same principal, however gently and diplomatically, and remind the world that Americans will never be subject to the the idle caprices of kings and queens, or the courts of foreign nations?
Accepting a title of royalty, even an honorary one, betrays Kennedy’s heart as man who fundamentally does not get the point about what it means to be an actual American patriot.
It’s only a symbolic act, sure, but it sends an offensive message to many Americans who see it as a public slight to America’s core stated bedrock principles as a free and independent nation. I think the American people should not give Ted Kennedy a pass on this one in their hearts.
Sadly, in this day and age, too many will.
“The constitution also states that unless they have the consent of congress they can’t accept any type of present...”
Do you know for a fact he does not have congress’ consent? Also, your reply was a bit snippy, which is not called for. I am neither liberal nor communist, nor do I casually read the constitution. It does not state that he may have no title, only that he must have congress’ permission to accept it. Personally I do not care for Kennedy, nor whatever title or award they may give the decrepit old boozer, and I am prepared for his inevitable beatification by the media upon his imminent death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.