Ed Huntress wrote:
"Steve W." wrote in message
...
rangerssuck wrote:
On Mar 12, 9:27 am, "Steve W." wrote:
[snip]
The story get's spun that HE is donating his money to the charities.
When in reality it is NOT his money. It is actually taxpayer money.
Just another of the "Gee look how great this man is" stories.

--
Steve W.
For ****'s sake, Steve. if the headline read, "Obama walks on water"
you'd spin it to mean "Obama can't swim."

If it didn't involve illegal methods I wouldn't have a problem with it.
However for anyone to consider this charity on Obamas part is like
considering it a great thing if a bank robber donated the money to
charity. Same principle.

What a ridiculous statement. He didn't "rob" it. He won it, and decided
where it would go. Unless you have some information to the contrary, it's
unlikely that he ever took possession of it.

Ed you might want to take a reading comprehension course.

Obama cannot legally take possession of the money. Period.

The money would legally have to be transferred to the U.S, treasury for
disposal per the law. This is all covered under the GSA regulations as I
showed in my other post.

As such the money now falls under the purview of Congress.
Obama made the announcement about what HE wanted done with the money,
when that choice is not his to make.


Those who accused President Barack Obama of soliticing donations
towards Haiti, but only contributing next to nothing, are now proven
wrong.

``WASHINGTON (AP) President Barack Obama has announced which
groups will get the $1.4 million he received for winning the Nobel
Peace Prize.

Obama said Thursday that $250,000 will go to Fisher House, a national
nonprofit that houses families whose loved ones are receiving care at
Veterans Administration medical centers. He will give another $200,000
to the Bush-Clinton Haiti Fund to help the country recover from the
earthquake.

The balance will go to an array of other groups including education
foundations, scholarship funds and regional development groups in
Africa and Central Asia.''

Now unless these words mean something different.
"$1.4 million he received"
"He will give another $200,000"

I read that as HE is giving away money that HE had no legal right to
accept. That is a FAR cry from charity.

Charity is reaching into your OWN wallet and giving YOUR money, or
giving of YOUR time.

Having it attributed to you that YOU are giving money to charity when
the money can not legally be yours in the first place is the problem.
What does the title of this post say?


Maybe if you read the laws you might understand it, unlikely but
stranger things have happened.


The press release is NOT the problem. The problem is that in no way can
this be claimed to be charity on his part.


--
Steve W.