Posted on 01/11/2013 7:46:52 AM PST by grundle
WASHINGTON President Barack Obama has signed into law a bill granting lifetime Secret Service protection to former presidents and their wives.
The measure Obama signed Thursday applies to presidents elected after Jan. 1, 1997, specifically Obama and former President George W. Bush. It reverses a 1994 law that ended Secret Service protection 10 years after a president leaves office. Under that law, the Homeland Security secretary could extend such protection on a temporary basis.
A sponsor of the bill, Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, says increased terrorist threats and the greater mobility and youth of former presidents made the change necessary.
The new law also authorizes Secret Service protection for the children of former presidents until they turn 16.
The bill is H.R. 6620.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Afraid of something Obama?
Tax and spend Republican? What business is this of his, anyway?
Presidents, like any other politician, retire as multimillionaires. Let them pay for their own security. They can afford it more than we can.
I'm really beginning to dislike the Republican party. Seriously. How much is this going to cost us now?
Secret Service ain’t gonna’ have guns, are they? Will crazy Joe Bite-me confiscate them?
Laws are only for us - not for them.
A Republican wrote this bill. Oboma, who'll take anything away from a working man, signed it gleefully.
Why do people who have body guards, with guns, not want us, in the flyover country not have guns? Strange.
no clips or single bullets, though
who needs 10 bullets to stop a nutjob?
I hope Obama’s armed security isn’t going to have scary black assault guns and hi-cap magazines.
He might soil his panties.
bttt
Should be fine print for some odd situations, not that they would ever occur, but just in case, that states this law is null and void for any president that fraudulently acquires the office, is overthrown when the citizens use the 2A to remove tyranny and reset govt, etc....
And let's be real honest here..it's far more likely that a nutcase from the opposite side of the political spectrum would take a crack at an unprotected former president. If you want to guarantee that 2nd amendment is repealed, then have some loco militia/survivalist type take a shot at a former Democrat president.
Even so, you can still p*** on their graves eventually if you want to do so (purely as an exercise of your First Amendment right of Freedom of Expression).
I agree.
I have no doubt some Muzrat would love to blast away on Dubya.
This has always been good for clinton, since the Secret Service apparently knows where the best hookers are.
rescind it the moment he leaves office... which will hopefully be before jan 2017
I agree but within limits. I don’t like paying for an entourage to travel the world on a book tour. It should be limited to home areas and local areas and only approval for extensive travel and overseas by a Congressional committee.
Guess who’s worried? The government SHOULD fear the people, not the other way around.
Queen LaFrito needs lifetime luggage carriers.
Since there was a limit put on secret service protection, I have been afraid the it would make George W. Bush vulnerable to attacks when his protection expired. I wish that we had a different president and agree with nothing Obama has done, but I would never want him to be harmed. If anything happened to him, he would almost be elevated to the level of saint. He is close enought to that in some people’s eyes now. I think keeping former presidents safe is a good idea.
If he could have made it only for himself, he would have. But the ‘optics’ would have been patently obvious to everyone, even his rabid loyal media. He had to include Bush for the optics filter. Otherwise, he’s still the petty little shit he’s always been.
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.