Obama signs bill giving himself armed protection for life

President Barack Obama gave himself and his wife Michelle the benefit of armed protection for the rest of their lives by signing a bill granting a Secret Service detail to former presidents and their spouses in perpetuity.

The new law, which will cost U.S. millions of dollars, is a re-instatement of a 1965 law which will see presidents protected for life as well as their children up to age 16. The billpassed the House and Senate in December.

Obama, whose Secret Service codename is Renegade, joked in 2011 that he liked the fact that 'men with guns' protected his daughters, Malia, now 14, and Sasha, now 11.

'I should also point out that I have men with guns that surround them, often,' he told ABC News. 'And a great incentive for running for re-election is that it means they never get in the car with a boy who had a beer, and that's a pretty good thing.

The new law statesthat all former U.S. presidents who served after January 1st 1997, along with their spouses, receive protection from the Secret Service for their entire lifetimes.The law also stipulates that children of presidents receive protection until the age of 16.

Lifetime government-provided security for former presidents was the law of the land until 1997, when Congress passed legislation limiting Secret Service protection to ten years after leaving office.

Now, every former president Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush along with Obama will continue to receive Secret Service details for the rest of their lives.

The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in November 2012 by South Carolina Republican Representative. Trey Gowdy.Co-sponsors included Republican Lamar Smith, and Democrats John Conyers and Bobby Scott.

'Both men [Bush and Obama] are young, enjoy good health, and have long lives ahead of them post-presidency,' Gowdy said on the House floor. 'This bill proposes to extend that security for the remainder of their lives.

The Secret Service started protecting presidents in 1901 after the assassination of William McKinley. In 1965, Congress passed a law authorising the agency, which is now a part of the Department of Homeland Security, to protect former presidents for life.

The legislation was signed along with a host of other bills, including the naming of seven post offices.

Some conservatives have attacked Obama for allegedly wanting to deprive ordinary Americans the right to arm themselves while at the same time ensuring that his family will always be protected by 'men with guns' at taxpayers' expense.

source

Obama thinks it's okay to spend millions of stolen tax dollars on armed security for himself, yet he opposes American citizens using their own money to keep guns to protect themselves. His hypocrisy it outrageous. Why does Obama believe that he and his family are entitled to safety, but not the rest of us? Why does Obama believe that he is the exception to his own laws?

Don't all ex-presidents have stuff like this?

Obama has not proposed to ban people from purchasing firearms.

/thread.

to be fair he is more a target than most people will ever be in 1000 years of living.

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

- Reinstatement of a 1965 law - Bill proposed by Republican legislator - Was voted in by the House and Senate - Covers all former Presidents, not just Obama Try again Lahendiworlock77

And just like that, the thread is dead.

Lol "millions" of dollars

Lol "millions" of dollars

Barbariser

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/obama-hawaii-vacation-cos_n_1158825.html

OP is upset because he cant even afford to tip when he eats out.

It will all get better when you finish middle school OP.

OP is upset because he cant even afford to tip when he eats out.

It will all get better when you finish middle school OP.

Cloud_Insurance

I'm sure OP is in better shape financially than the US government. The difference is that he can't just print or borrow more money all the time.

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

hartsickdiscipl

President Obama didn't make this bill. It was introducedby a Republican in the house, and passed thu vote to the Senate and then to his desk. I may disagree with Obama on alot of things; however this makes sense (and it isn't just Obama)

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

hartsickdiscipl

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

Chaos_HL21

President Obama didn't make this bill. It was introducedby a Republican in the house, and passed thu vote to the Senate and then to his desk. I may disagree with Obama on alot of things; however this makes sense (and it isn't just Obama)

He could have vetoed it. The current policy is protective enough. 10 years of protection after being out of office, with continued protection if a threat is received at least once a year.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

worlock77

The fact that he signed it tells me enough.

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

Lol "millions" of dollars

hartsickdiscipl

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/obama-hawaii-vacation-cos_n_1158825.html

I wasn't asking for confirmation, dude. I'm well aware that it might cost that much to fund a vacation with top tier security. It doesn't fvcking matter because a few million USD is literally less than a hundredth of a % of the Federal Budget, and anyone who spends time making a massive fuss about that kind of "wasteful spending" probably doesn't understand the sheer size of most national budgets around the world, and especially not that of the U.S.. Btw, Bush spent more time and money than Obama on vacations and I think anyone complaining about his taking "off-time" is probably making a huge sh!t over nothing tpo. I'd happily sacrifice millions of dollars if it meant helping an incredily stressed national leader to get some relaxation time without having to worry about being blown to pieces by some mad ideologue.

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

hartsickdiscipl

The fact that he signed it tells me enough.

:roll:

No wonder you're such a gullable believer of conspiracy theories.

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

hartsickdiscipl

The fact that he signed it tells me enough.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

Lol "millions" of dollars

Barbariser

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/obama-hawaii-vacation-cos_n_1158825.html

I wasn't asking for confirmation, dude. I'm well aware that it might cost that much to fund a vacation with top tier security. It doesn't fvcking matter because a few million USD is literally less than a hundredth of a % of the Federal Budget, and anyone who spends time making a massive fuss about that kind of "
wasteful spending" probably doesn't understand the sheer size of most national budgets around the world, and especially not that of the U.S.. Btw, Bush spent more time and money than Obama on vacations and I think anyone complaining about his taking "off-time" is probably making a huge sh!t over nothing to. I'd happily sacrifice millions of dollars if it meant helping an incredily stressed national leader to get some relaxation time without having to worry about being blown to pieces by some mad ideologue.

SS agents are trained professionals. not ome random lunatic off the street who wants to buy military grade weapons.

No one has proposed banning private ownership of all guns.

[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

This is pretty outrageous. His vacations cost the country millions of dollars due to the special arrangements needed for them, and now he does this. What does he think he has to fear that other presidents haven't? Currently a president only has to receive one "credible" threat a year to keep secret service protection beyond their 10-year allotment. That typically keeps presidents protected anyways, but he wants to make sure. Strange that he should do this.

hartsickdiscipl

President Obama didn't make this bill. It was introducedby a Republican in the house, and passed thu vote to the Senate and then to his desk. I may disagree with Obama on alot of things; however this makes sense (and it isn't just Obama)

He could have vetoed it. The current policy is protective enough. 10 years of protection after being out of office, with continued protection if a threat is received at least once a year.

Considering the US president, whoever he or she may be, makes life long enemies (real enemies, not political enemies) in office, that argument is just plain stupid.

And your link about how much the Obama trip costs tax payers is laughable. Its not like the Secret Service, Air Force One staff and fuel are free year round and then only cost money when Obama wants to do something with them you idiot. Air Force One is constantly fueled and ready to go anywhere and every and its fuel is constantly cycled (you can just leave jet fuel in a tank it will eat through it). I just don't understand idiots like you man... Its like you are physically incapable of logical thought process.

Can OP link me to where Obama proposed legislation to outlaw all guns?

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

Lol "millions" of dollars

Barbariser

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/obama-hawaii-vacation-cos_n_1158825.html

I wasn't asking for confirmation, dude. I'm well aware that it might cost that much to fund a vacation with top tier security. It doesn't fvcking matter because a few million USD is literally less than a hundredth of a % of the Federal Budget, and anyone who spends time making a massive fuss about that kind of "wasteful spending" probably doesn't understand the sheer size of most national budgets around the world, and especially not that of the U.S.. Btw, Bush spent more time and money than Obama on vacations and I think anyone complaining about his taking "off-time" is probably making a huge sh!t over nothing tpo. I'd happily sacrifice millions of dollars if it meant helping an incredily stressed national leader to get some relaxation time without having to worry about being blown to pieces by some mad ideologue.

How can a budget be that big when you're 16 trillion in debt? If I was that far in debt, I wouldn't be able to afford anything.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

President Obama didn't make this bill. It was introducedby a Republican in the house, and passed thu vote to the Senate and then to his desk. I may disagree with Obama on alot of things; however this makes sense (and it isn't just Obama)

C2N2

He could have vetoed it. The current policy is protective enough. 10 years of protection after being out of office, with continued protection if a threat is received at least once a year.

Considering the US president, whoever he or she may be, makes life long enemies (real enemies, not political enemies) in office, that argument is just plain stupid.

And your link about how much the Obama trip costs tax payers is laughable. Its not like the Secret Service, Air Force One staff and fuel are free year round and then only cost money when Obama wants to do something with them you idiot. Air Force One is constantly fueled and ready to go anywhere and every and its fuel is constantly cycled (you can just leave jet fuel in a tank it will eat through it). I just don't understand idiots like you man... Its like you are physically incapable of logical thought process.

Nice details about the jet fuel. Very relevant.

Can OP link me to where Obama proposed legislation to outlaw all guns?

DroidPhysX

HE'S A COMMUNIST MUSLIM KENYAN WE DON'T NEED EVIDENCE IT JUST IS! Think about it man... The fact that you don't already knows this just goes to show you are brainwashed by the liberal media and their agenda to have gay muslim overlords ruling the US under Sharia law.

Laihendi disappeared.

I don't see the point.

how many presidents have been assassinated after leaving office?

I don't see the point.

how many presidents have been assassinated after leaving office?

Sword-Demon

How many presidents have had protection after leaving office? Oh yeah all of them.

Lai, you got anymore talliers for otcars?dave123321

I don't see the point.

how many presidents have been assassinated after leaving office?

Sword-Demon

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

Lol "millions" of dollars

hartsickdiscipl

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/obama-hawaii-vacation-cos_n_1158825.html

I wasn't asking for confirmation, dude. I'm well aware that it might cost that much to fund a vacation with top tier security. It doesn't fvcking matter because a few million USD is literally less than a hundredth of a % of the Federal Budget, and anyone who spends time making a massive fuss about that kind of "wasteful spending" probably doesn't understand the sheer size of most national budgets around the world, and especially not that of the U.S.. Btw, Bush spent more time and money than Obama on vacations and I think anyone complaining about his taking "off-time" is probably making a huge sh!t over nothing tpo. I'd happily sacrifice millions of dollars if it meant helping an incredily stressed national leader to get some relaxation time without having to worry about being blown to pieces by some mad ideologue.

How can a budget be that big when you're 16 trillion in debt? If I was that far in debt, I wouldn't be able to afford anything.

The U.S. government has a 2013 revenue intake of 2.9 trillion dollars, or 725, 000 times the cost of that vacation. If your personal debt was about 5 times larger than your annual income (like the U.S. government), you would still be able to afford things provided that the annual interest paid on debt was less than 20%. You would also be totally screwed of you got called on your debt, and would have to declare bankruptcy if you weren't able to pay it off via selling assets. The U.S govt pays something like 1-3 % on debt interest, so its ability to spend is hardly affected (and it can just borrow more to cover the budget shortfall anyway), and nobody's going to try calling it on that debt since it would lead to either a U.S. recession or a U.S. default, both of which would fvckmurderape the world economy.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

I wasn't asking for confirmation, dude. I'm well aware that it might cost that much to fund a vacation with top tier security. It doesn't fvcking matter because a few million USD is literally less than a hundredth of a % of the Federal Budget, and anyone who spends time making a massive fuss about that kind of "wasteful spending" probably doesn't understand the sheer size of most national budgets around the world, and especially not that of the U.S.. Btw, Bush spent more time and money than Obama on vacations and I think anyone complaining about his taking "off-time" is probably making a huge sh!t over nothing tpo. I'd happily sacrifice millions of dollars if it meant helping an incredily stressed national leader to get some relaxation time without having to worry about being blown to pieces by some mad ideologue.

Barbariser

How can a budget be that big when you're 16 trillion in debt? If I was that far in debt, I wouldn't be able to afford anything.

The U.S. government has a 2013 revenue intake of 2.9 trillion dollars, or 725, 000 times the cost of that vacation. If your personal debt was about 5 times larger than your annual income (like the U.S. government), you would still be able to afford things provided that the annual interest paid on debt was less than 20%. You would also be totally screwed of you got called on your debt, and would have to declare bankruptcy if you weren't able to pay it off via selling assets. The U.S govt pays something like 1-3 % on debt interest, so its ability to spend is hardly affected (and it can just borrow more to cover the budget shortfall anyway), and nobody's going to try calling it on that debt since it would lead to either a U.S. recession or a U.S. default, both of which would fvckmurderape the world economy.

Stahp this thread had a mandatory NO LOGIC requirement that you accepted upon entry!

Laihendi disappeared.

Aljosa23

He has a firm bedtime of 8 pm

[QUOTE="Sword-Demon"]

I don't see the point.

how many presidents have been assassinated after leaving office?

worlock77

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="Sword-Demon"]

I don't see the point.

how many presidents have been assassinated after leaving office?

Sword-Demon