Bob,
Of course there are lots of dangerous people out there who could harm any
one of us. The families of presidents, of course, should be protected. But
he is out of office now and there has never before been a benefit to have
adult children continue to have Secret Service protection (which is
outrageously expensive) after their parent has left office. I was referring
to the special order Clinton signed specially for Chelsea before he left
office to give her the protection AFTER he left office. Do you propose that
all adult children of ex-president's have lifetime protection? Patti Davis?
Ron Reagan, Jr.? Amy Carter? Tricia Nixon? Caroline Kennedy? It's a
serious misappropriation NOT because they don't deserve protection but
because it was never the law before and still isn't, but he got it through
somehow on his own executive order. But nevermind, the Clinton's are
somehow special and will always do and get away with whatever they please.
I got used to that long ago and shouldn't have broken my vow never to
discuss them again. Kakki
> This is "serious misappropriation of the public's money?"
>
> I think anyone who has the good fortune of having a parent elected
president
> is also handed the misfortune of possibly being singled out for everything
> from harassment to kidnapping to who-knows-what.
>
> There have been too many mentally ill people (such as John Hinkley) and
too
> many organizations (such as the Symbionese Liberation Army) who have been
> willing to cause innocent people like Jodie Foster and Patricia Hearst a
lot
> of grief just to bring their own agendas to the forefront.
>
> I would rather see money spent on the protection of presidential
offspring.
> It would be nice if it weren't necessary, but I think it is.
>
> And yes, this goes for Barbara and Jenna as well.
>
> --Bob
