Dudley Henriques wrote:
Like him or not, (and I can't stand the guy believe me ) his
"position" in the government warrants protection.

I think you need to be specific about "position", otherwise I have no idea
which of the absurdly broad or absurdly narrow assertion to disagree with:

The position of him being an elected official? Or the position of being an
ill elected official? Or the position of being an ill elected official with
the last name of Kennedy?

It's a sad testimony
to aviation if some of those who fly can't make this simple
distinction.

Please understand that flying has absolutely nothing to do with the fact
that a principle inimical to everyone else's freedom is being invoked: that
the rights of private individuals to wander about public airspace are
conditional and subservient to an alleged public servant's fears (or even
mild dislike!)

We live in difficult times.

A statement valid throughout known human history.

When and if we reach the
point where both sides of a political equation start wishing each
other harm and deride a Senator's (ANY Senator's) right to personal
protection, we have reached a point fraught with danger for the
country.

I'm sorry, but this isn't an issue involving only a "right to personal
protection." He could secure that right ON HIS OWN if he were willing to
make HIS OWN SACRIFICE TO SECURE IT. This is an issue where THE RIGHTS OF
OTHERS TO ENJOY THE PUBLIC AIRSPACE ARE SACRIFICED so that HE DOESN'T HAVE
TO MAKE ANY SACRIFICES.