Run In With Mr. Edwards

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
This is all the work of the Secret Service. It wouldn't matter who the
politician du jour was. Don't blame their over-reaction on Kerry-Edwards
or
Bush-Cheney. If the SS decided that the water commissioner needed
protection, you would have received the same treatment.


You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that matter
Jay himself).

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Tony Cox wrote:

You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that matter
Jay himself).

Isn't he a senator anymore? Did I miss anything?

"Timo Koekenhoff" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Tony Cox wrote:

You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that
matter
Jay himself).

Isn't he a senator anymore? Did I miss anything?

It is my understanding that he is being protected because
he is the Democrat VP candidate, not because he is a NC
Senator. Did I miss anything?

I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.

Bob Gardner

"Tony Cox" wrote in message
news
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
This is all the work of the Secret Service. It wouldn't matter who the
politician du jour was. Don't blame their over-reaction on Kerry-Edwards
or
Bush-Cheney. If the SS decided that the water commissioner needed
protection, you would have received the same treatment.


You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that matter
Jay himself).

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.

SS protection can be refused. Nixon, for example, released the SS several
years after he resigned. I'm not sure if he retained private bodyguards, or
whether he just gave up on having bodyguards altoghether, but it does show
that a "principal" can tell the SS to get lost if he or she wants to.

But if I were the "principal", I certainly wouldn't want to. Both Kerry and
Edwards are entitled to SS protection, and they are wisely making use of it.
I'm reasonably sure that Edwards is now entitled to make use of any security
arrangement that Cheney has at his disposal. To be sure, Vice-Presidential
TFRs aren't anything close to the pain in the butt that Presidential ones
are, but even a baby-TFR -- which Edwards certainly could have had if his
people had asked for it -- would have been enough to ruin Jay's whole trip.
So my own personal take on Jay's (very well-written) story is that we should
be thankful that Kerry-Edwards is at least holding off on releasing the TFR
hounds right now. An hour's wait in the FBO lobby is a pain, but not nearly
as painful as having to cancel the entire trip.

If I had been in your shoes, Jay, my own reaction would have been to treat
the security people with over-the-top politenes and kid gloves. As a
resident of a swing-state (Pennsylvania), I can personally attest to how
over-blown presidential security has gotten and how totally disruptive it
can be to our day-to-day lives. On July 4th, of all days, I couldn't even
walk down a street three blocks from a scheduled campaign event, despite the
fact that I had tickets to and was on my way to attending that very same
event. Heck, the event even was due to start for another two hours! What
on earth was I, with a 3-year-old in tow, going to do three blocks away, two
hours before the speech that would put anyone in any danger whatsoever? So
instead my entire family, including my visibly pregnant wife, had to walk
several blocks out of our way for no good reason at all. I think it's gone
way too far.

But I also suspect that everytime the SS encounters an irate pilot in an
FBO, it just feeds their justification mill for keeping all these "crazy
people in little planes" as far away as possible from the people they are
protecting. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that you went nutso on
the SS in the FBO lobby. I'm just saying that they have a certain
pre-conceived mindset concerning GA, and that anything you did short of meek
and apologetic acceptance is quite likely to be twitsted into a
justification of this misbegotten mindset.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote in message
k.net...
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.

SS protection can be refused. Nixon, for example, released the SS several
years after he resigned. I'm not sure if he retained private bodyguards,
or
whether he just gave up on having bodyguards altoghether, but it does show
that a "principal" can tell the SS to get lost if he or she wants to.

But if I were the "principal", I certainly wouldn't want to. Both Kerry
and
Edwards are entitled to SS protection, and they are wisely making use of
it.
I'm reasonably sure that Edwards is now entitled to make use of any
security
arrangement that Cheney has at his disposal. To be sure,
Vice-Presidential
TFRs aren't anything close to the pain in the butt that Presidential ones
are, but even a baby-TFR -- which Edwards certainly could have had if his
people had asked for it -- would have been enough to ruin Jay's whole
trip.
So my own personal take on Jay's (very well-written) story is that we
should
be thankful that Kerry-Edwards is at least holding off on releasing the
TFR
hounds right now. An hour's wait in the FBO lobby is a pain, but not
nearly
as painful as having to cancel the entire trip.

If I had been in your shoes, Jay, my own reaction would have been to treat
the security people with over-the-top politenes and kid gloves. As a
resident of a swing-state (Pennsylvania), I can personally attest to how
over-blown presidential security has gotten and how totally disruptive it
can be to our day-to-day lives. On July 4th, of all days, I couldn't even
walk down a street three blocks from a scheduled campaign event, despite
the
fact that I had tickets to and was on my way to attending that very same
event. Heck, the event even was due to start for another two hours! What
on earth was I, with a 3-year-old in tow, going to do three blocks away,
two
hours before the speech that would put anyone in any danger whatsoever?
So
instead my entire family, including my visibly pregnant wife, had to walk
several blocks out of our way for no good reason at all. I think it's
gone
way too far.

But I also suspect that everytime the SS encounters an irate pilot in an
FBO, it just feeds their justification mill for keeping all these "crazy
people in little planes" as far away as possible from the people they are
protecting. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that you went nutso on
the SS in the FBO lobby. I'm just saying that they have a certain
pre-conceived mindset concerning GA, and that anything you did short of
meek
and apologetic acceptance is quite likely to be twitsted into a
justification of this misbegotten mindset.


well put Martin, I think Jay may be turning into a troll. Big fuss about
nothing. I find the story encouraging in that the management of the
security arrangements seems proportionate to the person being protected.

as for the local i.e. non SS security, I don't blame the local police chief
or sheriff getting all his guys on the street. No one want to have the
assassination of a candidate on their watch, it is a career ender.

well put Martin, I think Jay may be turning into a troll. Big fuss about
nothing. I find the story encouraging in that the management of the
security arrangements seems proportionate to the person being protected.

Right.

I just did the math. Assuming that there were "only" 50 law enforcement
officers at the airport, tied up for maybe 5 hours, (not assuming over-time
pay, which it may have been on a Sunday), at an average pay of $50K per year
(including benefits), Mr. Edwards' little party on the ramp in DSM cost
tax-payers about $6000.

This, of course, is only counting the cost of security we saw at the
airport. Let's not forget the en route security guys, the guys at the event
itself, and the guys we COULDN'T see. Factor in the cost of transportation,
and you're into five figures, easy -- all for just ONE crummy little speech,
given by a V.P. candidate!

You're sure willing to **** this kind of money away protecting a
vice-presidential wannabee -- and you're sure cavalier about our freedom of
movement.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:0V9Wc.24199$9d6.9615@attbi_s54...
.....snip..... Factor in the cost of transportation,
and you're into five figures, easy -- all for just ONE crummy little
speech,
given by a V.P. candidate!

You're sure willing to **** this kind of money away protecting a
vice-presidential wannabee -- and you're sure cavalier about our freedom
of
movement.
--


Personally, I don't exactly understand why presidential candidates in the
USA campaign in person anyway, given that they all load up the live audience
with their own supporters in advance anyway... (and the Republicans are even
worse than the Democrats).

For all the difference it will make on election day, they could all make
their speeches from an underground studio inside the Colorado Mountains.

Icebound wrote:

For all the difference it will make on election day, they could all make
their speeches from an underground studio inside the Colorado Mountains.

Then if we'd just quietly shut the door on our way out...

- Andrew

Jay Honeck wrote:
I just did the math. Assuming that there were "only" 50 law enforcement
officers at the airport, tied up for maybe 5 hours, (not assuming over-time
pay, which it may have been on a Sunday), at an average pay of $50K per year
(including benefits), Mr. Edwards' little party on the ramp in DSM cost
tax-payers about $6000.

As I understand it, the national party is supposed to reimburse the
local agencies for security. The trouble is, sometimes they do,
sometimes they don't, or don't pay the whole bill.
My solution is to demand cash upfront at the planning stage.
They don't pay, they don't get local cooperation.
The political machines here in Ohio are spinning the "disruptions" as
good publiciity for the communities that cannot be bought at any price.