Is one mans life really that important in a democracy?

[Jackal]

I was thinking about the obscene expenditure on Obama's inauguration and the ton of protection he has from ss, military, whoever. Also, a minigun in his car caravan?! The amount of money spent on this one man's protection doesn't remind me strongly of democratic ideals.

As far as I am concerned, a true democracy has ideals and principles that are strong enough that the loss of one man, regardless of how "great" he may be, should be negligible to the function of society. We have laws, a hierarchy, constitution, etc. You cannot kill these things except from above, with other laws or nullifications/whatever. The point is, why is one person so important that so many resources are being spent on it.

The only conclusion I can find is that it doesn't seem like democracy in a true sense. I know, I know, this is a "democratic-republic" but still...it reminds me of other systems. The country would not blow away in the wind with the loss of one man. Past presidents have not had that amount of protection, Jackson held a party IN the white house while he was there. I'm not trying to make light of losing a president, I am trying to address the paradox of an elite ruling a society of free and equal people. Past presidents have been lost, and the country moved along. What happened in recent years that makes the president so sacred?

[customloaded]

I agree but one for one thing. The mini-gun in the Presidential limo...aka, suburban, doesn't exist. Not real...

[Guns4Fun]

I think from my viewpoint anyhow that while the loss of one man might not mean a hill of crap in the big picture---if someone where to kill a President it would make America look weak. The President of the United States of America is the most powerful person in the world. So, it takes some serious work to protect him. Also, the world we live in today is a lot different than the world of 100-200 years ago.

[bpvet]

I was thinking about the obscene expenditure on Obama's inauguration and the ton of protection he has from ss, military, whoever. Also, a minigun in his car caravan?! The amount of money spent on this one man's protection doesn't remind me strongly of democratic ideals.

As far as I am concerned, a true democracy has ideals and principles that are strong enough that the loss of one man, regardless of how "great" he may be, should be negligible to the function of society. We have laws, a hierarchy, constitution, etc. You cannot kill these things except from above, with other laws or nullifications/whatever. The point is, why is one person so important that so many resources are being spent on it.

The only conclusion I can find is that it doesn't seem like democracy in a true sense. I know, I know, this is a "democratic-republic" but still...it reminds me of other systems. The country would not blow away in the wind with the loss of one man. Past presidents have not had that amount of protection, Jackson held a party IN the white house while he was there. I'm not trying to make light of losing a president, I am trying to address the paradox of an elite ruling a society of free and equal people. Past presidents have been lost, and the country moved along. What happened in recent years that makes the president so sacred?

It is not a republic democracy.....where have you been????? What system does it remind you of...that is probably the right system.

[bpvet]

I think from my viewpoint anyhow that while the loss of one man might not mean a hill of crap in the big picture---if someone where to kill a President it would make America look weak. The President of the United States of America is the most powerful person in the world. So, it takes some serious work to protect him. Also, the world we live in today is a lot different than the world of 100-200 years ago.

Just ask Mt. Jack about that.

[Philbert]

I was thinking about the obscene expenditure on Obama's inauguration and the ton of protection he has from ss, military, whoever. Also, a minigun in his car caravan?! The amount of money spent on this one man's protection doesn't remind me strongly of democratic ideals.

As far as I am concerned, a true democracy has ideals and principles that are strong enough that the loss of one man, regardless of how "great" he may be, should be negligible to the function of society. We have laws, a hierarchy, constitution, etc. You cannot kill these things except from above, with other laws or nullifications/whatever. The point is, why is one person so important that so many resources are being spent on it.

The only conclusion I can find is that it doesn't seem like democracy in a true sense. I know, I know, this is a "democratic-republic" but still...it reminds me of other systems. The country would not blow away in the wind with the loss of one man. Past presidents have not had that amount of protection, Jackson held a party IN the white house while he was there. I'm not trying to make light of losing a president, I am trying to address the paradox of an elite ruling a society of free and equal people. Past presidents have been lost, and the country moved along. What happened in recent years that makes the president so sacred?

The people elected Obama to a four year term. Anyone who doesn't like him is free to run against him in 2012. That is how the US constitution works. Those who wish to remove the president by violence is an enemy of the constitution and hence an enemy of United States.

It's not just about protecting one man, it's about protecting our system of government. It's about protecting the right of the people to choose a president through constitutional means and to make that choice stick. We're not going to let some asshole with a rifle change that choice, and rightly so.

[jcabin]

The only conclusion I can find is that it doesn't seem like democracy in a true sense. I know, I know, this is a "democratic-republic" but still...it reminds me of other systems. The country would not blow away in the wind with the loss of one man. Past presidents have not had that amount of protection, Jackson held a party IN the white house while he was there. I'm not trying to make light of losing a president, I am trying to address the paradox of an elite ruling a society of free and equal people. Past presidents have been lost, and the country moved along. What happened in recent years that makes the president so sacred?

i dont like your conclusion.
protecting our president is a big fuckin deal.
i don't agree with the 120 million dollar inauguration bill but i cant applaud the SS enough for adding a turret to their caravan.
my grandfather was in the SS for 25 years, why dont you call him up and ask him why protecting the president is a big deal?

[H.E. Pennypacker]

Anyone catch the program on National Geographic last night? I caught the tail end of the program about Air Force One, then watched a show about Marine One. The shit and minutiae that is focused on - not to mention the expense - to protect the POTUS is mind-boggling...and they really didn't even delve into the Secret Service aspect of it.

The POTUS is a symbol of our nation, our way of life, and our values...you attack/kill him/her, and it's attack on our aforementioned traits.

One thing that could've been less extravagant was the inauguration itself and all the ensuing parties.

[benc4liberty]

The people elected Obama to a four year term. Anyone who doesn't like him is free to run against him in 2012. That is how the US constitution works. Those who wish to remove the president by violence is an enemy of the constitution and hence an enemy of United States.

It's not just about protecting one man, it's about protecting our system of government. It's about protecting the right of the people to choose a president through constitutional means and to make that choice stick. We're not going to let some asshole with a rifle change that choice, and rightly so.

I second this statement. Also, FYI, Our government uses whatever tools and manpower available for the protection of the president. Over and above what the security assessment of a situation would require. It is because of all the controversy during the campaigning, and the fact that our new president is black, that they beef up security, and rightly so...big change can cause the crazy's to flip out. Someone taking out an American president is a horrible national tragedy. As a nation, we've been there before, and I encourage our government(who 99% of the time, I disagree with) to take any and all measures to prevent such a tragedy from ever happening again.

Furthermore, we are in a Constitutional Republic. Not a democracy. A big part of the problems we have as a country is this simple misunderstanding. It isn't majority rules. It's majority rules, as long as the rights of the minority groups are not violated. At least that's how it's supposed to be.

[Jackal]

Those who wish to remove the president by violence is an enemy of the constitution and hence an enemy of United States.

Yes I agree they are enemies to the president and the USA.

It's not just about protecting one man, it's about protecting our system of government. It's about protecting the right of the people to choose a president through constitutional means and to make that choice stick. We're not going to let some asshole with a rifle change that choice, and rightly so.

Yes, and we shouldn't let anyone do that. However, I don't see the clear connection between a president and assaulting our valuesor rights. No foreign power or nut with a rifle or whoever can effectively eliminate our rights or our value system. Only the government of the US can change these things.

I think it says more when the leader is left open to whatever, he is part of the people. I agree, this is not the USA of a few hundred years ago and many things have changed. But I fail to see why one man is so important that he requires THAT much energy and resources devoted to him. Hes like a King now.

Lets me clear on something though. I'm not trying to understate what some people's profession is to protect the potus, or deny them the respect and thanks they deserve for risking their lives - for everyone risking their lives for our values. This thread is not about them, or even about the president. Its about the path the presidency took from unwanted position to royalty.

My base point is that our ideals are righteous and true, so how could they possibly rest on one man's shoulders. They should exist in every individual person and in our democratic ways.