I would have done the same thing. The disrespect that is shown to our President is shameful.

still manage to find enough people to man his little Post Office cult meetings?

And can somebody tell me why the media always call him a "gadfly" rather than an "extremist"?

His butt-heads were running two tables outside of the massive Philly labor jamboree that Rich Trumka and Ed Hill organized in Aug to promote the Workers' Bill of Rights. Those tables had the same Obama Hitler posters. Reminded me of how the 'pro-life' set turns out every labor day in Pittsburgh to greet us with third trimester abortion posters, lining up along both sides of the start of the parade route.

You don't see the J.B.S. talking about a conspiracy involving Henry Kissinger, The Rothschilds, and Queen Elizabeth II(the Larouchies probably think Elizabeth I STARTED it, but they haven't been able to prove she invented beam weapons yet) .

"Berlet, Hunt for Red Menace:

"One month before the Clamshell Alliance staged its massive Seabrook occupation, [representatives of the LaRouche group] met with New Hampshire State Police agents, and warned them the demonstration was a cover for a terrorist attack. Among the documents provided to the police was material from Information Digest, a right-wing blacklist newsletter produced by aides and consultants to the late Rep. Larry McDonald (D-GA), a John Birch Society member who often blasted progressive groups in the Congressional Record. These USLP-supplied documents were apparently the basis for then-New Hampshire Governor Thompson's statements that the Seabrook Demonstration was being planned by `terrorists.' In the New Hampshire Police's summary of the USLP material, the Labor Party representatives are repeatedly described as `well- informed' and the police investigators give total credence to the charges that the proposed demonstration was `nothing but a cover for terrorist activity.' The Seabrook demonstration included non-violent civil disobedience, but no acts of violence on the part of the demonstrators." "

http://www.publiceye.org/larouche/truestory.html


Every time you see some political figure with a cartoonish version of history running inside their head, and ultra-right-wing politics 'justified' by that cartoon, you're looking at a Bircher. Tim LaHaye, Alex Jones, Ron Paul, Lynnie LaRouche, a klan of kartoon characters who help the Hunts and Kochs with their agenda.

I thought most of his followers under the age of 70 already jumped on the Ron Paul bandwagon years ago...

Good gawd.

This is what it has come to. Making the President out to be Hitler (by the LaRubish FREAKS) and SHE is the criminal.

America is going down the crapper.

be taken down?

Why isn't this similar to the legal fact that if you abandon property in a public place, anyone may take it?

OTOH it's possible that the person who put them up had permission to do so.

automatically OWN that public real estate?

She's my democratic (small "d&quot hero for the day!

If some schlep can put a poster up in a public place, I can surely tear it down.

that, if I WANT it down, why isn't that an equal justification???

If it's about permits, then get a permit for one's own posters and put them up over the "Libertarian" propaganda.

Yeah.... just print some big stickers that say something like


"Hitler murdered 6,000,000 Jews.
Don't be a moron
Obama is not Hitler"


and stick them over the stupid mustache.

I was riding my bike around the island I live on and there were a few "Romney... Believe in America" and "Romney/Ryan" signs ...no doubt in people's vacation home yards. I wanted to print up some small labels that said "1/2" to stick on the "Believe in (1/2) America" and some "Because I hate blacks too" stickers for the "Romney/Ryan" signs. But... they're in people's yards so I didn't.

On public property, looking at the law, at least in THIS state, I think you would be ok 'adding' things to the sign.

public spaces, you'd be cool with that?

I understand how she felt and why she acted, but the fact is that what she did was illegal. Period. That said, she should get off with a warning.

I am very much in favor of removing all the advertising signs from public spaces. And most of the vacant lots that they end up littering, likely without the permission of the owner.

Your own yard.. Up to you, or your hoa if you have consented to join one. Public spaces= litter.

When I go hiking in the mountains a lot of people like to create little rock piles of "art" all over the place. I see it often. Rock cairns, spirals of rocks, faux Native American medicine wheels. Some little hollow with a waterfall and somebody who thinks they are the next Andy Goldsworthy has stacked rocks on rocks on rocks on every flat surface. I immediately knock these things down. I see it as picking up trash. Heck, if I saw Andy Goldsworthy doing his art on public lands I'd have no problem wrecking it.

This election I've got 4 Romney signs so far. If it's on public land it's up for grabs. I've had other DU'ers tell me that I'm no better than the righties but I continue on. Politics is dirty. They fight dirty. We have to hold our own. It is illegal to place political signs in public. In most counties it's just not enforced. I would encourage other DU'ers to be proactive and go get some signs. And while they are at it put up some Obama signs in the place of the Romney ones.

At least, it is here in Washington State. And yes, people have been cited and gone to jail for it.

taking down signs would not be a problem.

by removing posters illegally displayed by third persons. It says that the state officials can and will confiscate them. i hope this woman gets off with a warning, but unless there is something in the law that says anyone can decide what is a violation of the law and take it into their own hands to enforce it, what she did was illegal.

I'd like to see the law your refering to.

Xtreme rong winger assembly prick had his signs on the corner of City Hall. I pulled them up and walked them into city hall and said city hall has no business promoting one candidate over another.

There were new ones up, in the same place, the next morning. I took those down as well.

definitely isn't always right. I wish that brave lady good fortune going forward and salute her courage.

Was the location city property? State road right of way? Private property?

It seems that's a major issue here.

Just making the point though, this isn't a freedom of speech issue.

'Course, what I've noticed is that DU'ers tend to throw the term around whenever they think it might make them look hip or enlightened, regardless of whether it actually fits or not.

Hope they go easy on her

like them, some because I didn't. I was unaware that there was anything legally wrong with it.

The picture on #4 shows one hanging from a table. And if that table is attended (and thus moveable, and not a permanent block on the sidewalk), I would think it would count as the property of the person/organisation who mans/owns the table, and thus not removable but others. Which is a shame in this case, but you can see the principle is that a person can place a table on the sidewalk with political posters, and it's 'free speech'.

The laRouchies should have been fined for littering. You can take down signs posted on public property.

Lyndon LaRouche is still alive?

it lets me know where the idiots andrednecks live

Anyone who would put up a sign with that kind of image, is THE ONE who should be arrested. This is infuriating.
Kudos to Nancy Lack and if she needs help in defending herself, I hope DU will let us know.

directly in front of the offending one.

This crowd sets up in government parking lots (USPS) and is looking for a reaction. This lady fell for it and she may be right in the court of public opinion but not legally. My self I'm thinking "sticky accelerator" both in drive and again in reverse.

the "Oops" manuever. At 80 there would be few questions.

Grand jury would no bill that shit faster than you can say Mitt Romney.

If not, the prosecutor should dismiss. Why waste the jury time on it?

What the hell?

that "Lack says she knew she would get in trouble." When a person faces the real possibility of actual consequences, then there is real courage.

It would have been immoral for her to leave it standing and illegal to remove it. She did the right thing.

I'm deeply sympathetic to this woman, but the fact i that what she did almost certainly was illegal (despite some silly arguments that some have made here). Hopefully, taking into account all the circumstances, she'll be let off with warning.

Let's be clear about something: if the posters she destroyed were lawfully displayed, she clearly violated the law when she tore them down and destroyed them. But even if they weren't lawfully displayed, it doesn't mean she could legally engage in self-help to remove them, any more than you or I, seeing a car parked illegally on public property, could go get a tow truck and haul it away ourselves.

that gal has GUTS

Kudos to the woman who knew what to do with them and did it.

to this atrocity by roaches.

I think that anyone removing ANY sign/banner/etc. or defacing any bumper sticker, or physically hurting anyone wearing a button is not cool and should be illegal.

WE hate it when someone pulls down an Obama sticker or whatever candidate.

UNLESS they are in some PRIVATE place that doesn't allow something, we need to be tolerant to even the most despicable things OR better yet, get the same permission the flakes have, AND SET UP YOUR OWN TABLE and destroy the message not the items.

BTW-engage those people (good naturedly, remember those are the same as the Nader and Paul fans and Perot fans and any third party fans) (the people manning those booths) who gave rise to the lie that both parties are one and the same, and look what happened when Nader did that in 2000. The lie made it close enough to steal.
Engage those people into why 3rd party don't work and ask them which of the two parties better gets something they want accomplished.
(and LOL- if they say the other party, tell them be my guest and vote for 3rd party! (LOL)
If they say, well, ah, jmmmm, hmmm, you know our party is at least trying, then say
hey, why are you voting against what is best for you and your family?

so, why Bravo for this lady for her thoughts, I do not agree with her tactics.

The right to man a booth outside a post office or wherever they have permission, and yes, they are legally allowed, is something we all can do ourselves.

(and was the concept of the old "town square".

And the 3rd party people are so extreme, that most sane people don't think anything of what they are doing.(so in essence, they hurt their own cause by their extreme tactics.)
and they are just cult groups in 2012.

rights to portray the pres in any lying BS way they want

It also it what allows us to portray Romney however we want.

Repuke rights to LIE and portray O as a Nazi are offensive. Maybe this woman should not have removed the signs---maybe she should have taken the issue up with her town gov or state gov. Still, she did the patriotic thing in my book.

She should never be hungry again.

God bless amerikkka, oh never mind.

What about the person who put the sign up defacing a sitting president? Will they be getting punished? This country really is fucked up.

To make it a crime to disrespect the president?

to a man that murdered millions of Jews? What is up with these hateful ass Libertarians?

Sorry, I hear Lyndon LaRouche and that's all I can think of...

But they are protected by the 1st amendment.

I didn't live through WWII but I remember my grandfathers talking about their service. I'm pretty well versed in Hitler's Germany, including his brownshirts. The answer to offensive political speech isn't to shut it down.

This after my neighbor removed several of my Dem signs from our shared road front over a period of a few weeks. She threw mine away but at least I returned hers to her door.

A cop questioned me and I told her the story. I was not questioned again but the neighbor and I made a truce that no signs would be posted or removed Repukes in my town are in the majority and I'm sure they would have preferred to see me jailed.

Give me a break, she puts a few signs in her car and she's charged with disturbing the peace?

and includes threatening to commit a crime against another person’s property.

I live in a CT small town that had an issue over lighting a big spruce tree on the Green for Xmas. Some Jewish people in town said it was offensive to see this symbol of Xtianity on town property and it was discriminatory against them as Jews. This became a heated argument and the town council finally solved it by allowing a big lit menorah on the Green for Hanukah at the same time as the lit up tree.

Anyway, who owns the property the signs were being placed on is key to the issue, I think.

Whether or not the placement of the signs was lawful, the actions of an individual to confiscate them and take possession of them was unlawful. As I've said many times, I hope she gets off with a warning. But unless they were placed on her property without her consent (in which case it was a trespass against her), she had no legal right to take the signs. She could've called the authorities or the owner of the property where the signs were placed to have them take action.

They have nothing going on there. The police must have been bored. They have to arrest an 80 year old woman because some Larouchies are nuts? In Hebron? There's like 3000 people in Hebron. It's on that side of my state that no one lives in. Freaking Hebron.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -- Patrick Henry