Maybe the author of the ad just wants Obama to get a mountain named after him, his face on currency and to really enjoy lasagna.

A low-level ad salesperson took the account and text was cut and pasted into Quark/InDesign or the ad was supplied ready to be put in. No journalist saw that classified ad and I fail to see how this is in any way controversial.

SockMonkeyHolocaust: A low-level ad salesperson took the account and text was cut and pasted into Quark/InDesign or the ad was supplied ready to be put in. No journalist saw that classified ad and I fail to see how this is in any way controversial.

You're probably right about no journalist seeing this ad. But your failure to see how this is in any way controversial is indeed a failure.

I read that and it didn't dawn on me right away that all those guys were assassinated. Give 'em a break!

I can't fathom why anyone would pay money to make a threat like that. What good does it do as the only result is a visit from the Secret Service.

Fabric_Man: I read that and it didn't dawn on me right away that all those guys were assassinated. Give 'em a break!

Geez, me either... took me a second.

/doubts that anyone above 'pee-on' was responsible for its publication, anyhow

That Obama. Loves lasagna, HATES Mondays.

House of Tards: Maybe the author of the ad just wants Obama to get a mountain named after him, his face on currency and to really enjoy lasagna.

And to bone a hot actress. Don't forget the "boning a hot actress" part.

He wants Obama to be holy?

How did I know this would be a story from Western PA?

Seriously, make them their own damn state,

Befuddled: I can't fathom why anyone would pay money to make a threat like that. What good does it do as the only result is a visit from the Secret Service.

I can think of dozens of behaviors I fail to fathom why people engage in.

/takes all kinds

Freedom of speech includes the right to be an asshole.

Freedom of speech does not include threats, veiled or direct, on the life of the predsident.

Freedom of speech includes the right to be an asshole.

This.

SockMonkeyHolocaust: A low-level ad salesperson took the account and text was cut and pasted into Quark/InDesign or the ad was supplied ready to be put in. No journalist saw that classified ad and I fail to see how this is in any way controversial.

Here's a copy of the page with the classified (pdf). This does appear to be the case.

/pdf link from abc page.

AmazingRuss: Freedom of speech includes the right to be an asshole.

too bad this guy went past mere assholism

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: Freedom of speech does not include threats, veiled or direct, on the life of the predsident.

Not a threat. Saying you hope someone dies is not the same as saying you will make them die.

Honestly, I appreciate the author's moxy, even if I do not endorse his rather strong beliefs.

LOL. So much for that J-school degree.

Probably too busy debating important social issues.

cchris_39: LOL. So much for that J-school degree.

Probably too busy debating important social issues.

It was the ad sales dept that farked up dipshait.

That's making a threat? Secret service must be bored if they followed that one up.

AmazingRuss: Freedom of speech includes the right to be an asshole.

You clearly lack the education and intelligence to understand what is and isn't protected speech. Do us all a favor and show your freedom by shouting "Fire" each and every time you go to the movies.

CheddarPants: You're probably right about no journalist seeing this ad. But your failure to see how this is in any way controversial is indeed a failure.

I don't see where a threat was expressed but yeah let's make a huge thing out of nothing then. We can argue about it on the internet so that future generations can have our words of wisdom. Post some pictures with text on them. Fart.

If that was a threat, my name is Nancy.

/My name is not Nancy

kleppe: That's making a threat? Secret service must be bored if they followed that one up.

they follow up on EVERYTHING. it is their job.

Damn. I didn't get that at first. I've heard so many Obama comparisions to both Lincoln and Kennedy that I assumed it was more in that vein. The really "fail" thing for me was reading the comments under that story. Some of my favorites...

"Is this not treason! Are all of the individuals working for this paper now guilty of a conspiracy to commit treason or is this free speech which consitutional amendment allow us to do this!"

"Apologies after the fact for news media should not be accepted and tolerated. They should know better and FINE the paper!!!"

"Charge the pathetic loser with sedition. Charge the editors with conspiracy to commit sedition."

"Apology? They should close them down and put them in jail! That's a threat! Just like the ghouls at Faux and their followers who spout the same rhetoric on a daily basis!"

"Apology?! They should be charged with sedition!
It is really "nice" that they cooperated with authorities after the fact, but what about having a little more on the ball than that. At the very least, their editor should be fired. I know editors need to have college degrees."

"The Paper/Owner should be charged and shut down! Disgrace beyond Politics. It is a Murder threat!"

"By the way, ....................I'm part white."

You "fail to see how this is in any way controversial??"

Do you know who takes over.......?

Fart_Machine: It was the ad sales dept that farked up dipshait.

Now that I can believe. But most newpapers have editors, proofreaders, typesetters, etc. Even the small ones.

You really think there is none of that going on here?

I had one English class that veered off into journalism for a couple chapters. The only thing I remember is the teacher saying "somebody WILL read every word of the paper, every day".

The people who take classified ads are not journalists, Subby.

They're clerks. And they don't run ads by journalists before the ads appear.

/so, nice try
//but your attempt at a "statement" is trumped by your ignorance

bwesb: Freedom of speech includes the right to be an asshole.

This.

Yeap
Link (new window)
Link (new window)
Link (new window)Link (new window)

josephstalin: Not a threat. Saying you hope someone dies is not the same as saying you will make them die.

But when they wind up dead, who's the prime suspect? They'll at least get you on incitement charges, if not make you the scapegoat if they can't find the actual killer.

There was a local (Albany NY) paper called "The Lark" in the 70s & 80s.

In the December 1980 issue, there was a crude pencil drawing of Reagan, with a target on it, captioned "Only 40 More Assassination Days Left Until The Inaugaration".

All hell broke loose on Lark St. Every advertiser, as well as their employees were paid a visit by the secret service.

Every item in the magazine's office was siezed.

The 19 year old publisher's picture was placed everywhere as part of an interstate manhunt, and they finally arrested him in Hawaii, where he was on vacation
with his family.

He ended up avoiding doing time, but not massive lawyer bills, probation, and the closing of his magazine.

IlGreven: josephstalin: Not a threat. Saying you hope someone dies is not the same as saying you will make them die.

But when they wind up dead, who's the prime suspect? They'll at least get you on incitement charges, if not make you the scapegoat if they can't find the actual killer.

This.


/STOP PICKING ON MY PRECIOUS OBAMA!

What if they had said: "May Obama follow in the steps of Harrison, Taylor, Harding, and Roosevelt" ... I think that would have been more subtle.

Also, if you didn't realize the assertion when you saw that list, you should really re-read your history. I'm not even American and I got that one.

Fabric_Man: I read that and it didn't dawn on me right away that all those guys were assassinated. Give 'em a break!

Heh. Soon as I saw Lincoln and Kennedy, I looked up Garfield and McKinley to see if I was right, and yep. All assassinated.

I'm Canadian, btw.

Does NOT find this tread amusing:

IlGreven: josephstalin: Not a threat. Saying you hope someone dies is not the same as saying you will make them die.

But when they wind up dead, who's the prime suspect? They'll at least get you on incitement charges, if not make you the scapegoat if they can't find the actual killer.

No, that classified ad would never meet the established 'true threat doctrine' as no reasonable person would assume that the author meant to cause anyone harm. There is an immense difference between opining about the death of someone and actually inciting the death of someone.

In fact, there are several court cases regarding this subject.

The SCOTUS held in Watts v. United States that talking about the murder of a government official is protected speech as long as there is little likelihood that the talk will be acted upon.

They also ruled in Brandenburg v. Ohio that advocating violence was also protected unless it would lead to "imminent lawless action"

homeoftheblues: Does NOT find this thread amusing:

And no pic of the ad? Seriously?

Tr0mBoNe: What if they had said: "May Obama follow in the steps of Harrison, Taylor, Harding, and Roosevelt" ... I think that would have been more subtle.

Also, if you didn't realize the assertion when you saw that list, you should really re-read your history. I'm not even American and I got that one.

I got the connection right away.

Most people know about Lincoln and Kennedy. The fact that the story ended up on FARK should clue you in on Garfield and McKinley.

cchris_39: Now that I can believe. But most newpapers have editors, proofreaders, typesetters, etc. Even the small ones.

You really think there is none of that going on here?

I had one English class that veered off into journalism for a couple chapters. The only thing I remember is the teacher saying "somebody WILL read every word of the paper, every day".

The people who work in the ad department are not journalists.

I saw McKinley and Kennedy and thought, "um, something about Cuba?"

Kidding. I thought the commonality was pretty obvious. But I can't say the guy selling ads should necessarily have picked up on it.

Conservative, middle of the road Christian but...

DON'T THREATEN MY PRESIDENT!

Super Chronic: I saw McKinley and Kennedy and thought, "um, something about Cuba?"

Kidding. I thought the commonality was pretty obvious. But I can't say the guy selling ads should necessarily have picked up on it.

If they're a small paper it's probably some temp they found who could use Quark or InDesign.

I did not notice the vieled threat until I read the comments in this thread.

Hell, I even forgot Garfield was assassinated.

/I wish someone would assassinate that stupid cat though. Jim Davis is a hack.

netcentric: You "fail to see how this is in any way controversial??"

Do you know who takes over.......?

Who do you think placed the ad?

Really, Garfield should have tipped them off. There are only 2 reasons people know that name, and only one of those reasons is related to Presidents.

Barry Soetoro is a FAILURE.

kleppe: Secret service must be bored if they followed that one up.

They followed up on graffiti on the side of a self-storage building on the outer edges of Podunk Nowheresville, New Mexico when Clinton was in office. To say they investigate everything is putting it mildly. If you sneeze something about the President incorrectly and they get a call, you're doing a face to face interview at some point.

SockMonkeyHolocaust: A low-level ad salesperson took the account and text was cut and pasted into Quark/InDesign or the ad was supplied ready to be put in. No journalist saw that classified ad and I fail to see how this is in any way controversial.

Mostly true, but there are always proofreaders for all ads.