Controversy Surrounds Billboard Up in Detroit.

[Torie]

1. Billboards suck in general. They should be zoned out of existence.

2. This billboard conveys a message that is once nationalistic (America First!), and bigoted (singling out another state with a special identity). So it especially sucks.

3. I can see the Trump billboards now with the same theme, just inserting Mexico and China in lieu of Israel. I wonder what the reaction would be to those billboards?

[Torie]

So Torie do you support the laws of Vermont, Oregon, Hawaii and Alaska? Those states ban all billboards.

Of course!  I might add that outside the venue of that hideous excrescence of a town without zoning laws right next to Hudson known as Greenport, Columbia County is largely a billboard free zone.

[Torie]

So it's now suddenly Israel's fault that Israel is surrounded by hostile countries that require billions of dollars in foreign aid to not attempt to exterminate six million more Jews. Gotcha.

Good God dude!
Show some dignity and stop whining like a freaking baby.

I'm not the one taking up most of this thread pissing and moaning about "muh tax dollars" when 9% of 1% of the US budget goes to military assistance to Israel.

The idea being offered here with the 18% figure is to cut off aid to all countries in the region including Egypt, and yes, there is no offset for whatever the economic benefits the US gets from arms sales financed from the aid. This is mostly an exercise in venting about dislike of Israel's policies, and nothing to do with the de minimus numbers relatively speaking, and thus the discussion is a mess, as Israel gets conflated with the whole region, and so forth. It's about as useful as the content of the sign itself in my opinion.

[Torie]

So it's now suddenly Israel's fault that Israel is surrounded by hostile countries that require billions of dollars in foreign aid to not attempt to exterminate six million more Jews. Gotcha.

Considering that Israel is a country created by Zionists settling in territory that prior to the Zionist movement had been largely populated to Arabs, I'd say it is indeed Israel's fault that it is surrounded by hostile countries. While that doesn't excuse that hostility or the potential results of it, it certainly explains it.

I'm not really sure what the alternative was supposed to be? Most of the other proposals were hilariously colonialist ideas that would have likely failed, or ideas that essentially amounted to deportation to a far-off hellhole at the mercy of a hostile power. And staying put certainly wasn't an option, given the murder sprees targeting the small remaining population in Europe. So if it's anyone's fault, I would say it's Europe's for forcing them into that situation.

There's the United States, Europe post-Holocaust (lol @ "murder sprees! jews! ") or really anywhere else. I don't know how disconnected from reality you are, Rubio Republican, but seeing as you're literally blaming Europe for the Jews choosing to go to Palestine and antagonizing literally every single one of their neighbors, I'm going to guess that this is a pretty bad case.

Please read this. Facts matter.

[Torie]

Please read this. Facts matter.

From your link...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stuff sucked for a lot of people.  Only one group though got an entire country magically created for them.  Time for equality.  Time to treat Israel like everyone else.

Notice the date there? Specifically, it was in June, 1948, one month after the State of Israel had come into existence. A bit late don't you think? Actually, when it came to the Jews during that horrible period, almost everything was a bit late tragically. Anyway, thanks for playing. I am done participating in this thread. I find it quite disgusting actually. I need a bath.

[Torie]

So Torie do you support the laws of Vermont, Oregon, Hawaii and Alaska? Those states ban all billboards.

Oregon has restrictions on billboards (placement, how many can be erected statewide, etc.), but the state's ban on them was overturned in 2006 by the State Supreme Court on the grounds of violating freedom of speech.

Was it a blanket ban, or a selective ban? I can see speech issues with a selective ban, but not a blanket ban, the purpose of which is aesthetics neutrally applied. And indeed, in googling the matter, it was a selective ban. That dog won't hunt - ever. Just get rid of all of the buggers, and life is beautiful, not only aesthetically, but legally.

[Torie]

And I don't see why this is a case for a ban on billboards, personally. It's offensive, especially given the historical context of "America first" being a Nazi sympathizer group, but the best response is to fight back louder and with the truth.

Just to be clear, I hate billboards in general, and the predicate for their ban would have nothing to do with the content of some of them being offensive to some or most people. Rather it is about aesthetics.