the information is incorrect, the analogy is incorrect, even the grammar (the descriptor should be "democratic") is incorrect. but the right of a political group--in this case the northern iowa tea party in mason city--to rent a space on which to announce their view, no matter how incorrect, must be upheld. in exactly the same way this must be allowed, and this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and even this. the criteria is not and should not be communal agreement or communal standards--were that the case only the blandest ideas could be communicated between communities, and maybe not even those--and while I'm uncomfortable that the default position is that willingness and ability to pay should be the deciding factor, that is the fairest position I can see. why then don't we see billboards in favor of, say, drugs? in some cases, we do. the solution, in good old-fashioned free market style, is that if a group or individual is offended by a billboard, purchase the same space or another to run something counter. as the sainted saul alinsky proclaimed, make the enemy fight by his own rules.
also, the irony of the unintended message is delightful.