The Great Suppression: Republicans Clampdown On Art

The Republican Party likes to pretend that they are the defenders of individual freedom in America. Of course, that is a pretense that has never true. Their vocal protestations about government being “on your back” only apply to regulations aimed at corporations and taxes on the wealthy. The GOP has no problem with government leaping onto the backs of women seeking reproductive health care, or gays who want equality in marriage and military service, or kids who want to attend school without someone else’s religion forced down their souls.

In short, the GOP wants businesses to have the absolute freedom to run rampant over a population that is straight-jacketed by federal guardians of morality. And that constricting philosophy extends to the free expression of artists as well. Conservatives have long-held the view that the creative community is dangerous and subversive, and they must be silenced. They acted on those views when they blacklisted artists in the 1940’s and 1950’s. And today they are pressing hard to shut down public broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts. But it doesn’t stop there.

There have been some recent incidents that ought to stir outrage among Americans who value free expression and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Public figures have been stepping on the rights of artists in an official capacity and it is repugnant and un-American.


A few years ago, Secretary of State Colin Powell was scheduled to give a speech at the United Nations to make the case by the Bush administration for going to war against Iraq. Prior to the speech he had aides cover up a tapestry depicting Picasso’s painting, Guernica. Powell was not going to make an argument for war in front of such a powerful and iconic anti-war statement.

Bush’s Attorney General, John Ashcroft, held press conferences in the Justice Department in a hall where the statue “Spirit of Justice” had stood for decades. In 2002 he ordered that the statue, a female representation of justice with one bare breast exposed, be covered by a drape. It’s not clear whether he was worried more about this being embarrassing or arousing.

Earlier this year, Paul LePage, the governor of Maine, had a mural removed from the Maine Department of Labor. The mural depicted scenes of Maine’s working citizens and the history of labor in the state. Obviously it has no business taking up space in the Labor Department.

And just this week, Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin removed a painting from the governor’s residence. The painting was of children from diverse backgrounds and was meant to remind the residents of that home, which belongs to the people of Wisconsin, of the impact their work has real families. Now Walker won’t have to be concerned with that unless he runs into some in person, in which case he’ll have much more to be concerned about.

The brazen insensitivity of public officials censoring messages that were meant to inspire openness and a devotion to service is appalling. These people are not only offending the artists and the citizens whose views are being represented, they are astonishingly tone-deaf to the political backlash that was easily anticipated.

Republicans can’t seem to get enough censorship. It weaves through the party from state houses to the White House. There is even a current speculative candidate for the GOP nomination for presidency in 2012 who has a low regard for free speech.

Rudy Giuliani: An exhibition of paintings is not as communicative as speech, literature or live entertainment, and the artists’ constitutional interest is thus minimal.

That was Giuliani arguing in court to ban artists from displaying their work on the streets of New York City. His argument is that, while evangelists predicting the end of the world and banjo pluckers strumming out strains of My Clementine are protected by the Constitution, artists are not. That’s all America needs now is a president who doesn’t think that art is communication or that it is protected by the Constitution. Welcome to the Dark Ages.

Murdoch Media Ignores Charges Against Fox News Boss Roger Ailes


Yesterday the New York Times published a bombshell story revealing allegations that Fox News chairman Roger Ailes asked an employee to lie to federal investigators to protect a close friend and political comrade.

The article said that Ailes had asked Judith Regan, then head of a publishing unit at News Corp’s HarperCollins, to conceal her affair with Bernard Kerik, whom President Bush had nominated to be Secretary of Homeland Security. Kerik was an associate of former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani who was mounting a presidential campaign. Giuliani was a friend of Ailes.

Giuliani’s nascent campaign might have been grounded before takeoff if news of Kerik’s affair had gotten out. Plus, there were concerns that Regan had information about Giuliani that would also have been embarrassing for the candidate.

Fragments of this story were revealed in a lawsuit that Regan had filed after Ailes fired her, but no names were disclosed. The new story in the Times fingers Ailes as the executive who had told Regan to lie to investigators.

This revelation could have harsh consequences for Ailes. His actions may constitute a federal crime. Short of that, it could impact his status at Fox News. Having a chairman who is potentially a criminal, and whose alleged criminal activity was aimed at protecting a political ally, is not the sort of thing a news network ought to condone. Lucky for Ailes, the only thing his network has to do with news is that they put it on their logo.

In keeping with their aversion to reporting the news, Fox News has blacked out any coverage of the story about Ailes. This story has been picked up by dozens of news enterprises including the New York Daily News, Forbes, USA Today, Politico, and the Hollywood Reporter, since having been reported first by the Times. But in the Murdoch empire it doesn’t exist. It is unquestionably newsworthy subject matter involving the head of one of the nation’s biggest media companies. It contains all the elements of compelling reading, including crime, sex, and political and corporate intrigue. Yet there has been no sign of it on Fox News, or in the Wall Street Journal, or in the New York Post, or on Fox Business Network. Neither has it been covered by notable conservative news outfits like the Washington Times, or Andrew Breitbart’s “Big” sites, or WorldNetDaily, or Human Events, or National Review, or NewsMax, or the Weekly Standard.

Perhaps even more disturbing is the fact that there has yet to be any mention of this by the big broadcast networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC. These networks in the past have taken pains to cover for Fox News when it has been under attack for shoddy and biased reporting. There seems to be a mutual defense treaty in the television news community that calls for members to support one another, even though Fox isn’t actually a news network by objective standards. But what other explanation is there for the broadcast nets to ignore this story while their colleagues in print are all over it?

This is our so-called “liberal” media at work. The chairman of the top cable news network is accused of a federal crime that involves political shenanigans, and much of the press averts their eyes and waves it off. And while the media at large deserve criticism for not honestly informing the public, the Murdoch empire earns extra condemnation for hypocrisy. After all, they have unrestricted access to the subject of this scandal, yet they choose to shield him.

[Update:] The industry trade paper AdWeek confirms that News Corp has failed to report on the allegations against Ailes.

Giuliani and McCain’s Nightmare On Pennsylvania Ave

Rudy Giuliani, the leader of the 9/11 Generation, and John McCain, the Beast of Baghdad, are starring together in this election year’s most TERROR-ifying fright fest. Nightmare On Pennsylvania Avenue is certain to scare the daylights out of everybody who sees it – especially Democrats who are already shuddering at the thought.

Nightmare on Pennsylvania Ave

Don’t miss the extravaganza that has Bill O’Reilly saying:

“There is a chance that before this presidential election year is over somebody is going to get hurt.” ~ Bill O’Reilly

Here is John McCain’s new ad boasting that he is the Democrat’s worst enemy:

Here is Rudy Giuliani’s earlier ad boasting that he is the Democrat’s worst enemy:

News Corpse will maintain it’s neutrality and simply concede that they are both pretty awful and they are both enemies.

Their heroes are looking more pathetic with every passing day. Huckabee props up Chuck Norris, a 68 year old high kicker who is supposed to make us vote for Rev. Mike or he’ll beat us up behind the cafeteria during recess. McCain has his own 62 year old relic who will challenge Huckabee’s champion ala Gamera vs. Mothra at the Monster Leisure World in Boca. What’s next? Illegal Alien Vs. Terrorist Predator?

Not much we can do but sit back and watch as they threaten to destroy us or each other or whoever is their enemy of the moment. It’s not art, but with a bucket of popcorn and a large soda it might just be some fun.

Rudy’s 9/11 Generation

If you thought Rudy Giuliani couldn’t get more crass in his exploitation of the tragic attack on September 11, 2001, you underestimate Rudy. On the second day of the new year he proves that there is no bottom to his well of puke.

Rudy 911

“I think it wouldn’t be unfair to describe us as the 9/11 generation, because how we handle this is going to say something about us in history.”

That’s right, Rudy thinks that the entire current population should be defined by a single, horrible day that represents both the hatred of a small tribe of barbarous extremists, and the woeful unpreparedness of an incompetent and illegitimate administration. I think I’ll stick with Baby Boomer.

Rudy Giuliani: American Fascist

Rudy Giuliani is blazing a trail for himself in Republican circles as he vies for the nomination of his party for president. The former mayor who marched in gay pride parades and supported abortion is now reinventing himself as Mr. Conservative. Unfortunately for him, some conservatives aren’t waiting to welcome him into their ranks. The American Conservative magazine, co-founded by uber-rightist Pat Buchanan, is featuring America’s Player on the cover of its current issue. Their characterization of him as a fascist 9/11 monger isn’t particularly flattering. And neither are the articles accompanying the illustration.

In Declaring Forever War, Michael C. Desch writes that “Giuliani has surrounded himself with advisors who think the Bush Doctrine didn’t go nearly far enough.” Desch is no wild-eyed liberal. He is a professor at the George Bush School of Government at Texas A&M. His article reminds readers of Giuliani’s national security failures as mayor such as:

“…his decision to locate the city’s counterterrorism center in the World Trade Center, which had already been the target of an al-Qaeda terrorist attack in 1993; his failure to integrate the fire and police communications systems; his penchant for surrounding himself with sketchy characters like Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik […] He dropped out of the blue-ribbon Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group because it cut into his paid speechmaking.”

Tom Piatak is the author of GOP Loses Its Life. Piatak warns that a Giuliani victory would spell defeat for the social conservatives that have propped up Republicans since the Reagan years:

“If Giuliani becomes the party’s standard-bearer and is then elected, the informal prohibition against pro-choice candidates within the GOP will be shattered, and the power of social conservatives within the party will inevitably decline.”

Surprisingly, Glenn Greenwald, a well-respected progressive, was accorded the space to opine that “…it is hard to imagine a more toxic combination than Rudy Giuliani and the Oval Office.” His column, Authoritarian Temptation, is a frightening account of how Giuliani’s dictatorial style would translate should he ascend to a White House that has been altered by eight years of Bush era precendents:

“Giuliani, when he was merely in charge of New York’s garbage collection, zoning rules, and a municipal police force, developed a reputation as a power-hungry, dissent-intolerant authoritarian, obsessed with secrecy and expanding his own power.”

The fact that a magazine called American Conservative is taking shots at the Republican front-runner is worthy of notice. But even more noteworthy is the theme that Giuliani is viewed by conservatives as a tyrant in the making. This is consistent with the conclusions of Rachel Morris’ Washington Monthly article, Rudy Awakening, that claims that “As president, Giuliani would grab even more executive power than Bush and Cheney.” It is also consistent with Giuliani’s own perverse vision of freedom:

Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.”

Freedom is about submission. And Orwell is spinning in his grave.

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Giuliani: Still Corrupt, Still Immoral

Last month The Politico published a story that escalated into one of the sleaziest scandals of the current campaign season. The story revealed that Rudy Giuliani had been secretly slipping off to the Hamptons with his mistress, Judy Nathan. There were also allegations that the costs of those trysts were improperly charged to obscure city offices.

This morning, the New York Times weighed in with its own account of Rudy’s accounting. The Times seems to conclude that it was unlikely that there was any mischief in Rudy’s travel expenses. [Link to graphic scan of the article]

This quasi-revelation has set off a mini-storm of rash exclamations of vindication and denunciations of the “liberal” media for their unscrupulous attacks on America’s Player, er…Mayor. Web sites like the PowerLine Blog and Townhall are shocked – shocked I say – at the mistreatment Giuliani has suffered.

There’s only one problem: Giuliani has not been vindicated at all. The only thing the Times has uncovered is that the majority of the funds spent on Rudy and Judy’s holidays were charged to the Mayor’s expense account. How exactly does that excuse him from spending city money on seaside sex romps? The Times doesn’t even rule out the possibility that some of the expenses were indeed charged to agencies that regulate lofts and assist the disabled. The article even admits that up to $40,000 is entirely unaccounted for.

In light of this, why are rightist bloggers asking “Where Does He Go to Get His Reputation Back?” Why is Chris Matthews asking an even more idiotic variation on this inane theme, “Where Does He Go to Get His 10 Points Back?”

Setting aside the fact that Giuliani is still guilty of misusing city funds, his apologists are conveniently forgetting the moral component of this story. Let me remind them: Rudy Giuliani was cheating on his wife. In the Republican Party that is probably a more heinous crime than robbing the city treasury.

Giuliani is not entitled to his reputation back (such as it was) because he is still culpable for making his constituents finance his romances. And he is not entitled to any polling points back because he lost them due to his slack morals, which are still in evidence. And hacks like Chris Matthews ought to think things through before making bigger asses of themselves than they were to begin with.

Rudy Call

Mr. 9/11 is burnishing his credentials with an accounting scandal to go along with his sex scandal and his terrorist association scandal and his corrupt police commissioner scandal and…

From Politico:
“As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records.”

Judith Regan’s Latest Blockbuster Busts News Corp

With a cast of characters that includes Rudy Giuliani, Rupert Murdoch, and Judith Regan, a tale is being woven that starts off better than any novel by Melville, Hemingway or Steinbeck – put together!

“This action arises from a deliberate smear campaign orchestrated by one of the largest media conglomerates for the sole purpose of destroying one woman’s credibility and reputation. This smear campaign was necessary to advance News Corp.’s political agenda, which has long centered on Giuliani’s presidential ambitions.”

This is the Introduction to a lawsuit filed (pdf) by Judith Regan against publisher HarperCollins and its parent, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. The lawsuit was filed by Regan in response to her having been fired in the wake of the aborted publication of O. J. Simpson’s imagined confessional “If I Did It.” The ripples from this wave are certain to roil the waters around both News Corp and the presidential ambitions of Giuliani.

Enter Bernie Kerik, Giuliani’s Police Commissioner whom Giuliani recommended to President Bush to be the first Director of Homeland Security. That appointment was scuttled due to Kerik being waist high in the sort of corruption that just got him indicted for multiple felonies. It seems that Regan and Kerik were sparking a little heat of their own. That revelation has made some folks nervous.

“Defendants were well aware that Regan had a personal relationship with Kerik. In fact, a senior executive in the News Corp. organization told Regan that he believed that she had information about Kerik that, if disclosed, would harm Giuliani’s presidential campaign. This executive advised Regan to lie to, and to withhold information from, investigators concerning Kerik”

This story has blockbuster written all over it. There is drama, intrigue, betrayal, corruption, money and sex. If Fox were not so inextricably intertwined in it, this would be a perfect subject for them. The News Corp executive (whom Regan does not name) that directed Regan to lie to Secret Service agents gathering data on a prospective cabinet member is potentially guilty of unlawful intimidation and deception. If true, what’s left of Fox News’ credibility is irredeemably lost (admittedly not a big loss for them).

It remains to seen how this will impact Giuliani who has been all but anointed by Fox as the Republican nominee. The New York Times reported earlier this year on the close relationship between Giuliani, Fox News and News Corp honcho, Roger Ailes. Giuliani has been a frequent guest on Fox, particularly the Hannity and Colmes program. His appearances far outstrip his Republican rivals:

“Mr. Giuliani’s on-air time on Fox [115 minutes] was 25 percent greater than that of his Republican competitor Mitt Romney, and nearly double that of Senator John McCain of Arizona. Fred D. Thompson, who has yet to formally announce his candidacy, came in second to Mr. Giuliani with 101 minutes of Fox interviews.”

Besides the valuable airtime Hannity contributes, he also headlined a $250.00 a plate fund raiser for Giuliani. Then there is Rudy’s personal relationship with Ailes, the Chairman of Fox News:

“Mr. Ailes was the media consultant to Mr. Giuliani’s first mayoral campaign in 1989. Mr. Giuliani, as mayor, officiated at Mr. Ailes’s wedding and intervened on his behalf when Mr. Ailes’s company, Fox News Channel, was blocked from securing a cable station in the city.”

It will be interesting to see how all of this unfolds. Kerik is already facing serious charges for his unscrupulous misadventures. Giuliani’s house of cards is only just beginning to wobble. But the real cliffhanger is News Corp and Fox News. How will they fare after being accused of threatening Regan to secure her silence regarding Kerik and Giuliani? Will regulators take any of this under consideration with regards to the Dow Jones acquisition? How will the media report the details of this lurid scandal that marries elements of the media (Fox News) and the government (Giuliani, Kerik) with the tabloid exploits of the “Golden Vagina” as Regan was known to her critics at News Corp.

The good news is that Fox’s reputation for honest and impartial journalism is not in jeopardy because, of course, they have no such reputation. Thus, it may not surprise many that they have suborned perjury, intimidated witnesses and clandestinely supported a presidential candidate who was a friend and benefactor. I just wonder when the conservative population in this country, who have prided themselves on the virtues of law and order, will finally surrender to the fact that Murdoch and Co. are a criminal syndicate that simply cannot be trusted.

Update: Giuliani’s non-denial denial: “I don’t respond to the story at all. I don’t know anything about it, and it sounds to me like kind of a gossip column story more than a real story.”

Plus, Regan reportedly has “juicy” tapes that bolster her account of the events detailed in her lawsuit.

Giuliani: Artists’ Constitutional Interest Minimal


Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani has a record of authoritarian positions on crime, foreign policy and terrorism. His tendency toward dictatorial rule extends even to the arts. In 1997 he argued a case against street artists in New York saying:

“An exhibition of paintings is not as communicative as speech, literature or live entertainment, and the artists’ constitutional interest is thus minimal.”

All America needs now is a president who doesn’t think that art is communication or that it is protected by the Constitution. Welcome to the Dark Ages.

Giuliani: I Am MoveOn’s Worst Nightmare

The MoveOn advertisement challenging General Petraeus’ congressional testimony is continuing to stir up dust. After drawing heat from Fox News war apologists like Bill O’Reilly, and taking fire from Dick Cheney, and being threatened with deportation by John McCain, and having GOP congressman Tom Davis call for hearings, now another Republican presidential candidate has weighed in with a unique fund raising scheme.

Rudy Giuliani has already hit MoveOn with an ad that attacks both the advocacy group and Hillary Clinton. He has also made comments that trample that pesky Constitutional notion of free speech. Now he is on the attack again, this time wrapping his assault in a plea for campaign donations:

“Why is MoveOn attacking Rudy Giuliani? Because he’s their worst nightmare. They know Rudy is a Republican who can beat the Democrats.”

This radio campaign is accompanied by an Internet keyword campaign that delivers Rudy’s anti-MoveOn message when searching for either “MoveOn” or “Hillary Clinton” on Google.

Many candidates are using Google AdWords in their ad campaigns. But Rudy is using keywords that are associated with his opponents to bring attention to himself. In fact, searching for keyword combinations of his own name return only ads for his campaign web site with no mention of MoveOn or Clinton.

Several weeks ago, the media was aghast that John Edwards would include appeals for donations after he and his wife Elizabeth were attacked by Ann Coulter, though his fund raising was limited to his web site and emails to his supporters. Do you think the press will respond with equivalent indignation now that a Republican candidate is doing the same thing in an even more brazen fashion?