The mural asked for it!!

Conservatives loathe the New York Times as a bastion of Marxist doctrine. Liberals often confuse the paper's generally good reporting as a consistent source of objective reporting. On a day like today, one can easily see that both are wrong.

Times reporter Steven Greenhouse took notice of Maine Governor's Paul LePage's most recent outlandish behavior. LePage recently took exception to a mural depicting workers in the state's Department of Labor Office as being pro-union propaganda. Of course, this is absurd, as one can judge simply by reading Greenhouse's article.

If you squint, you can see Vladimir Lenin!

Pointing out that LePage acts like a cartoonish moron isn't hard to do: This tax cheat "won" election with a whopping 38.2 percent off the vote in November, and has taken his 9,000 vote margin of victory as a clear mandate ever since. But that's not the issue here.

The headline of the article is a passive sentence. It reads: "Mural of Maine's Workers Becomes Political Target." How exactly did it "become" a political target? Who, outside of the John Birch Society, would see a painting of a shoemaker, a lumberjack, Rosie the Riveter and striking paper mill workers as pro-union? Half of those professions predate workers unions! And Rosie the Riveter? Has LePage no decency? (That's a rhetorical question. Obviously, he does not).

Aside from the fact that passive sentences are grammatically incorrect, the headline gives the impression that Paul LePage is merely passive in attacking this artwork as "pro-union propaganda." Apparently, he saw a rendition of the iconic Rosie the Riveter and couldn't help but scream "Communism!"

The problem is not with artwork but with LePage himself. To say otherwise would be akin to writing: "attractive women in skirts invite themselves to sexual assault." If the Times were to run that headline, the public would rightly excoriate the editorial judgment of running such a headline--regardless as to the content of the article.

Women do not "invite" themselves to sexual assault anymore than this particular mural "invites" itself to political controversy. And I'm willing to bet that a good reporter like Greenhouse didn't write this awful headline--that was probably done by an editor for the paper. Perhaps this editor didn't want to appear biased, but let's face it, calling LePage an anti-union shmuck who will stop at nothing in his pursuit of attacking worker's rights isn't biased--it's objective reporting based on facts. And if by some reason this is spelled out in the headline, then so be it.

*Although somewhat tangential,  fans of art and/or history can't help but be reminded of Diego Rivera's lost mural, "Man at the Crossroads." Nelson Rockefeller contracted the great muralist to paint a huge mural at Radio City Music Hall, then objected because Rivera included Vladimir Lenin in the mural. Unable to reach an agreement with Rivera, the mural was destroyed. Why? Would anyone have seen the mural and said, "wow, Nelson Rockefeller is a communist? I had no idea!" Certainly no one outside the John Birch Society!