I really HATE alarmist sounding statements but I am having a hard time seeing how this can be construed in any other way...
The story straight from the artist involved:
Here is the 'mission' of the NEA:
The National Endowment for the Arts is a public agency dedicated to supporting excellence in the arts, both new and established; bringing the arts to all Americans; and providing leadership in arts education. Established by Congress in 1965 as an independent agency of the federal government, the Endowment is the nation's largest annual funder of the arts, bringing great art to all 50 states, including rural areas, inner cities, and military bases.
I cannot understand why people who were upset over issues such as The Patriot Act and other government iniatives/policies that they felt were potentially intrusive on their rights and privacy--how are they NOT upset over the kind of things that are coming out of this administration as well??
The very same government that they say has oppressed and disenfranchised millions they now trust to do right by them?
From January 2006 by Kevin R. Kosar:
But, what of federal propaganda directed towards domestic audiences? A near century-old law (5 U.S.C. 3107) prohibits federal funds from being “used for the compensation of any publicity expert unless specifically appropriated for that purpose.” And annual appropriations acts often include provisions stating “No part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not heretofor authorized by Congress.” Together, these prohibitions might seem like a formidable bulwark against federal agencies and officers engaged in activities to promote government policies and people.