The phrase "No Regrets" in a Times headline is usually code for "The Opinion of the Times Editors Is That The Person Claiming They Have No Regrets Darned Well Should Have Some Regrets." A classic example is "Tony Blair on Iraq: 'No Regrets.'"
The latest target of this practice is (surprise!) a Republican candidate for mayor of New York, Joseph Lhota, who gets the treatment today on page one of the Times in a headline that reads, "For Mayoral Hopeful Who Lost Fight to Remove Art, No Regrets." The article discusses Mr. Lhota's effort during the Giuliani administration to prevent a Brooklyn Museum exhibit of a dung-smeared, pornography-decorated image of Mary. The article draws an unfavorable comparison between Mr. Lhota and Mayor Bloomberg:
Now, as Mr. Lhota promotes himself as a moderate Republican candidate for mayor of New York with urban sensibilities that the national party lacks, his handling of the episode stands out as a deeply discordant moment, raising questions about how he would operate in a diverse city whose current mayor champions unpleasant speech from every quarter.
The claim that Mayor Bloomberg "champions unpleasant speech from every quarter" is inaccurate. This is the same mayor who sent police forcibly to clear the "Occupy Wall Street" protesters out of a plaza in Lower Manhattan, the same one who is trying to prevent retail stores from displaying tobacco products in what the stores argue is a restriction of their commercial speech rights (the ban applies to the display, not the sale, so how exactly is it different from Mr. Lhota's effort to prevent the display of the artwork at the Brooklyn museum?).
A summary on the Times Web site of the article about Mr. Lhota describes the Brooklyn Museum conflict as "one episode in a continuing battle over free speech." The article itself gives a less one-sided description than the summary, describing it as a "showdown over free speech, respect for religion, and public financing of the arts."