Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dixie Chicks - Vindication

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Naturist Mark
    replied
    Gosh, even Tobey Keith agrees with the Chicks now.

    He "officially" ended his feud with Natalie Maines years ago, but still won't speak her name. However he now says he doesn't support the Iraq war "Never did," and despite being a Bush supporter in the last two elections remains a Democrat and counts New Mexico Governor and Presidential Candidate Bill Richardson as a close buddy.

    I'm sure Coltergeist is livid.

    -Mark

    Leave a comment:


  • nacktman
    replied
    Yep, vindication.

    Leave a comment:


  • nacktman
    replied
    Vidication, ya'hear.

    Leave a comment:


  • shomymojo
    replied
    I'm more of a classic rock fan myself...I probably could not identify a single country artist...or their music...same thing with rap...don't know any rappers...don't care...as the Bob Seger song says..." I like that old time rock and roll"

    Leave a comment:


  • WNYjoe17
    replied
    I applaud them for saying what they felt.
    I am sure they knew there would be consequences. Highest on the list is that they expressed an opionion that, at the time, was not held by the majority of people. In a forum such as this, we tend to see many of the participants share their views. But at that point in time, that was not the case in America in general. Their message was right then, as it is now. Only more people recognize it now. It would be real interersting to see how many people who vocally came out against them have now changed their tune; with all of the new information we have, and the way public opinion is different. But we will never see the same people publicly admit to being wrong.
    It's a little bit of vindication that they have won the awards they have now. But, for the most part, they really are separate issues.

    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • Naturist Mark
    replied
    quote:
    So far as the Dixie Chicks are concerned, I've always felt that much of the adverse reaction they got was due to having made such an insulting comment to a foreign audience.


    I don't.

    Have you ever heard of that standard being applied to anyone else before or since?

    It is the excuse the flying monkeys used to explain their outrage over what even they had to agree was free speech not worthy of having an act banned from the airwaves. But it is BS. No one expects neo-cons to be moderate in their views when they go abroad. No one condemned Bill O'Reilly for speaking ill of his opponents while roughing it in Iraq's Green Zone.

    -Mark

    Leave a comment:


  • G I Joe
    replied
    They are free to say what they want, I am free to say what I want, (I think) as long as it does not legally threaten or harm someone. Other than that, the Dixie Chicks are not worth commenting on.

    Leave a comment:


  • usmc1
    replied
    They said it, some of us applauded them. Some of you attempted to villify them and destroy their careers by joining in bans and boycotts and stupid PR stunts such as bulldozing their records.

    What was said was correct, some of us are not proud of Bush or the fact that he claims Texas residency. Many of us despise the dysfunctional little punk and the things he and his coven of neo-con hobgolins and trolls are doing to this country.

    They said what they had to say, they paid a certain price for it, and now they have been given a lot of recognition from the music industry.

    You don't like it, too bad so sad! I'm delighted for them, because in the context of the run up to the war and climate of mob hysteria that enabled the dry-drunk sociopath in the White House to get us there what they said and did was was incredibly courageous.

    And now, they are Vindicated! By an election, by public opinion, and by their peers.

    Don't like it. Get over it!

    Leave a comment:


  • luvnaturism
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by Swimguy: I find it interesting how so many people can see only one side of this issue. The whole Dixie Chicks issue was a true lesson in free speech issues. The Dixie Chicks were free to express their opinions. The general public was also right to express their disagreement or approval.


    I've been wondering if someone would see this distinction, and wondering why so many don't seem to get it.

    "Free speech" means little more than that you can say what you want, and the government won't come after you. Nowhere in there does it say that there may not be other consequences if your personal exercise of free speech meets with the disapproval of others who are significant in your life, such as your family, friends, employer or those who constitute the market for whatever it is you are selling. Each of those also has the right of free speech, which by extension often means that they can exercise the various means at their disposal to express their disapproval.

    There are indeed times of life when responsible people speak up and say what they think without counting the cost, but responsible people also don't randomly drive away friends, family, and careers by thoughtlessly spouting unpopular ideas on subjects that don't matter anyway.

    So far as the Dixie Chicks are concerned, I've always felt that much of the adverse reaction they got was due to having made such an insulting comment to a foreign audience. If they'd said the same thing in Dallas, my guess is that it wouldn't have made such waves.

    But now we're supposed to believe that getting an award for their music is somehow vindication for a rude remark that betrayed an utter lack of class? Give me a break. People don't hold grudges forever, and music should be judged on its own merits. That's all it means.

    Leave a comment:


  • usmc1
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by harveym:
    One of the most frightening bumper stickers that I have seen was on the back of a car full of what looked like High school students - 'Respect Authority'.


    You sure? I've seen Reject Authority, but not respect authority.

    Leave a comment:


  • hm0504
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by l2ltlarry:
    Yesterday on one of the Sunday morning political issues shows, Bush was quoted "I'm willing to listen to anybody who has a better idea on what to do in Iraq. I want to hear your ideas."


    Here's my idea. Give Bush and Cheney 9 months to do whatever they think needs to be done in Iraq. if they are not successful (as determined by Congress and the House of Reps), then they must both resign and let someone else try to sort things out.

    Leave a comment:


  • hm0504
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
    quote:
    The Dixie Chicks were free to express their opinions. The general public was also right to express their disagreement or approval.


    Interesting that there was no outrage or backlash against Willie Nelson, Kris Kristofferson, Merle Haggard, Tim McGraw or any other country artists who expressed just as negative opinions of our dear leader ... What makes them different from the Dixie Chicks?

    Anatomy?

    Of course the outrage was ginned up by the monolithic broadcast companies like Clear Channel and Infinity who own most of the radio stations across the nation. It was not a genuine fan based backlash - the Chicks continued success proves that.

    As for all those other guys who can and did say things just as forthright as the chicks - just goes to show that country music loves its rebels - as long as they have a penis.

    Taking My Country Back

    -Mark


    Good point!

    Leave a comment:


  • harveym
    replied
    One of the most frightening bumper stickers that I have seen was on the back of a car full of what looked like High school students - 'Respect Authority'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sanslines
    replied
    quote:
    My experience is, authorities (almost) always want to hear your ideas until they hear your ideas.


    Larry,

    It seems to take a special kind of person (man or woman) to maintain an open mind, listen respectfully to others knowing that what works for one person might not work for another, and work to achieve compromise. The problem with some men is that they are on their fragile little ego trips, will never open their minds, admit that they are wrong, and admit that everyone has something of value to offer. This problem exists not only on the political level but throughout society. This problem also seems to be more prevelant with older people as the younger generations tend to question authority and rules and are more inclined to challenge them. I think that this is ONE reason why most companies prefer to higher younger workers. The younger workers are perceived to be more open minded, able to think outside of the box, and are less resistant to change.

    Leave a comment:


  • l2ltlarry
    replied
    quote:
    Authority does not like to be challenged and to have its decisions, programs, or policies aired, challenged, dissected and criticized in pulic.
    Yesterday on one of the Sunday morning political issues shows, Bush was quoted "I'm willing to listen to anybody who has a better idea on what to do in Iraq. I want to hear your ideas."

    My experience is, authorities (almost) always want to hear your ideas until they hear your ideas. And then they don't want to hear your ideas. I think it's often to draw people out so they can get a better bead on them. To get people who think differently than the authorities to out themselves, giving authorities their opportunity to "take control of you and put you in your place (as one of my former bosses told me in our first one-on-one getting-to-know-you session)."

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X