The Dixie Chicks reach the top of their field by speaking truth to power

[The_Professor]

Lots of idea polarization here. They are free to say what they want as I am free to present opinions as to their views, sometimes that represents itselfe via the wallet, other times via the spoken, or in this case the WRITTEN, word.

I did not like Bill Clinrton's positions on many issues yet I did not advocate his impeachment as others here have or made the crass comments I hear here. If a Republican-leaning entertainer would have gone overeas to a foreign audience during wartime acitvities duirng the Clinton Adminsitration, made comments as they did, I would have said the same, namely that treason was now present.

It is the state of wat that determines the difference. Now, would I have them flogged, etc., OF COUSE NOT. They are private citizens. But, it was , in my opinion, still a treasonous act. I would not have done this, even during the Clinton Administration; I expect them to behave themselves by this standard, namely my own.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Disagreeing with the president or any other politician is not treason. Treason would be revealing secret battle plans or providing weapons to the enemy.

Treason is a serious crime. The Dixie Chicks committed no crime, one of them just suggested that as a Texan, she was ashamed of Juniorbush. That is not treason by any possible definition.

[Mucho]

Lots of idea polarization here. They are free to say what they want as I am free to present opinions as to their views, sometimes that represents itselfe via the wallet, other times via the spoken, or in this case the WRITTEN, word.

I did not like Bill Clinrton's positions on many issues yet I did not advocate his impeachment as others here have or made the crass comments I hear here. If a Republican-leaning entertainer would have gone overeas to a foreign audience during wartime acitvities duirng the Clinton Adminsitration, made comments as they did, I would have said the same, namely that treason was now present.

It is the state of wat that determines the difference. Now, would I have them flogged, etc., OF COUSE NOT. They are private citizens. But, it was , in my opinion, still a treasonous act. I would not have done this, even during the Clinton Administration; I expect them to behave themselves by this standard, namely my own.
[/quote

Criticizing an American Pres , whether at home or abroad , isnt treason. In fact it is one of the most American  things anyone can do. I didnt think the criticism of Clinton was treason , only fucking stupid. Your standards are those of a typical fascist and therefore suck.

[Plane]

The Chicks are not played by the vast majority of country music stations, but are now being played by rock stations.

I'm glad for them. Whether one supported the war or not, they didn't deserve the treatment they received. The ladies have talent and at the end of the day that is what matters in the business.

I drove home from work the other day and listened to a country song about a woman who had a cheating lover. She decided to key her name into his 4 x 4, cut his tires, and take her Louisville slugger to his windows, while he danced with his mistress.

I wonder, what does that teach young women? (though I applaud the use of traditional ash over aluminum in bat choice)

Yet, censoring a much better musically talented band (and it is honestly difficult to argue that they aren't, even if you dislike what Natalie said) is acceptable.

I'm glad for them.

The Dixie Chicks had a hit of that type , though in theirs Earl actually  dies , it made money in the country circuit.

It is too bad , if you beleive that they are especially musicly talented ,that they were not recognised as tremendous talents by the Grammys untill there was a political reason to do so, it kinda places an asertisk.

The betrayal felt and the betrayal done is pretty much a one way thing and is not reciprocated, I havent heard of President Bush saying anything negative about the Dixie Chicks .

[Mucho]

>>It is too bad , if you beleive that they are especially musicly talented ,that they were not recognised as tremendous talents by the Grammys untill there was a political reason to do so, it kinda places an asertisk.<<

Sometimes greatness comes out of adversity. The Chicks were nothing more than a good (which means mediocre everywhere else) C&W group. Being persecuted by their former shallow and evil fans brought out the best in them as it does with many artists. There will be no asterisk here that isnt a star for bravery and resilience.



>>The betrayal felt and the betrayal done is pretty much a one way thing and is not reciprocated, I havent heard of President Bush saying anything negative about the Dixie Chicks<<

The chickenshit fascist asshole is probly afraid to confront them

[The_Professor]

The frequent use of profanity displays a lack of judgement and lack of intellectual acumen. But, that is okay. Many in the population base are of substandard intelligence anyway.

[Plane]

Lots of idea polarization here. They are free to say what they want as I am free to present opinions as to their views, sometimes that represents itselfe via the wallet, other times via the spoken, or in this case the WRITTEN, word.

I did not like Bill Clinrton's positions on many issues yet I did not advocate his impeachment as others here have or made the crass comments I hear here. If a Republican-leaning entertainer would have gone overeas to a foreign audience during wartime acitvities duirng the Clinton Adminsitration, made comments as they did, I would have said the same, namely that treason was now present.

It is the state of wat that determines the difference. Now, would I have them flogged, etc., OF COUSE NOT. They are private citizens. But, it was , in my opinion, still a treasonous act. I would not have done this, even during the Clinton Administration; I expect them to behave themselves by this standard, namely my own.

There are Republicn leaning entertainers.
But are there none so crass?

[Mucho]

The frequent use of profanity displays a lack of judgement and lack of intellectual acumen. But, that is okay. Many in the population base are of substandard intelligence anyway.

You sound just like the little old lady you surely must be.(With apologies to real little old ladies who surely  have more balls than  this guy  )

[Mucho]

[

There are Republicn leaning entertainers.
But are there none so crass?

Nearly all fascist leaning entertainers are mediocre at best From sub-B 'Movie Star" Raygun  to the sunburst hatted kid rock. Real artists being able to perceive reality better than most are usually of a liberal bent. They do not wallow in their shallow ignorance like RWers.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I havent heard of President Bush saying anything negative about the Dixie Chicks .
================================================

There would be absolutely NO reason for him to do so, and there is every reason for him not to do so.
It would be incredibly stupid for a president to get into a verbal fight with any pop entertainer.

Maybe if Mike Tyson killed, roasted AND ATE someone, then there would be a reson to speak out...
Pretty much everyone is agreed that murderous cannibals are a negative force.
===================================================
Nearly all fascist leaning entertainers are mediocre at best From sub-B 'Movie Star" Raygun  to the sunburst hatted kid rock. Real artists being able to perceive reality better than most are usually of a liberal bent. They do not wallow in their shallow ignorance like RWers

I disagree on this. Reagan was a pretty good actor in his day, though not a Cary Grant or a Gregory Peck.
John Wayne was entertaining in most of his films. Charlton Heston was extremely good in Soylent Green and even better in that film where he played two crazy trapper twin brothers in Alaska.

The problem with ratwing actors would be that some might chose to take parts in films that would eventually be seen as just plain dumb (Red Dawn or perhaps those Left Behind books).

Kristofferson managed to be in that awful ABC-TV series Amerika as well as the horrible Heaven's Gate, and he is a bit of a Liberal. Bad casting can wreck an actor. A script can read well and still make a stinker as a film.

An actor's talent does not seem to be very tied to his political beliefs to me.

[Amianthus]

I disagree on this. Reagan was a pretty good actor in his day, though not a Cary Grant or a Gregory Peck.
John Wayne was entertaining in most of his films. Charlton Heston was extremely good in Soylent Green and even better in that film where he played two crazy trapper twin brothers in Alaska.

Jimmy Stewart was always one of my favorites.

[_JS]

Buddy Ebsen was great and very talented beyond the Beverly Hillbillies role.

I've honestly never understood this fascination with the politics of entertainers. Emmylou Harris and Willie Nelson tend to be leftwing in their politics, for example, but I'd bet they both have a lot of fans from all parts of the political spectrum.

I know it isn't PC at the moment, but I'll say that I very much liked The Passion of the Christ and I give Gibson a lot of credit for the film and I could care less about the guy's politics.

That was my point with the Dixie Chicks. They are talented ladies, and basically mix a lot of bluegrass talent with country style.

The Dixie Chicks had a hit of that type , though in theirs Earl actually  dies , it made money in the country circuit.

Plane, that was my point (and I'm glad you brought up that very song). For the Country Stations it is very hypocritical to act as though this is some sort of moral principle.

It is too bad , if you beleive that they are especially musicly talented ,that they were not recognised as tremendous talents by the Grammys untill there was a political reason to do so, it kinda places an asertisk.

The Dixie Chicks won nine grammies before winning any this year. I think they simply had more notoriety with this year's awards. They've also won 10 CMA awards, but of course the CMA doesn't particularly care for them now

[Amianthus]

For the Country Stations it is very hypocritical to act as though this is some sort of moral principle.

I don't see it as moral principle. It is no more than a simple boycott, for actions that are disliked.

While the Chicks did have the right to say what they said, the country stations also had the right to no longer play their music.

There is no constitutional guarantee of airtime for performers, last time I checked.

[_JS]

There is no constitutional guarantee of airtime for performers, last time I checked.

True.

Big news here (Music City) is that George Jones and several other older performers are planning to sue the corporations that own the country stations for not playing the older country stars newer albums. According to Jones (and several others) the stations only play works by younger artists.

Might be interesting to see if they get anywhere with it.

I don't see it as moral principle. It is no more than a simple boycott, for actions that are disliked.

"Actions that are disliked" would indicate a moral principle to me.

[Amianthus]

"Actions that are disliked" would indicate a moral principle to me.

I don't like going for more than a day without a shower.

Is taking a shower a "moral principle" for me?