Why haven't GWB supporters made a big stink about this yet?

[JDBoston 0]

That's ridiculous. This country was founded on the principle of freedom of dissent & political speech. Doesn't matter where, or when, or to which audience.

If you don't like it, there are plenty of countries where it isn't practiced.

Joe

[taln1rigr 0]

Quote

That's ridiculous. This country was founded on the principle of freedom of dissent & political speech. Doesn't matter where, or when, or to which audience.

If you don't like it, there are plenty of countries where it isn't practiced.

Joe

Indeed, I will not argue that "this country was founded on the principle of freedom of dissent & political speech. Doesn't matter where, or when, or to which audience." As a matter of fact I've commited my life to protect that freedom.
But let me turn the tables for a moment ... if you don't like me voicing my opinion then I can just as easily inform you that "there are plenty of countries where it (voicing an opinion) isn't practiced."
So what exactly were you hoping to accomplish with such a shallow & hypocritical statement?

[FliegendeWolf 0]

Quote

Quote

That's ridiculous. This country was founded on the principle of freedom of dissent & political speech. Doesn't matter where, or when, or to which audience.

If you don't like it, there are plenty of countries where it isn't practiced.

Joe

Indeed, I will not argue that "this country was founded on the principle of freedom of dissent & political speech. Doesn't matter where, or when, or to which audience." As a matter of fact I've commited my life to protect that freedom.
But let me turn the tables for a moment ... if you don't like me voicing my opinion then I can just as easily inform you that "there are plenty of countries where it (voicing an opinion) isn't practiced."
So what exactly were you hoping to accomplish with such a shallow & hypocritical statement?

I fail to see how JDBoston's statement was either shallow or hypocritical. After you accused the Dixie Chicks of being traitors for speaking their mind, JDBoston reminded you that the freedom of speech is a basic American right. When did he ever say that your speech about the Dixie Chicks should be considered treasonous?

A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All

[Muenkel 0]

As a GWB supporter, I have never blamed the Chicks for their comment. I'm a fan of theirs and would do any of them, anytime.

_________________________________________
Chris

[Amazon 7]

I remember the Vietnam war all too well. The hawks were quick to use the term America: Love it or leave it.

I loved it enough to join the military in1971.

I believe in a different philosophy.

America: love it, don’t leave it.

If Americans cannot and will not dissent, criticize, debate openly, demonstrate and obstruct, then what is America? The land of the paycheck and the bureaucrat or politician? Certainly not the land of the free.

Thos who would trade freedom for security neither deserves nor will long have either.


There take that cliche and shove it

[GARYC24 3]

America: love it, don’t leave it.

This reminded me of a bumper sticker I saw recently.
Most likely Indian heritage people in the car.
: " America Love it or give it back""

[taln1rigr 0]

Many fans labeled Natalie as a traitor not as a way to bring forth formal criminal charges for what she said, which is how I'm gathering a few of you are defining the word. Natalie Maines is a traitor to us in that she is a betrayer, which is one definition for traitor per The Encarta Dictionary & the one in which I'm using.

Many former Dixie Chicks fans who serve in the military, like myself, felt betrayed by Natalie Maines because of what she said, who she said it to & when she said it. The reason being? Before she made the remark one of her songs, Travelin' Soldier, was climbing the charts. She was making money off a song about the military then she turned around with the same mouth & trashed its leader, the military's Commander In Chief ... all at a time when the military needed the most support.

I think we can all agree, at least to some degree, that freedom of speech does not equal acceptance of speech. Natalie Maines certainly can say what she wants, when she wants & to whom she wants ... I can not deny her that Constitutional Right nor have I made any suggestions to do so. But I do not have to like what she's said nor must I accept it.

But regardless of whether or not I understand why she said what she said or whether or not I agree with it I would never suggest she go find herself another country where she would no longer be ashamed of her President. In fact, I never implied any of her freedoms should be taken away for what she believes ... instead I simply expressed how her comment made so many feel. So I found it amusing that when I exercised my freedom of speech JDBoston, in not so many words, suggested that if I didn't like the fact she has the freedom of speech that I could find myself a country where freedom of speech isn't practiced. It's plainly hypocritical & shallow to me to suggest I find myself another country when I'm exercising my freedom of speech which happens to be the same thing he's attempting to defend.

[FliegendeWolf 0]

Well, when one labels one as a traitor, it means that they have committed treason, which is a punishable offense (up to death), which would certainly take away one's constitutional rights to life and liberty, wouldn't it?

A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All

[juanesky 0]

No, when a someome is charged with treason, then your point of view applies, otherwise, if someone is "labeled traitor" which in this case, were her own fans, deciding to protest quietly.

DC still have their constitutional righs untouched, yet what suffered is their careers, or sales.

Please keep it in context, there has been enough spinning the words around.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[taln1rigr 0]

Quote

Well, when one labels one as a traitor, it means that they have committed treason, which is a punishable offense (up to death), which would certainly take away one's constitutional rights to life and liberty, wouldn't it?

To be quite honest when one labels one as a traitor it could mean a few things ... which is what makes the English language one of the most difficult to learn.

In my previous reply I stated that I was using the word traitor as someone who betrays which is an acceptable usage of the word. If you choose not to believe that my intention of using the word traitor as someone who betrays then that's your choice.
If you continue to define the word as you do then be mindful that this is YOUR definition, not mine ... please do not put the proverbial "words in my mouth."

[juanesky 0]

Don't worry about it Dawn, you have explained what you meant, it is unfrotunate that still some people just like to twist things around.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[taln1rigr 0]

Quote

No, when a someome is charged with treason, then your point of view applies, otherwise, if someone is "labeled traitor" which in this case, were her own fans, deciding to protest quietly.

DC still have their constitutional righs untouched, yet what suffered is their careers, or sales.

Please keep it in context, there has been enough spinning the words around.

Excellent point! Labeling someone as a traitor & charging someone with treason are not always synonomous. Granted, someone who has been charged & is found guilty of treason are referred to as traitors in the sense they violated their allegiance & betrayed their country.
But it doesn't necessarily apply the other way around since traitor can also be defined as someone who behaves disloyal, someone who betrays, someone who deceives or a person who says one thing & does another.
I don't know about anyone else reading this but I've heard many times kids on the playground & even adults call someone else a traitor either in jest or when someone's feelings got hurt. "You traitor!"
But by no means was anyone ever implying that a person should be stripped of their Constitutional Rights ... nah, they were just calling them disloyal, or a betrayer.

[taln1rigr 0]

Quote

Don't worry about it Dawn, you have explained what you meant, it is unfrotunate that still some people just like to twist things around.

Hee, hee ... I guess great minds think alike since I was typing that last reply at the same time you typed yours.

[SIDE NOTE:] I realize that it now looks like I was trying to get in the last word but I was honestly in the middle of my reply before juanesky offered me some reassurance.[/END SIDE NOTE]

Thanks for the support. I needed it.

[newsstand 0]

Quote

...
Many former Dixie Chicks fans who serve in the military, like myself, felt betrayed by Natalie Maines because of what she said, who she said it to & when she said it. The reason being? Before she made the remark one of her songs, Travelin' Soldier, was climbing the charts. She was making money off a song about the military then she turned around with the same mouth & trashed its leader, the military's Commander In Chief ... all at a time when the military needed the most support. ...

Travelin' Soldier was actually written by Bruce Robison and Farrah Braniff and released in 1995. Although the song is set in the Vietnam era it was in reference to the first Gulf War and is an anti-war song. Not anti-military, just anti-war. The lyrics can be found here
Natalie did not trash the military. She made a personal statement about her feelings related to coming from the same state as GWB. When people trashed Clinton, or Reagan, or Bush I, or Carter did you feel betrayed?

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[newsstand 0]

Quote

Many fans labeled Natalie as a traitor ...

If "many fans" didn't like what they heard why were almost no tickets turned back in even after they Chicks offered to buy them back? Why were the protestors at concerts counted in two digit numbers and the fans in thousands?

Could it be that the media and country radio stations 1) sensationalized the whole thing and 2) caved in to a vocal minority?

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[juanesky 0]

Minority or not, it seems that their sales suffered either way, so they became apologetic.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[taln1rigr 0]

Quote

Quote

Many fans labeled Natalie as a traitor ...

If "many fans" didn't like what they heard why were almost no tickets turned back in even after they Chicks offered to buy them back? Why were the protestors at concerts counted in two digit numbers and the fans in thousands?

Could it be that the media and country radio stations 1) sensationalized the whole thing and 2) caved in to a vocal minority?

That's certainly a good question & a feesable hypothesis. This article also tried to come up with an answer to that question in the very last paragraph

Quote

Before the concert, about 15 protesters milled outside the arena, carrying sings saying "The three French hens" and "Nothing Dixie about these Chicks." But it's possible that most of the anti-Dixie Chicks crowd was at the Marshall Tucker Band show, an alternative concert held 30 miles away in Spartanburg.

[newsstand 0]

Quote

Quote

Before the concert, about 15 protesters milled outside the arena, carrying sings saying "The three French hens" and "Nothing Dixie about these Chicks." But it's possible that most of the anti-Dixie Chicks crowd was at the Marshall Tucker Band show, an alternative concert held 30 miles away in Spartanburg.

So what about the other 58 cities on the tour?

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[skydivexxl 0]

Who got upset at the Dixie Chicks?

Republicans in Texas!

WFC

Who Fuck Cares.........

Blog Clicky

[newsstand 0]

Quote

Minority or not, it seems that their sales suffered either way, so they became apologetic.

Home finished out the year as the number 2 country album on Billboard's charts and number four on the overall top 200. Didn't suffer much.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[taln1rigr 0]

OK, this may expalin their ongoing popularity.

Quote

Yet some would-be concertgoers have been attracted to the Chicks because of their opposition to war and scorn for fellow Texan George W. Bush.

"Until tonight I was not much interested in any country-western group," wrote one to a Dallas online chat. "But right after [the trio's interview], I went to Amazon and bought their CD and checked out Ticketmaster for tickets to their July concert. None available. So to the people who purchased tickets and ... plan not to attend - I'm a buyer!!!"

The article does mention that disgruntled fans "ripped up" their tickets ... so that may explain why none were turned in, especially if they were ripped up before the offer was made.

But it's obvious by this statement the Dixie Chicks made that the "minority" has been felt in volumes & therefore they realize they're not as welcome as they once used to be with the Country Scene:

Quote

The Dixie Chicks say they don't want to be a country music band any more.
Violinist Martie Maguire told Spiegel magazine: "We don't feel part of the country scene any longer, it can't be our home any more."
She said she was disappointed other country singers didn't back up the Dixie Chicks in their criticism of George W Bush's politics on Iraq.
"A few weeks ago, Merle Haggard said a couple of nice words about us, but that was it," Maguire complained.
"The support we got came from others, like Bruce Springsteen."
Going home empty-handed from the Country Awards ceremony also made them decide to break with the scene, Maguire said.
"Instead, we won three Grammys against much stronger competition.
"So we now consider ourselves part of the big Rock 'n' Roll family."

[JDBoston 0]

I'm glad you clarified. Your original post made it sound like you had a problem with other people exercising their rights... hence my post. I've heard so much "love it or leave it" crap disguised as patriotism that I mistakenly lumped you in with people who actually WOULD curtail freedom of speech if they had the chance. And BTW, as FW noted I did not say "you should leave" or "you should not be allowed to say that". I was simply making a point.

Anyway, traitor and treason are pretty big words to me. And I would think you can separate criticism of a person from criticism of the entire organization to which they belong. So I see no reason for soldiers to take personal offense at what someone says about the President. I mean, you can like the Boston Red Sox players, and still say Dan Duquette is a loser... oh wait... they already fired him.

My sister is in the Army, and I would like to think that if she has to risk her life, it's for the interests of the American people and the American way of life in general, and has NOTHING to do with defending the honor of politicians, CINC or not.

Joe

[burbleflyer 0]

I want the five minutes back that I spent reading this thread.

[billvon 3,078]

>My sister is in the Army, and I would like to think that if she has
>to risk her life, it's for the interests of the American people . . .

You've just hit upon why many people feel they _must_ defend any US military action. No one wants to believe they lost a leg, or a loved one, to a mistake or a lie. That's hard to stomach no matter which side of the aisle you're on.

[taln1rigr 0]

Quote

And I would think you can separate criticism of a person from criticism of the entire organization to which they belong. So I see no reason for soldiers to take personal offense at what someone says about the President.

I understand what your saying & agree. Just because something ugly is said against My Commander In Chief (CINC) doesn't mean it was said against me or ment for me. But the picture I choose to paint for myself is much bigger than that.

**Disclaimer to ALL readers**
In an attempt to explain why I, as a soldier, would take personal offense to a disrespectful remark made about my Commander In Chief (CINC), I respectfully ask anyone who would to please refrain from nit-picking my analogy. I'm aware of the many loopholes & opportunities this analogy lends for criticism. I'm not attempting to persuade anyone to change their way of thinking based upon what I'm about to say ... I'm trying to describe how I feel based upon my beliefs, how I've been raised & the experiences I've been exposed to in an effort to answer JDBoston's question.

To me, as a soldier, the military is family. As such we have relatives (civilians), we have our problems, we have our secrets, we have each other & we have a "mom" (CINC). I may not always agree with what "mom" may subject me to ... let's face it, as a soldier I don't get to pick & choose which wars I'd like to participate in. But my deep sense of loyalty for "mom", regardless of how I'm personally feeling about her at the time, causes me to become defensive if someone else disrespects her. Much the same way many of us would react if someone said something ugly about our own mothers.

Throughout my upbringing, I was taught to never publicly "air out the family's dirty laundry." At "home" (home equaling homeland) I may protest to what "mom" subjects me to but never in a million years would I dare disrespect my "mom" in "public" (public being abroad ... amongst people "mom" does not govern).

So when Natalie, a relative but family none the less, went outside "the house" & "publicly" disrespected "mom" I became defensive of "mom" because of what I've been taught to be considered as unexcusable or intolerable behavior.

Outside that explanation, the only other reason I can think of as to why I took her comment personally probably lies deeper in my psyche ... sometimes I take things personally when I maybe shouldn't. Doesn't make me right but then I've never claimed to be.

Quote

My sister is in the Army, and I would like to think that if she has to risk her life, it's for the interests of the American people and the American way of life in general, and has NOTHING to do with defending the honor of politicians, CINC or not.

You're absolutely correct. Through my Oath of Enlistment I swore to obey The Presiden't orders not to ensure everyone agrees with him. But I'm uncertain as to why this was added since no where has it been mentioned the military going to war to defend The President's honor ... much less anyone possibly dieing for it ... especially in the case of The Dixie Chicks. Maybe further clarification is need on your part in order for me to understand this the way you intended it.