That new Dixie Chicks song that bashes Bush is amazing

edallasplanet

edallasplanet

CAGiversary!
Feedback
12 (100%)
I took a chance on this song from ITUNES and its pretty awesome. Its already at #3.

People are probably downloading to prove a point for the Bush Admin
 
I might actually buy the album this gets put on... or is it internet exclusive like the Roger Waters "To Kill A Child/Leaving Beruit" single ended up being (outside of the Japan CD release... which I actually spent $25 to get).
 
[quote name='niceguyshawne']Isn't it amazing how much things can change in 3 years?[/QUOTE]

Nothing's changed- they've always spoken out against Bush. Toby Keith feuded with them the first year of the war because they criticized the administration and "HE'S A PAY-TREE-AW-TIK AMAYRICAYN."

A despise country music, but I guess I'll give it a listen.
 
[quote name='Greetard']Nothing's changed- they've always spoken out against Bush. Toby Keith feuded with them the first year of the war because they criticized the administration and "HE'S A PAY-TREE-AW-TIK AMAYRICAYN."

A despise country music, but I guess I'll give it a listen.[/QUOTE]

I think he meant that people are not up in arms about them making fun of Bush like they were for their first comments.
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']I think he meant that people are not up in arms about them making fun of Bush like they were for their first comments.[/QUOTE]


Yes, that's exactly what I meant.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I sorta remember that they had people engaging in mass dixie chick cd destroying parties.

That was funny and sad at the same time.[/QUOTE]

:lol:

I hate the dixie chicks.
Me to, lets buy all of their cds and smash them.

Thats a good idea that'll show them.
 
[quote name='Greetard']Nothing's changed- they've always spoken out against Bush. Toby Keith feuded with them the first year of the war because they criticized the administration and "HE'S A PAY-TREE-AW-TIK AMAYRICAYN."

A despise country music, but I guess I'll give it a listen.[/QUOTE]

Ah, yes. The "Boot Up Yer Ass" guy.

Really living in the tradition of Hank, ain't he? ;)
 
Maybe people aren't "up in arms" about the Dixie Chicks because they aren't near the big name they were years ago when the first hubbub happened? Sort of like how people after a while didnt pay any attention to Sinead Oconnor.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I sorta remember that they had people engaging in mass dixie chick cd destroying parties.
[/QUOTE]


kinda reminded me of my time in the late 30s in Germany
 
[quote name='niceguyshawne']Yes, that's exactly what I meant.[/QUOTE]

and I thought you meant the Dixie Chicks had changed and actually sounded good...
 
[quote name='penmyst']Maybe people aren't "up in arms" about the Dixie Chicks because they aren't near the big name they were years ago when the first hubbub happened? Sort of like how people after a while didnt pay any attention to Sinead Oconnor.[/quote]

That's it as much as anything. Plus, people in entertainment speaking out about politics (regardless of which party they follow, if any) is hardly scandalous. They just happen to have a larger stage for their views to be heard. I personally think that entertainers (and everyone else for that matter)need to be a bit more dispassionate whether it is the Dixie Chicks or Toby Keith, but thats just me. A lot of "regular" people in America already see celebrities as out of touch with the real world. The second people allow emotion to drive their responses you tend to see some really irrational behavior by otherwise intelligent people. It often results in name calling, talking or shouting people down, and other childish behavior.
 
The Dixie Chicks are just like a neglected mutt that causes trouble for the attention; if you leave him alone for long enough, he'll stop bothering.

Listening to this song 'to prove a point to the Bush Admin' is like voting for Bush because you believed he was a lesser asshole than Kerry. You have a choice this time as you did last time, so make the right one.
 
[quote name='Blade']Listening to this song 'to prove a point to the Bush Admin' is like voting for Bush because you believed he was a lesser asshole than Kerry. You have a choice this time as you did last time, so make the right one.[/quote]

You can't be comparing listening to a song to voting. I mean, come on!
 
[quote name='niceguyshawne']Isn't it amazing how much things can change in 3 years?[/QUOTE]

Yea, it's amazing how once the general public actually cared about celebrity opinions on politics.

Who the fuck cares what Pink or The Dixie Chicks think. Their opinion is no more valuable then yours or mine.

Yes, I know that they are expressing their feelings through their songs, but keep thy religion and politics to yourself. ;)
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']kinda reminded me of my time in the late 30s in Germany[/QUOTE]

No, the Nazis forced people to burn books/information because they were afraid of the message.

People who burned the Dixie Chicks did so as a demonstration of disgust for their actions, much like one of our own is planning to destroy a certain book as a protest against the man's behavior.

I know I'll get flamed for this, but all I can do is hope I reach some of you liberals out there. We may disagree about politics, that's fine. But please at least be intellectually honest. If you believe that the Dixie Chicks should be praised or at the very least left alone because "after all, they were just exercising their free speech" then you should shut your nasty mouths about the people who exercised their free speech against the Dixie Chicks.

The truth is, most of you people don't really want free speech. You just want the speech that you agree with to be free. You want the Dixie Chicks to have full reign to disgrace the President of the United States in a foreign country without so much as a word of disapproval from US citizens, but you want millions of hurt and offended people Stateside to keep their big mouths shut - and you compare them to Nazis for exercising their own free expression against the Chicks.

Hypocrites.
 
[quote name='Scahom1']Yea, it's amazing how once the general public actually cared about celebrity opinions on politics.

Who the fuck cares what Pink or The Dixie Chicks think. Their opinion is no more valuable then yours or mine.

Yes, I know that they are expressing their feelings through their songs, but keep thy religion and politics to yourself. ;)[/QUOTE]

I honestly don't care what the Chicks or any other public personalities think. But, I DO care that celebrities' politics have disturbing influence over what many people in the general public think. Sad, Scary, and True. Thus you have this thread.
 
I'm thinking the Dixie Chicks meeting with their producer(s) went something like this:

Dixie Chicks: Hey nobody is paying attention to us anymore, could it be because people have realized our music is bland, derivetive of everything else in our genre, and very played-out?

Producer: Probably, but you know what you need to get more attention from people... An even more played-out publicity stunt where you disguise it like you actually care about what's going on in society instead of making money, but really you don't.

Dixie Chicks: Yeah remember when we said we didn't like Bush and people then actually cared about our opinions on politics, we could make a song about and surely a bunch of chumps will download it because of the redunant message they can find everyday in other music, movies, radio, and TV mediums and not realize what bad musicians we really are.

Honestly people, I care about the message as much as the next joe, but if we start popularizing crappy music and stuff such as the Dixie Chicks for it then what good have we brought the world? Not only that but this isn't something new, Bush has been doing idiotic things for sometime now and the Dixie Chicks aren't the first public figures to try and point this out to us all and they certainly aren't the best.
 
The main thing here is most people who listen to country music are southern and are usually very patriotic and/or Republican, so a country artist speaking out against a Republican president is usually a big no-no.
 
will this matter ever? maybe, but maybe as in a year from now nobody gives a crap since this really wont do anything. Stop being pissed off and whatever and do something yourself about your opinions instead of bitching... oh, and this is not to the OP. I'm sure the song is great but this is really just nice sounding bitching. that's all I'm saying to the dixie chicks. and personally, I need to stop bitching myself :lol:
 
[quote name='chosen1s']I know I'll get flamed for this, but all I can do is hope I reach some of you liberals out there. We may disagree about politics, that's fine. But please at least be intellectually honest. If you believe that the Dixie Chicks should be praised or at the very least left alone because "after all, they were just exercising their free speech" then you should shut your nasty mouths about the people who exercised their free speech against the Dixie Chicks.

The truth is, most of you people don't really want free speech. You just want the speech that you agree with to be free. You want the Dixie Chicks to have full reign to disgrace the President of the United States in a foreign country without so much as a word of disapproval from US citizens, but you want millions of hurt and offended people Stateside to keep their big mouths shut - and you compare them to Nazis for exercising their own free expression against the Chicks.

Hypocrites.[/quote]

No.

We want away with designated protest zones, warrantless secret police spying on American citizens, and an administration that only speaks to fake press plants (ala Gannon)

I consider myself to liberal in the classic sense (similar to modern libertarianism but without the militant pro-corporate stance), but I believe that any rational, educated person who believes in freedom would denounce the current government on my first paragraph alone.

You remind me of that elderly woman caller on CSPAN that repeated "Bush is good, Bush is for good" 7 times like it was a mantra, and then hung up - you're so desparate to believe that the other side is anti-American that you're now making up things such as liberals are anti-free speech (I believe it used to be liberals are anti-xmas, you must have moved on to the next O'Reilly talking point)

Fact is - I can agree with the Dixie chicks AND call you an idiot for supporting Bush - doesn't mean that I want to shut you up - I'm just calling you out for being a moronic tool of the current administration. The people who want to censor other Americans are the Faux news "Support the troops" crowd - "Support the troops" is the logic-banishing Republican rallying cry any time some errant neurons start to fire north of your red-state MGD-doped jesus-freak medulla oblongatas.
 
I've never been a fan of the Ditzy Twits. For one thing I absolutely cannot stand the whiney warbeling voice of their blonde lead singer. As my friend once said "She needs the stupid fuck 'ed outta her."

Having a love for one's political party is very similiar to having a love for your favorite video game system. Republicans and Democrats are just grown-up versions of Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo Fanboys. They usually believe whatever hype their leaders are pushing, and like to jump up on their soapboxes and proclaim to the masses why their leader (or console) or their party's politics (or game) is better than anyone else's.

Personnally, I can't for the life of me figure out why more and more people aren't Libertarians like myself. If you are unsure of what a Libertarian is, the short answer is we believe in small goverment, with most decissions made at the local level, and we put the liberties of the individual above all else.
 
Did someone say "Libertarian"?

snake1.jpg
 
[quote name='Krymner']As my friend once said "She needs the stupid fuck 'ed outta her."[/QUOTE]

Is your friend a rabid misogynist, or does he say that male artists need the stupid fucked out of them, too?

Libertarianism! You guys are like the TurboGrafx fans of the 16-bit wars. So deluded in your own pretentious elitism and self-inflicted superiority that you're oblivious to the fact that there are - what? Seven of yous?

You know why I'm not a libertarian? Because supply-side economics is a fucking joke.

At any rate, I don't mind if people let their political beliefs inform their music choices (there was a thread about Trent Reznor's raging liberalism a few months back, and CAG "Ruined" was particularly bother by that - as if the political ideas of a fucking junkie - Reznor, not Ruined - mattered!).

What irks me is when "I don't like their music" or "I don't respect them bringing politics into their music" becomes "they're stupid," "they need the stupid fucked out of them" and other wrongly attributed statements.

EDIT: Brak, you're a hero.
 
Political dissonance is just as useful a tool for creativity as love, hate, sorrow, or any other myriad of human emotions.

I don't have a problem with artists that are motivated by a political agenda.

Personally, I listen to music because I like it. I regard musicians as just that. If I want political opinions, I'll read the op-ed pages or listen to political commentators. And just the same, when I want music I'm not going to listen to Al Franken or Sean Hannity.


But when artists use their stage to fire off direct shots at a political opponent- there shouldn't be surprise when it has a polarizing effect on the fans. It's a bit hypocritical to get upset when the fans take umbrance with you for your political beliefs since you used your freedom of speech to protect yourself. Use sharp words, expect sharp replies.

I happen to think many of these artists use the shock-jock theory to create attention for themselves and their causes. They know what they are doing, and so do I. That's why I tune them out.
 
[quote name='penmyst']But when artists use their stage to fire off direct shots at a political opponent- there shouldn't be surprise when it has a polarizing effect on the fans. It's a bit hypocritical to get upset when the fans take umbrance with you for your political beliefs since you used your freedom of speech to protect yourself. Use sharp words, expect sharp replies.[/QUOTE]

If you (the royal you, of course) don't like it, then ignore it, or refute what they're saying directly (if you feel it's warranted). I don't think it's the disagreements that are unsettling; it is the CD burnings, ad hominem attacks (OMG she's so FAT! and DUMB!), and labeling of "unpatriotic" that I found bothersome. Very few people took up precisely what she said, from the backfire I heard and read - they took issue with the *fact* that they were being dissident, and they attacked their characters in return, rather than what it was that they were saying.

That having been said, I really don't like contemporary country (it's all fucking Garth Brooks' fault), and I didn't like their song. Hooray for them writing songs contrary to the political leanings of their fan base, but don't expect me to buy your albums if you're not going to rock the boat of bad country music. Augh!
 
Many of these leftists don't pull any punches when talking about President Bush. From calling him an idiot to constantly insinuating he has the intellect of a 4 year old, it is some of the most venomous things you could ever see.

The personal attacks go both ways. It's generally the resort of people that don't have either the facts behind their opinions or simply lack the intellect to refute their opponents.

It's part of the political landscape though. Not much to be done about it.



And I agree with you myke, contemporary country music is awful. It's been invaded by the mechanics of the "pop machine". And just like Pop music, the only acts you see are ones that are packaged for sale to the foolish masses. Talent can come a distant 4th behind 1. beauty 2. sex and 3. "attitude". :whistle2:|
 
[quote name='chosen1s']

People who burned the Dixie Chicks did so as a demonstration of disgust for their actions, much like one of our own is planning to destroy a certain book as a protest against the man's behavior.

I know I'll get flamed for this, but all I can do is hope I reach some of you liberals out there. We may disagree about politics, that's fine. But please at least be intellectually honest. If you believe that the Dixie Chicks should be praised or at the very least left alone because "after all, they were just exercising their free speech" then you should shut your nasty mouths about the people who exercised their free speech against the Dixie Chicks.

The truth is, most of you people don't really want free speech. You just want the speech that you agree with to be free. You want the Dixie Chicks to have full reign to disgrace the President of the United States in a foreign country without so much as a word of disapproval from US citizens, but you want millions of hurt and offended people Stateside to keep their big mouths shut - and you compare them to Nazis for exercising their own free expression against the Chicks.

Hypocrites.[/QUOTE]

As one of those liberals you're 'trying to reach', you're completely wrong. Yes, I totally disagree with your politics, and I am totally intellectually honest when I kept saying Bush was going into Iraq on false pretenses, touting Bin Laden hunting, when he was simply pushing forward his own political agenda, with no thought about 9/11. But that's when Republicans (conservatives like you) kept saying it was wrong to speak ill of our president in these trying times. Uh, yeah, show me some easy times in US history.

And people CAN say whatever they want, that's the beauty of free speech. You disagree with me? No problem. But don't call the Dixie Chicks, or anyone else, unAmerican because they hold a position that is not BOOYAH let's go kick some ASS Bush supporting. Or my second fav argument, tell me I don't support the troops, even though they fight for freedom. Yeah, I support the troops, because they do a job I didn't sign up for, and because listening to an idiot IS their job, just like many of us. Except they can get killed because of the idiot they have to listen to, and if they live on base, they aren't even allowed to question his authority in the privacy of their own backyard.

Now what was that word you used? Oh yeah, hypocrite.
 
[quote name='camoor']No.

We want away with designated protest zones, warrantless secret police spying on American citizens, and an administration that only speaks to fake press plants (ala Gannon)

I consider myself to liberal in the classic sense (similar to modern libertarianism but without the militant pro-corporate stance), but I believe that any rational, educated person who believes in freedom would denounce the current government on my first paragraph alone.

You remind me of that elderly woman caller on CSPAN that repeated "Bush is good, Bush is for good" 7 times like it was a mantra, and then hung up - you're so desparate to believe that the other side is anti-American that you're now making up things such as liberals are anti-free speech (I believe it used to be liberals are anti-xmas, you must have moved on to the next O'Reilly talking point)

Fact is - I can agree with the Dixie chicks AND call you an idiot for supporting Bush - doesn't mean that I want to shut you up - I'm just calling you out for being a moronic tool of the current administration. The people who want to censor other Americans are the Faux news "Support the troops" crowd - "Support the troops" is the logic-banishing Republican rallying cry any time some errant neurons start to fire north of your red-state MGD-doped jesus-freak medulla oblongatas.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for proving my point by putting words in my mouth and calling me names as a means of winning your argument.

Fact is - I can disagree with the Dixie Chicks AND call you a hypocrite for responding to my post with the same hatred and vitriole as the people you condemn/call morons/etc for disagreeing with their "free speech".

As I've always said, I have never seen such hatred from a group of people who claim to support the rights and dignity of "all people" as I have seen and continue to see from the Democratic Party. Thank you for supporting my views. :)
 
[quote name='browneyedgal68']As one of those liberals you're 'trying to reach', you're completely wrong. Yes, I totally disagree with your politics, and I am totally intellectually honest when I kept saying Bush was going into Iraq on false pretenses, touting Bin Laden hunting, when he was simply pushing forward his own political agenda, with no thought about 9/11. But that's when Republicans (conservatives like you) kept saying it was wrong to speak ill of our president in these trying times. Uh, yeah, show me some easy times in US history.

And people CAN say whatever they want, that's the beauty of free speech. You disagree with me? No problem. But don't call the Dixie Chicks, or anyone else, unAmerican because they hold a position that is not BOOYAH let's go kick some ASS Bush supporting. Or my second fav argument, tell me I don't support the troops, even though they fight for freedom. Yeah, I support the troops, because they do a job I didn't sign up for, and because listening to an idiot IS their job, just like many of us. Except they can get killed because of the idiot they have to listen to, and if they live on base, they aren't even allowed to question his authority in the privacy of their own backyard.

Now what was that word you used? Oh yeah, hypocrite.[/QUOTE]

Now wasn't that nasty? This is what I struggle with Dem's - they can't debate with facts, and/or must distort truth to win arguments. Most people had a problem with the Dixie Chicks defaming the President TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY. That's just not right, and I wouldn't have supported it if it were said about Kerry, Clinton, or any other Democratic President (or potential President). Democrats have successfully labeled Republicans' outrage as being defensive and that is just a lie.

Back to hypocracy - do we have freedom of speech or not? Can the Dixie Chicks say whatever they want about Bush or not? You seem to think they can, but per your statements above I am not allowed to call them Unamerican. Regardless of whether I feel that way or not, that's so clearly hypocritical to me it blows my mind.

Look, I really think both sides have a lot to offer in Politics. I don't think the Dem's are always wrong and they want a lot of good for the country. But this nastiness is ridiculous - and then they accuse Republicans of having a double standard. It's very childish. God help us all.
 
[quote name='Blade']Listening to this song 'to prove a point to the Bush Admin' is like voting for Bush because you believed he was a lesser asshole than Kerry. You have a choice this time as you did last time, so make the right one.[/quote]As my manager calls it, "choosing the less of two evils"
 
[quote name='chosen1s']Thank you for proving my point by putting words in my mouth and calling me names as a means of winning your argument.

Fact is - I can disagree with the Dixie Chicks AND call you a hypocrite for responding to my post with the same hatred and vitriole as the people you condemn/call morons/etc for disagreeing with their "free speech".

As I've always said, I have never seen such hatred from a group of people who claim to support the rights and dignity of "all people" as I have seen and continue to see from the Democratic Party. Thank you for supporting my views. :)[/quote]

What can I say - the Democratic Party is rather large, so you're bound to get footage of a few crazies who "hate" political opponents that Faux news can exploit again and again.

However back in the real world, the hate I see is coming mostly from the pro-war protesters at a peace rally or the anti-abortion protesters yelling murderer (or worse) at crying 14-year old girls going into an abortion clinic.

And please - PLEASE - take an American civics course. People who support the right of free speech (including the so-called liberals) do not have to support your views - free speech means that you have the right to say what you wish without reprisal from the government (excluding yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater). I support free speech - but from now on I want you to understand that this doesn't mean I support your views (not for all the emoticons in cyberspace).

BTW - as long as we're making generalizations, one thing I get a kick out of is conservatives who try to get a rise by using smileys or rolly-eyes. Oh noes.. he smiley'd me.. must.. fight back.. with level-headed cool --- hulk mad hulk mad!!
 
[quote name='chosen1s']Now wasn't that nasty? This is what I struggle with Dem's - they can't debate with facts, and/or must distort truth to win arguments. Most people had a problem with the Dixie Chicks defaming the President TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY. That's just not right, and I wouldn't have supported it if it were said about Kerry, Clinton, or any other Democratic President (or potential President). Democrats have successfully labeled Republicans' outrage as being defensive and that is just a lie.[/quote]

Actually, it wasn't nasty at all - you're just looking for contention to prove your piousness, which is a very thin layer of clothing, I should point out. She took the name calling you started with and threw it in your face, yet somehow *you're* the righteous one? Sure thing, kid. Sure thing.

Back to hypocracy - do we have freedom of speech or not? Can the Dixie Chicks say whatever they want about Bush or not? You seem to think they can, but per your statements above I am not allowed to call them Unamerican. Regardless of whether I feel that way or not, that's so clearly hypocritical to me it blows my mind.
Click to expand...

I think that your mind only selected out the claims you considered to be legitimate (that they spoke out while abroad, which seems to be some social norm with very few prior precedents to try and draw any legitimacy from), and ignored the foolishness that people did to express their distaste with them (calling them stupid, or saying Natalie's fat, or burning their CDs, while all forms of protest whether or not I like it, didn't do a very good job at conveying the cohesion you seem to think existed among people on the right in regards to the collective disdain for the Chicks. You cannot deny that, for a great number of people, "The Dixie Chicks don't like George Bush" was a sufficient explanation for their disdain; if you don't believe me, perhaps you would rather ask a random sample of Dixie Chicks haters about where they were when Natalie said they were ashamed of the president?

As for calling them unamerican, how can you call a person unamerican for practicing one of the very virtues this country was founded upon? Now, I know one might express freedom of speech in the following ways that would certainly make them unamerican: "I am not American"; "I hate America"; "Death to the Republic"; and so on, but the woman said "I just want you to know that we're ashamed of the president." That says nothing about America or American ideals. In order to do so, you'd have to believe that the course of action and ideological package that George Bush brings to the White House is the only possible iteration of ideals and actions that constitutes being "American." Not only is that not true (due to the logical impossibility of one finite "American" ideal in a democracy), but it's incorrect - ask a Goldwater conservative about the job Bush is doing. He is by no means a conservative, although, like Reagan, he loves to bump up spending and cut taxes. He shares little similarities with conservative predecessors other than a tax cut fetish. With that in mind, he is a unique character as president, and his perspective by no means shapes the domain of what is "American" and everything else is "unamerican." So that, to be short, shows that you are dead wrong about your claim. The woman said she was ashamed of her president, and you drew false generalizations as a result of her shame towards one person. If you want to get off the high-n-mighty horse of honest discourse in the form of avoiding lies and distorting truth (the latter in particular), then I'll take him back to the stables for you.

Look, I really think both sides have a lot to offer in Politics. I don't think the Dem's are always wrong and they want a lot of good for the country. But this nastiness is ridiculous - and then they accuse Republicans of having a double standard. It's very childish. God help us all.
Click to expand...

:yawn: baseless attacks are not the exclusive domain of any political party. Take it somewhere else, because you're boring.
 
[quote name='chosen1s']Now wasn't that nasty? This is what I struggle with Dem's - they can't debate with facts, and/or must distort truth to win arguments. Most people had a problem with the Dixie Chicks defaming the President TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY. That's just not right, and I wouldn't have supported it if it were said about Kerry, Clinton, or any other Democratic President (or potential President). Democrats have successfully labeled Republicans' outrage as being defensive and that is just a lie.

Back to hypocracy - do we have freedom of speech or not? Can the Dixie Chicks say whatever they want about Bush or not? You seem to think they can, but per your statements above I am not allowed to call them Unamerican. Regardless of whether I feel that way or not, that's so clearly hypocritical to me it blows my mind.

Look, I really think both sides have a lot to offer in Politics. I don't think the Dem's are always wrong and they want a lot of good for the country. But this nastiness is ridiculous - and then they accuse Republicans of having a double standard. It's very childish. God help us all.[/QUOTE]
You can call them unamerican as much as you want. Who said otherwise?
 
I think it was stated in in the movie American Dreamz, that more people vote for the next American Idol than they do for the President of the United States.

Pretty sad.
 
[quote name='jmcc']You can call them unamerican as much as you want. Who said otherwise?[/QUOTE]

Browneyedgal68 - "But don't call the Dixie Chicks, or anyone else, unAmerican..."

As opposed to someone who would say "but don't go badmouthing our President, Democrat or Republican, in a foreign country, etc. etc."
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Actually, it wasn't nasty at all - you're just looking for contention to prove your piousness, which is a very thin layer of clothing, I should point out. She took the name calling you started with and threw it in your face, yet somehow *you're* the righteous one? Sure thing, kid. Sure thing.

I think that your mind only selected out the claims you considered to be legitimate (that they spoke out while abroad, which seems to be some social norm with very few prior precedents to try and draw any legitimacy from), and ignored the foolishness that people did to express their distaste with them (calling them stupid, or saying Natalie's fat, or burning their CDs, while all forms of protest whether or not I like it, didn't do a very good job at conveying the cohesion you seem to think existed among people on the right in regards to the collective disdain for the Chicks. You cannot deny that, for a great number of people, "The Dixie Chicks don't like George Bush" was a sufficient explanation for their disdain; if you don't believe me, perhaps you would rather ask a random sample of Dixie Chicks haters about where they were when Natalie said they were ashamed of the president?

As for calling them unamerican, how can you call a person unamerican for practicing one of the very virtues this country was founded upon? Now, I know one might express freedom of speech in the following ways that would certainly make them unamerican: "I am not American"; "I hate America"; "Death to the Republic"; and so on, but the woman said "I just want you to know that we're ashamed of the president." That says nothing about America or American ideals. In order to do so, you'd have to believe that the course of action and ideological package that George Bush brings to the White House is the only possible iteration of ideals and actions that constitutes being "American." Not only is that not true (due to the logical impossibility of one finite "American" ideal in a democracy), but it's incorrect - ask a Goldwater conservative about the job Bush is doing. He is by no means a conservative, although, like Reagan, he loves to bump up spending and cut taxes. He shares little similarities with conservative predecessors other than a tax cut fetish. With that in mind, he is a unique character as president, and his perspective by no means shapes the domain of what is "American" and everything else is "unamerican." So that, to be short, shows that you are dead wrong about your claim. The woman said she was ashamed of her president, and you drew false generalizations as a result of her shame towards one person. If you want to get off the high-n-mighty horse of honest discourse in the form of avoiding lies and distorting truth (the latter in particular), then I'll take him back to the stables for you.

:yawn: baseless attacks are not the exclusive domain of any political party. Take it somewhere else, because you're boring.[/QUOTE]

Dude,

You still don't get it. My only point was that there are a lot of "Liberals" who would DEFEND the Dixie Chicks' right to insult the President to the death - and no matter how passionate they are about freedom of speech, they ATTACK anybody who disagrees. "You have the right to say whatever you want, offensive or not." "You guys over there - how dare you speak out against the Dixie Chicks?! Keep your opinion to yourself!"

You really wasted the rest of that rant because it doesn't even apply. I don't really have a stance one way or the other about calling someone "UnAmerican". America is so diverse it's hard to define. My point was as stated above - "The Dixie Chicks have the right to say whatever they want!.....You over there, shut up! You don't have the right to say whatever you want." It's hypocritical.

Again, I made a simple statement about hypocracy and instead of rationally discussing, it turned it into personal attacks, putting 2 long paragraphs of words in my mouth in an effort to win your argument.

I do agree that originally I was over-generalizing - however, "The Democrats" I guess applies to most of what I see on a regular basis, which doesn't mean they're all the same. Still, the generalizing runs both ways.
 
[quote name='camoor']What can I say - the Democratic Party is rather large, so you're bound to get footage of a few crazies who "hate" political opponents that Faux news can exploit again and again.

However back in the real world, the hate I see is coming mostly from the pro-war protesters at a peace rally or the anti-abortion protesters yelling murderer (or worse) at crying 14-year old girls going into an abortion clinic.

And please - PLEASE - take an American civics course. People who support the right of free speech (including the so-called liberals) do not have to support your views - free speech means that you have the right to say what you wish without reprisal from the government (excluding yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater). I support free speech - but from now on I want you to understand that this doesn't mean I support your views (not for all the emoticons in cyberspace).

BTW - as long as we're making generalizations, one thing I get a kick out of is conservatives who try to get a rise by using smileys or rolly-eyes. Oh noes.. he smiley'd me.. must.. fight back.. with level-headed cool --- hulk mad hulk mad!![/QUOTE]

I mean this sincerely - the protests I've seen have been "Pro-Peace" protests at military funerals. Have you witnessed these pro-war protests you speak of? I'm not being confrontational, I'm really curious because I haven't seen them. Honestly, I wish the Republicans were 1/2 as good at protesting as Democrats but am yet to see that happen so your comment was surprising. As for abortion, what does that even have to do with this?

As for freedom of speech - you and I totally agree. If a person is going to defend the Dixie Chicks rights based on unlimited freedom of speech, then they should also defend (or at least not attack) those who protest the Dixie Chicks unless they want to appear to be hypocrites. Agree with me or disagree with me, I don't care. But I think it's wrong to wave the flag of freedom of speech if you're only waving it for people you agree with.

Emoticons - you're just trying to get a rise out of me by patronizing my emoticons. I didn't learn to use them in my "Conservatives 101" class. I just have gotten used to using them in my typing over the years. Truthfully I'm a complete novice with them - I don't know anything but the smiley.
 
[quote name='edallasplanet']Lets keep killing soliders in IRAQ and rob everyone but rich white people their rights.

GO BUSH![/QUOTE]

THINKING IN ABSOLUTES!

YEAH!!!
 
[quote name='chosen1s']Browneyedgal68 - "But don't call the Dixie Chicks, or anyone else, unAmerican..."

As opposed to someone who would say "but don't go badmouthing our President, Democrat or Republican, in a foreign country, etc. etc."[/QUOTE]
You ellipsed out the part where they said "for not holding certain views." Why, I don't know, but the point wasn't that you couldn't say it, just that it was incorrect and made you sound foolish for saying it.
 
[quote name='chosen1s']I mean this sincerely - the protests I've seen have been "Pro-Peace" protests at military funerals. Have you witnessed these pro-war protests you speak of? I'm not being confrontational, I'm really curious because I haven't seen them. Honestly, I wish the Republicans were 1/2 as good at protesting as Democrats but am yet to see that happen so your comment was surprising. As for abortion, what does that even have to do with this?

As for freedom of speech - you and I totally agree. If a person is going to defend the Dixie Chicks rights based on unlimited freedom of speech, then they should also defend (or at least not attack) those who protest the Dixie Chicks unless they want to appear to be hypocrites. Agree with me or disagree with me, I don't care. But I think it's wrong to wave the flag of freedom of speech if you're only waving it for people you agree with.

Emoticons - you're just trying to get a rise out of me by patronizing my emoticons. I didn't learn to use them in my "Conservatives 101" class. I just have gotten used to using them in my typing over the years. Truthfully I'm a complete novice with them - I don't know anything but the smiley.[/quote]

I live on the cusp of DC, so at peace marches there are always the pro-war crowd (differentiated from the more civil plain vanilla pro-Bush crowd) bused in from south VA for the day, standing at the fringes yelling 'traitor' or worse as we file by, smile, and flash a peace sign.

The pro-life protesters tend to be Republican, and some of the things these people are downright inhumane, especially for a group of people pretending to espouse the views of a man like Jesus.

Basically it seems we agree about freedom of speech.

This whole convo reminds me of the Eminem/Moby fracas, I think Moby summed up the issue best when he said "I support Eminem's free speech, I oppose censorship in all forms. He's very good at what he does, but he's also a misogynist and homophobe and racist and anti-Semite." Just pointing out that it's not all liberals who buy into criminalizing hate speech, much as I'm sure there are some truly conservative Republicans who hate the idea of the government deciding whether I can see boobies after 10pm on a weeknight.
 
[quote name='chosen1s']You really wasted the rest of that rant because it doesn't even apply. I don't really have a stance one way or the other about calling someone "UnAmerican". America is so diverse it's hard to define. My point was as stated above - "The Dixie Chicks have the right to say whatever they want!.....You over there, shut up! You don't have the right to say whatever you want." It's hypocritical.[/QUOTE]

Yet you were the one who brandished that label at them!?! :dunce:
 
[quote name='camoor']I live on the cusp of DC, so at peace marches there are always the pro-war crowd (differentiated from the more civil plain vanilla pro-Bush crowd) bused in from south VA for the day, standing at the fringes yelling 'traitor' or worse as we file by, smile, and flash a peace sign.

The pro-life protesters tend to be Republican, and some of the things these people are downright inhumane, especially for a group of people pretending to espouse the views of a man like Jesus.

Basically it seems we agree about freedom of speech.

This whole convo reminds me of the Eminem/Moby fracas, I think Moby summed up the issue best when he said "I support Eminem's free speech, I oppose censorship in all forms. He's very good at what he does, but he's also a misogynist and homophobe and racist and anti-Semite." Just pointing out that it's not all liberals who buy into criminalizing hate speech, much as I'm sure there are some truly conservative Republicans who hate the idea of the government deciding whether I can see boobies after 10pm on a weeknight.[/QUOTE]

That's really interesting. I was in Minneapolis during the elections and it was pretty much the opposite. There were several "good ole' American families" who went out with pro-Bush signs supporting the war, but mostly there was just anti-war hatred. On the eve of the election, the word "Vote for" was painted over so that pro-Bush families woke up to find "F*CK BUSH" in their front yards. People hung similar banners in the middle of the city and the anti-war protests were generally people with nasty signs who tried to disrupt businesses by blocking the doors, etc. It was very oppressive.

Are your rallies really that peaceful? That surprises me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top