As he says...this won't make everybody happy...but then, neither did Rock 'n Roll! I happen to agree with him...so you can stone me as the messenger if you wish.

Bobbie

The Chick “Choke”

Author: Steve Warren
CEO for Music 1, Inc./Warren Country Consulting
steve@gomusic1.com
http://www.gomusic1.com
Steve Warren


The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily that of AllAboutCountry.com
July 9, 2006

The Chick “Choke”


Okay, this is going to piss-off some people, maybe even a lot of people. But I'm at the age now where I don't really care all that much. I've been in this biz a long time, longer than most of the folks reading this have been on the planet and I'm here to say that the still on-going Dixie Chicks episode is the second stupidest thing I have ever seen a radio format do. The capper was the circular firing squads in the late 70s when those heritage AM Top 40 stations began switching to all-Disco. There's little chance of Country stations taking the kind of ratings dive those brainiacs did. For one thing, Country listeners are incredibly loyal. For another, there's no place for them to go. Web stations aren't available in cars just yet.

Collectively, Country radio allowed a few idiots within our business to take one big crap on the heads of our premiere superstars. No, not all Country programmers joined in the stoning but those who didn't stood by silently and let it happen, participating by removing them from the library. They took the most important brand-name we had off our shelves. Talk about your circular firing squads. My, my. Can anyone imagine Adult Rock doing such a thing to Springsteen? Not a chance. He could call the president a war criminal and it wouldn't cost him one spin.

This would've blown over quickly had we defended their American right to say whatever they please, or had we simply ignored it, not said a word on the air and continued to play their monster hits. And remember this: they are the biggest selling female group of all time. Moreover, take another listen to the song that was #1 on the charts the week before Country radio dropped it. "Travelin' Solider", arguably the most poignant, honor the soldier, honor the sacrifice hit song ever. Take a good hard look at the hell-hole our guys are in over there and then listen to that record again. Talk about resonance! Talk about relevance! It can make grown men cry.

The Chicks were the greatest ambassadors for the format since the Garth explosion. Indeed, it could be argued they were even better for us than Garth because they have been icons of fun-loving, sexy but happily-married, hard-working, dues-paying, tradition-honoring makers of fresh, exciting multi-demo, soul satisfying Modern American Country music. Everybody knew it and everybody loved them. People who 'hate' Country music loved them. Damn, these girls were good. Not 'were', still are. The new album is great. Going into 7th week, it remains Number One and with virtually no airplay. The first single was a top download on iTunes for weeks. Had not all this have happened, the second single would be in Power rotation on every station by now. As is, it's not even on the charts. My professional ear says there are at least three others on that album that are Top 10 hits-that-will-never-be because they will be denied shelf space on playlists.

Virtually nobody stood up to defend them. We acted just like the citizens of Salem in 1692. And what Natalie said was so utterly innocuous. "We're embarrassed that the president of the United States from Texas." That's IT! We'd just come out of a decade in which the right wing of the nation had been insulting the president in the most guttural ways. Clinton fathered black babies. Clinton was a child molester. Clinton was running coke up from Central America. Clinton had one of his very best friends, a guy he'd known since kindergarten, murdered. Insulting the president in the most slovenly of terms was a team sport for all kinds of columnists, pundits and malcontents on the right and tolerated by those on the left as only and an odor that we have to accept as a natural byproduct of living in a free speech nation.

"Oh," they said, "but Natalie insulted the president in a foreign land!!", as if that made the deed all the more dirty. Listen, moron, the only nation that is less 'foreign' to us is Canada. England is family, don't you know? Mr. Bush's number one partner in the "coalition of the willing."

What happened was a feeding frenzy that Country radio primarily stirred up and brought upon ourselves. She said it in England at a weekend concert. It was reported in a UK paper. Sometime the next week one of the jock prep-sheets put the blurb in their daily dish. Then some few Country morning show guys then started talking about it using the 'with us or with the enemy' bullshit that the administration was then shoveling.

So, certainly such a thing got hot voicers from the phones, which the morning teams aired. Next, they started their instant 'polls' "Should we squash'em or what?! Come on gang, grab some rocks and let's go teach the bitches what it means to be a red blooded American." That bit of loud mouth bullying then got the ant hill all stirred up. So, soon we had the station in KC with a 'burn their CD's' rally and the one in Shreveport with the 'drive the tractors over the CDs' rally, both of which gave the bubble-headed bleached blondes of local TV some visuals and got the station call letters on the evening news and oh, don't we radio guys just love to have our faces on the TV news? The video then got to the national news. Oh, yeah! our station made CBS Evening News, ain't we great!!!


I noticed that, as per usual, those were the only two videos all the national networks were running; the one from KC and the one from Shreveport. And I also noticed the shots were tight-focus, there was not a big crowd at either event. The 'crowd' shot I saw in KC looked like about two dozen people were there. How many were station personnel, I wondered. And when they pulled back from the boot stomping on a CD down in Louisiana we saw that the foot in the boot belonged to some 13 year old kid.

Country radio absolutely started this. Would it have happened if the first morning shows hadn't talked about it and fanned the flames? Maybe. But I doubt it would have become a national story had not some radio programmers decided it was a 'promotion'. So, it was a fine old time, just like the witch trials.

Not long after this sorry ball got to rolling, I watched a rock n' roll history documentary on PBS. The grainy old video showed a couple of disc jockeys in St. Louis, circa '57, breaking 45s vowing to only play "good" music from thence forward. Deja vu. Same [naughty word removed], different assholes.

Without Country radio's instigation, would the crucifixion have happened anyway? Possibly. We do live in a culture corrupted by the daily bile and rants of neo-fascist idiots and liars like Rush Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity. But if right-wing radio hosts had tried to keep the episode going, we wouldn't have had to enable them with our acquiescence and participation. We could've defended our family and the American right to say whatever we dammed well please. But no. Burning them at the stake was just too much fun for some morning hosts looking for free press to stroke their own egos. And everybody else was just too timid to speak up and call it out for what it was: a gang rape.

Today, some in the biz are now justifying their refusal to play the Chicks because "they're out there sayin' bad things about the format, so screw them." Hummm. The format slaps them in the face, disowns them, shits in their plate and they are heartbroken and hurt because the family has cast them out for no good reason, so they say a few uncomplimentary things about Country radio on 60 Minutes. Well, that is perfectly understandable, wouldn't you think? Totally appropriate, too, because the shoe fits. And still, that is no good reason for any Country programmer to say he is justified in continuing to withhold airplay. Shoot yourself in the foot and cut your nose off to spite your face, lame brain.

Oh, but we now have research telling us not to play them. Larry Rosin presented some data at the last convention saying 20-some percent of our core audience thinks they should be banned. Quoting RFK here, 20% of the people are against everything all the time. I say So What!? Do we really want to have our programming decisions guided by the most ignorant of our listeners?

We've spent decades supplying Country radio sales people with consumer data refuting the Country stereotype. Ours is one of the most educated audiences, over all. Ours is clearly the most main- stream of middle American demographic groups. But, yes, we also do have some of the dumbest white people on the planet listening to us, as well. They are the ones who still believe Saddam was in cahoots with bin Laden. They are the ones who still believe 9/11 was planned and carried out by Iraqis. They are the ones who still say our boys and girls are dying in the desert fighting for our 'freedom'. They are the ones who call us on the phone and scream "Get those traitor bitches off the air or I'll never listen to you again."

So, the knuckle-draggers in our audience, are driving the programming bus. Country radio programmers, for the most part, want to play them, I think. I hope. But they get these hate calls from wingnuts, so they chicken out and don't spin the Chicks. If you got any guts, if you are truly a patriot, you ought to stand up for what's right. We're not talking about playing stiffs here, we're talking about smash it records, folks.

Those folks aren't gonna leave us. They may rant a bit, sure, but it'll fade away. They are and always will be Country listeners. Plus, in the age of consolidation, few Country stations have competition that their company doesn't also own. They won't be leaving because the Chicks are on the air. They've got no place else to go. Are they going to the webcasters? No, you don't get webcasts in the car and at home these people have a hard enough time setting the clocks on their VCRs, so tuning into a web station is more than they can handle. Besides, the Chicks are all over the web, my friends.

Listen, these cretins are the spawn of the people who used to call me on my request line back in the mid-'60s and shout "get that ****** music off the air." What I'd do was come out of the next Beatles or Beach Boys record with a double-shot of Wilson Pickett and James Brown in my very next set. But then, I was young and idealistic. And I had an owner who said "****'em, kid, play the hits."

The Chicks are still getting huge publicity with the release of the new album. They were on the cover of Time magazine twice within a month. All kinds of other magazines and newspapers have done stories on them, as has every entertainment oriented TV news and magazine show. And almost every one of them has pointed a finger at Country radio as being too intolerant to play their music. This just confirms the stereotype image of us all as close-minded, reactionary, intolerant and ignorant. The polling bears that out. I've seen numbers already that suggest the overwhelming majority of respondents now say Country radio is wrong for not playing Dixie Chicks. Country programmers are ignoring that and still courting the ugliest 20%.

I have loved this format, this music, and the people who make it run with all my heart. But today, with this sorry episode, I'm deeply embarrassed.

Well, The "Chicks" are still getting bashed in places. There are some real severe ones in the rant area on the ********* web site. I don't think the Chicks will ever recover their former popularity but may still be sucessful in releasing new material. They spoke their piece and the fans spoke their piece. As they say, you can't unring the bell.

Well, The "Chicks" are still getting bashed in places. There are some real severe ones in the rant area on the blanked out web site. I don't think the Chicks will ever recover their former popularity but may still be sucessful in releasing new material. They spoke their piece and the fans spoke their piece. As they say, you can't unring the bell.

The credibility of his points (most of which are correct) are tempered by his own suggestion that those against the Chicks shouldn't equally be able to speak and act as they want with the same freedom he suggests the Chicks deserve. It's the same trap many fall into in these arguments. They scream that the Chicks shouldn't be punished for their free speech, but the "punishment" they got was a direct result of others exercising their own rights and free speech and freedom of choice. You can't have it both ways. No one has forced the chicks to say or not say anything they want. They can't force fans or decision makers from playing, not playing, liking or not liking them in return. It's ironically EXACTLY part of the free speech process he claims is being assaulted. But he's wrong. It's simply another example of proof that free speech, whether offensive to him or others, is alive and well. He's missing the forest for his owned biased trees. It's possible that some of us may agree with his disappointment that free speech has resulted in the Chicks being scorned.. but that very scorn itself IS FREE SPEECH.

To suggest they have some pre-ordained right to be broadcasted on radio would raise the question of whether every other talented artist who is ignored is getting equally screwed. For every Dixie Chicks song not played, there are literally a million other great songs ALSO not played for a vast number of reasons, some legit, some biased, some racist, some unfairly, many because people illegally buy airtime (including the Dixie Chicks own label by their own admission) and so on. The system that gave them carte blanche radio play for anything they released for years is a fickle thing. They were at one time the biggest benefactors.. now they find themselves a bit more on the outside looking in. Join the club of your far less fortunate peer writers and artists who never got to enjoy the love affair radio had with your music in the first place DC's.

I personally like the Chicks music. Their version of my friend Susan Gibson's Wide Open Spaces set her up for life to pursue her own talent and passion on her own terms. But for every DC group, there's hundreds of equally deserving ones that get shut out of ever having a single chance at the opportunities that were given to the DC's over their career. And let's face it, it's not like they're not selling records or not successful beyond 99.9999% of the humans of the planet's wildest dreams. They're still a top tier, fabulously wealthy trio set for life on all levels. Having someone suggest "poor little Dixie Chicks" is a bit ironic while at the same time calling attention to people who REALLY are getting screwed.. like soldiers and their families or the worlds poor and starving or even the legions of artists who never got a fair shot at a single opportunity to have their music heard on mainstream radio ironically due in part to the Chicks own corporate label illegally keeping them off with Payola. If the Dixie Chicks never got another single song played on the radio EVER, they've been given more support than any other female artist group in history. It's like feeling bad for an NBA player who doesn't hit all his contract bonuses and only makes 120 million instead of 150 million. It's a hollow concern in the scheme of things.

The other observation I have is that the radio stations who don't play what people want eventually lose ratings and the staff loses their jobs. As internet radio finds ways into our non tethered lives, a lot will change. Most of the groups like the Chicks may find even LESS airplay in the first place or in the long run because there won't be artificial roadblocks filtering out the other 99% of artists and writers as the current radio model with it's payola and corporate control, which the Chicks have benefited from as much as anyone else in history until now, starts to fade in relevance in lieu of on demand and more open minded, less corporate controlled formats. It's simply hard to cry for some of the richest and most powerful music artists in the world when so many talented others were kept OFF radio while their songs dominated in part because of the artificial forces their corporate owners used.

Food for thought. It's rarely as black and white as any passionate advocate might suggest. Interesting article though. That's for posting it. I like reading passionate well spoken advocates, whether I totally agree with their premise or not.

Brian

[This message has been edited by Brian Austin Whitney (edited 07-11-2006).]

Here here. I too like the Chicks, but...

I'd be happy to be in their position to be granted a forum to say that in front of thousands if not millions of fans. To suggest they deserve radio play over myself or any of my peers that equally has the talent is silly. I don't care what format the station is. They got there with hard work, payola backing and a bit of luck. So crying foul about it is Just Plain Stupid.

Jody

------------------
Music That Makes Your Soul Happy!
www.jodywhitesides.com

I totally agree with the author of that article. Thank you for posting it, Bobbie.

I was never so ashamed of the country music industry as I was with the Chicks fiasco. Ashamed, I tell ya. I hope they make a bazillion dollars with (edit: "withOUT") country radio.

The only good thing is that I wrote a couple of good songs as a result of this. Of course, country radio wouldn't play them but I sure like 'em.

[This message has been edited by DukeWill (edited 07-12-2006).]

Dear Bobbie,

Thanks so much for posting this article.

Nice to hear a different point of view. I have gotten really tired of people bashing the Dixie Chicks for stating opinions....funny...the same people rant about THEIR right to free speech...but when there is an opinion differnt from their owm...they are the first ones to say
free speech isn't the issue!

I TOTALLY agree with Dukewill here!

The first thing my husband and I did when this fiasco started was go out and BUY the Dixie Chicks CD !!!

Go, Chicks!

Emily

[This message has been edited by Emily Sanders (edited 07-11-2006).]

Seems a little like John Lennon with his "Beatles are bigger than Jesus" crack.

Who knows how big THEY could have been

Although this seems to be going on longer.

Maybe it just seems that way.....

Or maybe the Chicks have tapped into something that the Beatles couldn't

Scott

Howdy Ray,

Haven't been to that other site in years...mostly because of the ranting that was so pervasive then. Sounds like it is still going on...probably some of those knuckle-draggers he is talking about. Thanks for taking time to read this. Funny thing is..I think his whole point was that it wasn't primarily the "fans" who spoke. My interpretation of his words are that he is saying that it was the radio programmers looking for a promo.

Hugs,
Bobbie

Howdy Brian,

To my way of thinking...any cd that is able to make it to the top 3 on Billboard without radio play...tells me that it wasn't the fans who spoke negatively about the Chicks. As I said above...this article..at least to me is all about the radio programmers who were trying to create a controversy where none really existed...or at least a very minimal one. There are a lot of folks out there who simply love being in the center of a big drama at all times, whether real or created. I know folks like that. We all do.

I was sure this would bring out opinions on both sides. For once I was right. LOL

Hugs,
Bobbie

Bobbie,

Rap music regularly FAR outsells ANY country music in terms of album sales with ZERO radio play. ZERO.

People act like the Chicks have a birthright to radio airplay. They don't. People are not played on the radio for all sorts of bad reasons. The fact that the Chicks own record corporation confessed to illegal payola to help them and their label mates get illegal airplay for years and years means they've gotten more than they (or anyone in their situation) actually deserved in the first place. There's such a double standard here.

Free speech applies to BOTH sides. But it seems that both sides of this (the PRO and the ANTI Dixie Chick crowds) seem to want to shut the other side down. The reality is that they BOTH have the right to say what they want.. they have the right to tell others to be for or against. People ban stuff ALL THE TIME. Being able to boycott or ban something is an important part of free speech. Can't you guys see that? Should people be forced to play Dixie Chick music? Okay.. who else should they be forced to play? And who needs to be removed to make room? Which artist gets the ax? Please think this through.

Brian

Howdy Brian,

Heck I am not disagreeing with what you are saying...merely don't see that as the issue here. Nobody is forcing anyone to play anything. The issue as I read it was that the programmers created a controversy that did not really exist. Has it happened before? Yes...will it happen again...probably. A lot of folks who really enjoy Chick's music were the losers here. We also voted with our wallets...and chose to go out and buy the cd regardless of airplay. Regardless of any of the issues you bring up..payola, undeserved airplay...whatever...there are a whole lot of us who truly love to listen to them. I am not and I did not see that the author was trying to shut anyone else up at all. I fully believe everyone is entitled to speak their mind in this country. I do think, however, that many of us who did support the Chicks all along were way too silent when all this was going on. Anyone and everyone can choose to disagree with me..and freely say so. I'd be the first person in line to stand up for your right to disagree with me..with the president...or whomever. What I truly was personally disappointed in was that anyone would chastise anybody else for saying what they believe when that is one of the founding principles of this country...and IMO one of the things that our armed forces are supposedly over there fighting for. It just seems so totally hypocritical.

Hugs,
Bobbie

Howdy Duke,

Sorry I answered Brian out of turn there...but he is online...and I figure you're probably snoozing by this time. Thank you so much for taking time to read this and share your thoughts on it. While I agree with the radio stations' right to play who they choose to...they ought to be smart enough to recognize that people who loved the Chicks music aren't quite as fickle as the programmers figured they were...hence the huge sales despite the lack of airplay. The radio in my car died...and to be honest...I haven't really missed it. I can play my cds and listen to the folks I choose to whenever I want to.

Thanks again...

Hugs,
Bobbie

"The entire country may disagree with me, but I don't understand the necessity for patriotism. Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don't see why people care about patriotism." Natlie Maines (as reported in the Telegraph, June 2006)

Bobbie,

I am not aware of anyone stopping the Chicks from saying anything. Free speech doesn't at all mean freedom from the possible negative reaction and ramifications of that speech. They were free to say what they did and they did. Others were free to respond by doing what they could to refute and negatively impact them commercially in return. In return to that, Chicks fans still were free to buy the music and support those places where Chicks music was available. Internet radio ALWAYS has someone playing the chicks. So if people are bothered by their lack of airplay, they should simply shift to Internet radio, or, as many have done, just buy their CD. They make a lot of money from CD sales so some could argue their lack of airplay (and subsequent satiation of fans desire to hear them) may have resulted in a lot more CD sales that may never have happened if all their songs were hot rotation. Really the only people that got hosed here were the songwriters who didn't get the big payday they probably expected from airplay. But hell, great songwriters get screwed every single day because of the system. At least in the case of the Chicks, the system has rewarded them handsomely for years and years. You live by the corrupt system and sometimes die by it too. The chicks are doing just fine. Their fans have all sorts of access to their music. The subsequent backlash to the original backlash has just as many political implications and manipulation in it as the original did. In the end, it's the same old 2 tired Left Wing/Right Wing fanatics that frankly have worked hard to ruin our country. I personally dislike both sides very strongly. Us 80% in the middle of the two 10% fringe sides have to deal with the aftermath of both sides and their regular scorched earth tactics. I only wish some day the middle would tell both sides to F$%# OFF and leave the sane people alone to live a decent life without their histrionics and BS.

How's that for voicing my opinion! Guess I'll never get radio airplay from either side now.

Brian

Howdy Ms Emily,

Yep...reminds me of the article I read in Country Weekly..actually a letter from a serviceman who had just returned from duty in Iraq. He said he was appalled that anyone would suggest that any citizen of this country not be able to say what they believe about our leadership. He alluded to that line of thinking as being somewhat akin to what was going on in Germany when Hitler rose to power. Those who did see through his line of reasoning but who said nothing were as much to blame for the results as those who were in lockstep with his thinking. It is the hypocrisy that is the issue here IMO.

Thanks for stopping in.

Hugs,
Bobbie

Hi Marty..

Yep, she said that...and blind patriotism is what got Germany into a position to start WW2 and annihilate much of the Jewish population of Europe. I am one of those who chokes up when I see the flag in the parade..and when I think of all who serve and have served in the military..those who gave their lives for the rest of us so we can enjoy our freedoms. BUT...I also firmly believe that we must retain not just the right, but the OBLIGATION to question our leadership when we think that that leadership is taking our nation in the wrong direction.

Hugs,
Bobbie

Howdy Brian,

You know...from my days in marketing...it would seem that the real issue is that the 80% you are talking about are the biggest part of the problem because such a large percentage of them just don't bother to get involved one way or the other..so we end up leaving the decision making to that 10% (lunatic) fringe on either side. That is pretty sad but unfortunately...pretty much the state of affairs. In other nations, people die for the right to cast a vote...and here..we can't be bothered to get to the polls. Then we have the audacity to complain about how things are going. Ummmm...I did say the issue was hypocrisy, didn't I?

Now...please get back to your work!! You have far more important things to contend with than disagreeing with me...cause I'm not arguing with ya!! LOL

Hugs,
Bobbie

So true - but I'd be scared of everybody going to the polls unless they try to educate themselves. Paraphrased from "The Art Of War" - ...the masses are swayed by emotion...the will to obtain education AND voting is the key to maintaining a free society

Howdy Jody,

Sorry I missed you in the fray. If the world were truly a "fair" place...all talented folks would have a level playing field with the same opportunities. I think most of us who think we have talent would also love to be where they are now. There are a lot of reasons why certain "acts" rise to the top and as you say...fairness may not be one of those. But for those of us who sat on the sidelines while someone else decided "for us" that the Chicks were wrong to say what they did, we don't see the core issue as stupid at all. But I defend your right to think and say so.

Hugs,
Bobbie

Thank-you-Bobbie-for-the-posts.

To-ban-or-boycott-something-or-someone-based-on-hype-lies-and-ignorance-would-be-as-

empty-and-deceitful-as-those-who-caused-such-an-action-to-be-considered-in-the-first-place.

To-me-there-is-a-big-difference-between-'Freedom-of-Speech'-and-the-freedom-to-promote-

hate-crimes-against-anyone.

And-it-was-the-Springer-attitude-of-some-Country-Radio-Stations-that-lead-it's-listeners-
into-a-

hate-filled-life-threatening-witch-hunt...simply-for-'RATINGS'-and-the-$-that-they-b ring.

Freedom-of-Speech-is-not-and-was-never-the-situation-here!

Chris

Sorry_if_the_hyphens_are_causing_any_of_you_ultra_wide_window_pain...haha///but_my_
space_bar_is_broken_and_I_don't_know_any_other_way_to_make_a_sentence_readable...
I_won't_post_any

_more_here_till_I_get_a_new_keyboard.My_apologies!

[This message has been edited by Brian Austin Whitney (edited 07-13-2006).]

vontanner, it probably took you 20 minutes to write that post with all the hyphens. I wonder if you would be so kind to take another 20 minutes and remove them? It's screwing up the width of this page, making it ultra-wide. Thank you.

"They scream that the Chicks shouldn't be punished for their free speech, but the "punishment" they got was a direct result of others exercising their own rights and free speech and freedom of choice."

really?

you think clear channel flexing its oligargical market muscle is a free speech right?

that's odd. I think its fascism.

Posting here changes no minds. It just voices opinions.

If you want change, call the station, buy or don't buy a cd and most of all vote.

One thing I've noticed, as a tide turns, it's the 20% that turn it, and the 80% surf on it.

The two most active types are: ardent follower, usually allying not with an idea, but with a group of people who give them something (identity, power, safety) and will follow their group even when it is proven wrong; and the pathological leader who will jump in front of a movement and say,"follow me," adjusting their values to the morphs of the group. There are few statesmen and few true patriots, most will, at times, do things against the best interest of the country to keep alive the cause.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Mike

p.s. dang, this width of this thread is annoying, now that I know what causes it (thanks for the info, Duke), I will remember never to construct an unbroken line of characters that extend very long, and if, by some remission, I find that I have done that, I'll certainly edit it.

------------------
You have to practice improvisation. -Art Tatum

Mike Dunbar Music

[This message has been edited by Mike Dunbar (edited 07-12-2006).]

Folks...

The article writer only touched on the massive consolidation of radio ownership that's happened over the last 20 years.

Most stations are owned by just a few companies, which are overwhelmingly headed by Bush-supporting right-wingers. It's these who are driving the controversy and the stupid boycott.

------------------
Later,

Pat

I am very neutral in this whole argument- but I think there is one very key element in this argument that is being overlooked. I truly believe if the chicks said what they did over HERE in the USA, they would've been viewed by the right as just another Clooney, Springsteen, left side thing. What STARTED the clamor, was that they were bashing our leaders on FOREIGN soil. The war draws intense feelings on the left AND right, and people have the right to say what they want--
But at the end of the day, this is STILL THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. Alot of the rest of the world hates us for one reason or another. Yes, we can debate within us, but I DO believe it IS classless to go and create even more hate in other parts of the world than there already is. This is what is at the core of the "chicks" issue in my opinion.

Herbie

Hi Liszt,

Funny, but I don't recall the framers of our Constitution putting anything in there about intelligence or the need to be educated regarding leaders and policy being a prerequisite to voting. Yes there are a lot of ignorant people out there but they still have the right to cast a ballot in our society. Yes voters SHOULD take time to educate themselves...but alas, that is not required nor is our society or our freedom predicated on that.

Hugs,
Bobbie

I think we're choking our OWN chickens, beating this subject to death! {LOL}

------------------
bc

Webb Pierce forever!

Hi Chris,

Talk radio is definitely one of those tools that has been unleashed on the public which seems to bring out the worst in people..who suddenly feel that even their most racist, bigoted or phobic attitudes are supported by countless other "faceless" people...including the hate-mongering show hosts who love to see how far they can push people's buttons. And yeah...sadly...it does bring in big ratings. Why does it always come down to the money?

Hugs,
Bobbie

Howdy Bit,

Nice to hear from our Canadian contingent! I agree with you on the Clear Channel thing. Never was about freedom of speech. It was about who had the biggest bat in the rack.

Best,
Bobbie

Hey Mikey...in my opinion..LOL you are right as usual (although being a female I certainly retain the right to change my opinion! ) This wasn't posted to change anyone's core beliefs but to see what others think about the subject.

Years ago, my job necessitated a great deal of involvement with the political process at the state level (NOT in TN..another state)..and that experience was incredibly revealing about the nature of decision-making in this country. As you said...the huge majority of folks are totally UNINVOLVED. More or less just want to be left alone.

Unfortunately, in a democracy, that doesn't work because the decisions made by those in government impact nearly every facet of our lives...and it is nearly impossible to make everyone happy on any issue. So..on most issues it is a matter of making everyone a little bit unhappy and some folks will always be VERY unhappy with any given decision.

So the 80% surfs until the waves in some area get too overwhelming on some issue they can't ignore and then they scream "foul" and wonder why.

Yep, there are crooks, criminals and all sorts of bad people in government...but hey...that is true of every business everywhere. There are also a LOT of very dedicated people who really do try to make the best decisions for the squeaky wheels who bother to let them know what they want the decision-makers to do. If lobbyists and PACs are the only ones they hear from..who is to blame? When was the last time you called your Senator or Congressman and expressed a concern or wrote a letter. I am guessing that no more than 10% of the folks reading this thread have done so in the past year.

Guess I will get my surfboard waxed for the next wave!

Hugs,
Bobbie

Howdy Pat,

It's a funny thing about how the media seems to be in the hands of an increasingly smaller and smaller group. The realist in me says this is a bad thing, when a few with an agenda control what we hear. Seems like a recipe for disaster actually...sort of borderline what seems to occur in all those "bad countries" we don't like in other parts of the world. Hmmmm Sadly, perhaps the "Axis of Evil" is tilted a bit on the home front.

Hugs,
Bobbie

here's a chicks thread on the NS board
http://mboard.usanetwork.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=276742



------------------
Ande Rasmussen
AndeRasmussen@aol.com
http://www.AndeRasmussen.com
http://songramp.com/ande

http://www.MySpace.com/anders

Editor Of "Inspirations for Songwriters"
Message archive:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DIFS/messages
To receive IFS,
SEND an EMPTY email to:
difs-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Howdy Herbie,

Can't say as I buy that line of reasoning myself. Why should it matter one whit where we state our views. I don't think that there are any codicils in the Constitution that restrict "where" we voice our opinions...from the safety of our own shores or somewhere else.

Oh..and the author DID cover this subject...see article above: "Oh," they said, "but Natalie insulted the president in a foreign land!!", as if that made the deed all the more dirty. Listen, moron, the only nation that is less 'foreign' to us is Canada. England is family, don't you know? Mr. Bush's number one partner in the "coalition of the willing." Oh...and I am NOT calling you a moron!!

There were and are, indeed, a LOT of people in other nations who agree with you (and me) that this really IS the greatest nation on earth. But we are also the greediest in terms of consumption and negative impacts on the earth. If we want the rest of the world to keep us on that pedestal on which we think we belong...we need to act the role of responsible world leadership. Sometimes we do...sometimes we fall very short. Sometimes we ought to actually LISTEN to the rest of the world's opinions of us.

In the case of the Chicks commentary in the UK...IMO it was a matter of playing to that particular audience...something all good entertainers do to gain acceptance. At that point in time...much of the world WAS opposed to the decisions that our leaders were making. I daresay that Bono, Springsteen and all the other very opinionated major artists probably don't change their views or the way they express them when traveling and performing abroad either. Why would anyone expect that of them? That is hardly logical. They are entitled to say what they think regardless of where they are at any given time. As Americans, we ought to be applauding these folks for exercising their freedoms and for caring enough to speak out instead of chastising anyone.

Hugs,
Bobbie

It served as a very timely reminder that The Machine operates on standardized parts.

so let it be written
so let it be done

Ok, plan B. Delete your entire post. Stick your cursor in there and camp out on Delete.



[This message has been edited by Brian Austin Whitney (edited 07-13-2006).]

Oh, my goodness...

------------------
Later,

Pat

Bobbie
Peoples "perception" is 99% of their reality-
Not trying to be too deep here, I'm simply saying that doing it in another country, is why this REALLY caused such an uproar. I am NOT judging or arguing left or right. Personally, I find it offensive when you go out for entertainment and the performer injects politics into the evening. I hate it on either side of the aisle--if I spent my money to go out and have fun I can only take a little drop of politics---
The country thing--- If you have a fight with your wife, you argue at HOME- You might even go out and bag her to your friends (although this will usually come back to haunt you)--but you just DON'T go somewhere and bag her to a bunch of strangers in a different land---sorry, but I have no respect for what they did, MOSTLY because they did it overseas. Do they have the right to say whatever they want? Maybe--- Is it appropriate? I think not.

Hi Herbie...

This is totally unrelated to this thread but I have been trying to reach you via email. It is urgent...about Pineyfest. Can you either call me at my work number (931-388-1339 X 246) yet this evening or email me ASAP at bgallup@aol.com. I don't have your number and the herbietunes email doesn't seem to reach you.

Hugs,
Bobbie

Bobbie, check your email.. I heard from Kim..
thanks for responding to my email..

~~shelia

There hasn't been any music on the radio since the mid-70s anyway so what's the big deal.

heh

good point

Go Doug!

------------------
bc

yo doug...
right on the money with that one! puts it all in perspective!
rock on,
r.

------------------
http://cdbaby.com/all/chevyford

I understand that this can be a very emotive issue. And I do take on board the idea that people of a for or against persuasion with regard to this subject have the right to free speech. On the other hand, I do see a distinction between the viewpoint expressed by the Dixie chicks which I feel was an honestly held opinion and the line espoused by the radio stations whose sincerity I would have to question.

Freedom of expression is always a prickly subject but I have always felt that it is not truly free speech unless it is allied with thought and personal responsibility. It is my opinion that the radio stations have not exercised much thought or personal responsibility, not so much in the content of their opinions but in the visceral and intimidating manner in which they of attempted to put them across.

------------------
[b][color=red]A Great FREE Way To Promote Your Music[/color][/b]

Lighten up folks! The Chicks are not Jane Fonda! I spent a tour in Nam and turned down a part in a movie with her 10 years later. I was a hawk and hunted terrorists before it became in vogue. I became a dove when my boys became draft age and found forgiviness as John MCain and the other POW's did. The issue about the Chicks reminds me of my childhood and the Mac Carthy hearings and the black list of entertainers. As my favorite baseball player would say "It's de ja vue all over again." Unfortunatley history repeats itself. It is not news that the current White House residents will do anything possible to discredit any opposition and spin intelligence/news/stats to their favor. The only person you can trust in the current adminstration is John D. Negroponte. The rest do not have the huevos. The bottom line is remember the Our Father (The Lord's Prayer) "Forgive us of our trespasses as we forgive thoes that trespass against us." Think about it; we condem ourselves by condeming others.

Nuf said!


------------------
Kahlil Gibran:
God created music as a common language for all men. It inspires the poets, the composers, and the architects. It lures us to search our souls for the meaning of the mysteries described in ancient books.

[This message has been edited by tadpolz (edited 07-15-2006).]

Interesting that this is still a topic of discussion long after the incident happened.
While I respect their propensity to exercise their rights of freedom of speech as a free American, I do take issue with their actions on the stage of a foreign land.

The closest parallel I can think of for a comparable incident happened with another musician nearly 50 years ago. This musician decided to flaunt his values, which were actually hardly being paid attention to here, across the water. Unfortunately for him, his foolish heart and instincts got him into trouble there and changed his career direction in a not so dis-similar fashion to what has happend to the once beloved Chuxie Ducks.

Anyone care to guess who I might be alluding to here?
His fall from grace was long and hard.

Point is, don't assume that your freedoms you so dearly treasure here can give you a free ride elsewhere.

I also tend to agree with the notion that as long as we have troops in harm's way, their mission and safety isn't helped any by offering up an outward opinion of dissidence on a foreign stage. Save that outward sharing of dissidence for within our own borders and give the audience that paid to see you what they initially paid to come see you do - entertain them with what you initially indicated you were going to do. MUSIC!

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

I just heard "Not ready to make nice" (3rd song on the Chick's new album) on Atlanta's STAR 94 at lunch time. STAR 94 is the popular pop station. Interesting to hear it there and not on the country station, but the song sounds more like Michelle Branch than the chicks anyway

Great song BTW!

First of all, I should say that I concur with Brian's eloquent response to the original post. It's absolutely fine to say whatever you please in a public forum; you just have to be prepared to accept the consequences of your speech. Whether it's a pat on the back or a scathing admonishment, it's all part of the deal. To expect immunity from consequences is the height of arrogance.
Secondly, I'd like to add that I was really enjoying this thread for a while. To witness people of differing opinions respectfully putting forth their views in an articulate manner warms my heart.
Unfortunately, it didn't take long for someone to spoil it by trotting out the old "This is the greatest country in the world' chestnut. Of what possible use to a debate is a propagandist phrase like that? Is there a "Greatest Country In The World" competition that I'm unaware of? Do they give out medals like in the Olympics? What is the criteria used? (It can't be the beer, otherwise Belgium would have won wouldn't they?)
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go and have a nice lie-down.

http://www.steverobinsonmusic.com/

------------------
"The Empire's slipping away..."

[This message has been edited by Robinson (edited 07-21-2006).]

yeah, there is a contest for Greatest Country in the World. It's called "immigration". People vote with their feet and their lives.

Bill

[This message has been edited by DukeWill (edited 07-21-2006).]

Europe it is, then.

One should remember that it was the fans of the Chicks that did not accept the Chicks statement and caused the rejection of the Chicks after that statement was reported. I think Mr. Warren is refering to the fact that some 42 dates of the Chicks around the U.S. this year have been eliminated because of slow/no sales. Other Country Acts have sold out and drawn excellent crowds so it it seems the fans aren't welcoming the Chicks back just yet. It has nothing to do with "Right Wing" radio, George Bush or anything else. It is the fans that have passed on the Chicks. I wish the Chicks the best and in a decade or two down the road they will look back and reflect and judge their actions. We all make mistakes. This one is a small one at best. Write a hit!

Dude...chill.
I don't think I'm the only one who shared an opinion here that you disagree with and really don't appreciate being singled out. This is a discussion and your tone is rather over the top. I can appreciate your strong disposition having had a loved one as a POW. I truly hope he was able to regain some sort of a foothold on happiness before the end.

The Dixie Chicks took a cheap shot at our president on foreign soil and are now profiting from it. I find that to be offensive. I don't care who our president is. While that is my opinion, I don't see that as a reason to go off on a fellow board member who disagrees with me here. I used to think fellow members at JPF were generally above that type of behavior.

We can disagree on points without the condescending b.s. If you don't see that as possible, then I am truly sorry you find that to be the case and feel the need to go that route.

btw - I don't think I ostracized the Dixie Chicks as "bad people" anywhere in my post. Or were you finished with singling me out at that point of your post?

Best -
Jeff

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

I totally agree with Jeff, Duke...sorry but
what makes an entertainer throw his/her opinion about politics into public domain? If you want to do that, then do like Steve Largent or Ronald Reagan (or whomever) and stop doing what you're doing and go into politics. It is NOT entertaining to me to go out to see music and have them inject their political views into my evening of relaxation (maybe just a slight touch on it is OK, but no rant like this). And don't do it in someone else's house, especially. If you have to be an activist do it at the proper time and place...Just my opinion, and we all know opinions are like a**holes--everybody's got one---breathe, Duke, breathe

Last I checked, Europe was a continent.

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

Last I checked I wasn't that petty.

Even BAD Publicity can be GOOD Publicity. Especially if you're already a huge Star This whole thread is a fine example. Sue Lainey

Duke,
Supposedly the President is down in the Polls. However it appears the Chicks are even further down in the "Polls". Once again, it is the Fans that are "Voting" the Chicks "Out of Office" so to speak.

Bush won the election. Get over it. I hear Lousiana is sinking. Move to higher ground. Move way up north. To Shreveport.

Really? Let's see:

- #1 debut U.S. pop albums chart AND the U.S. country albums chart
- 526,000 copies sold in the first week
- gold record within its first week

That's still a success, hands down.

It is obvious to me that this whole "backlash" thing was so completely, utterly contrived by a handful of radio DJs who wanted to pump up ratings by riling up their nutjob listeners.

------------------
Scott Andrew
Lo-fi acoustic pop superhero!
http://www.scottandrew.com/music

Well Scotandrew,
You missed a couple of points. Steve Wareren's pointed Article and some 42 dates posponed,(Cancelled), around the U.S. booked for the Chicks. Remember that is not what I am saying, that is the fans "Speaking". Once again, it is the fans, not D.J.'S or anyone else that have abandoned the Chicks. You can take it apart and put it back together any way you please, it is the same result.

If there was no complaints, you would hear plenty of the Chicks on the radio. Sorry.

Ray, just because the majority does something does not make it right. People have been duped before. And later regretted being duped.

As for "get over it," if one feels as I and millions of others do that the Dubya committed treason, you won't see any of us "getting over it."

As far as the fans "voting" the Dixie Chicks out... the magnitude of how many country radio fans rejected them was made about 1,000 times worse by what country radio did. They incited the whole furor.

I think the Dixie Chicks will be just fine in the long run. They will gain millions of new followers outside of country music. Plus, some country music fans will come back to them. They are very talented and I think the political situation will cause more people to rethink the whole situation. Time will tell.

ok. I'm posting this just because I want to hear someone say it. I just saw a CBC interview. Turns out once the freeze was on DJs got actually fired for daring to play their music.

How about one of you Fine Americans tell me how that was the moral thing to do. I know what you're gonna say. I just want to hear someone who actually believes it step up and say it.

"Last I checked, Europe was a continent."

same size

try googling "European Union"

OK. Here's how:

Companies are in business to make money. Most of the time, they have shareholders, some whose retirement income depends on the company turning a profit. They also have many other employees who have families that depend on their paychecks.

The company suits may have concluded that, by playing the Chick's music, they would lose listeners. Hence ratings. Hence advertising income. So maybe they ordered the DJ's not to play the Chick's music. Some did anyway....

Maybe the suits concluded that these DJ's were endangering the company. If so, maybe employees would have to be laid off. Maybe elderly shareholders would have to take a job bagging groceries in their golden years.

So they considered the welfare of the bulk of their employees and their shareholders (who, this day and age, are generally not rich). And stacked it against the welfare of the DJ's who apparently found it necessary to make a statement.

So whose side are you on? The company protecting its middle class employees and shareholders? Or the DJ's supporting the Dixie Chicks, who would never have to work another day in their lives.

One could argue that the decision was entirely moral....

I'm not. And I admit my examples are facetious. Nevertheless, its been my experience that opposing sides rarely consist of good vs evil. Almost always, it's Joe Blow with his agenda vs Joe Blivet with his.....

Scott


[This message has been edited by scott59 (edited 08-18-2006).]

Don't worry 'bout my brain Ms. Emily,,,,I've decided to <sigh> instead...

Midnite



------------------
Satchel was right...Something is gaining on me....
www.jackcouldntmakeit.com

Sorry 'bout that, Midnite

Let me atone:

Picture yourself on a BOAT! on a RIVER! With TANGERINE DREAMS!!! and MARMALADE SKIES!!!!

Well forgive me for saying so, or not, I really don't care, but when a singer says "I'm ashamed President Bush is from Texas" and the market backlash is so bad record executives are afraid to play her records I really have to wonder even more what all those soldiers are dying for.

'T'aint you Scott, no need for 'tonement, even if I could offer it....

Midnite

P.S
I bought a 30 y/o bicycle this evening for rides around the lake....Ya got one guess what I've christened her.....I can't wait for Sunday night when "The Shatt Hits The Fan"(Comedy Central insider's reference)





------------------
Satchel was right...Something is gaining on me....
www.jackcouldntmakeit.com

Nothing to forgive....

I see it a little differently. I see this episode as a shining example of our freedoms.

But rather than put a lengthy post here, I'll note that Brian's post (4th one on page one of this thread) has already touched on this. The whole post is good but the first paragraph makes the point I'm driving at here.

In these types of situations, we always seem to focus on the rights of speakers - and forget about the rights of the listeners to respond....

Scott

P.S. In the general case of somebody making a statement that could damage, or even kill, their career: If they thought about the ramifications of their statement and went ahead anyway, I would have nothing but the highest respect for them - whether I agreed their views or not. On the other hand, if they just said it without thinking about any ramifications, I'd simply think they were clueless. Which of those happened here? I don't know - which is why I find it difficult to express an opinion about the Chicks' behavior.


[This message has been edited by scott59 (edited 08-19-2006).]

Ha! I don't even need one!

Seen some of the commercials for the Comedy Central thing. Looks promising

Scott

and I see it as a shining example of how you've squandered your inheritance.

Haven't been to a concert in years,but if I did go I would expect to be entertained for my hard earned money and not lectured to about some millionairs political beliefs e.g. Linda Rhonstadt in Vegas.Mr. Warren should visit a national guard armory or military base and call the soldiers "boys and girls." I'd like to see that.As A famous right-wing radio talk show host say's SHUT UP AND SING

[This message has been edited by ben willis (edited 08-19-2006).]

from what I've seen The Chicks are better off for it.

[This message has been edited by BitWhys (edited 08-19-2006).]

<sigh>

Midnite

------------------
Satchel was right...Something is gaining on me....
www.jackcouldntmakeit.com

You are, of course, welcome to your opinion.

However, since it appears to me to be so completely at odds with the historical record, I'm led to conclude that you and I do not share enough of a common framework to hang a discussion on.

We could build one but we would stray completely out of music and into politics - thereby giving the other members of this forum the opportunity to exercise their right of free speech and start throwing (metaphorical) tomatoes at both of us. Rightly so....

Maybe we'll bump into each other in a political forum someday and discuss the issue further.

Being this is a music forum, I'm bowing out for now....

Scott

I'm guessing Natalie figured she could squeek her little GB comment by in England without anyone across the water noticing or finding out what she said. Interesting she didn't make that little comment at a concert in her home state.

Oh yeah . . . I'm supposed to come out and "say (what)who I'm talking about" . . . Natalie's home state is Texas.



btw - my earlier reference in this thread was to Jerry Lee Lewis. His values didn't travel so well across the water and his career was never quite the same.

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

Is an $11.5M gross over 19 shows and 10 sellouts supposed to be bad?

Not at all, but . . . quite a difference from Summer 2003.

$61M gross over 63 shows and 57 sellouts. 3rd in overall concert sales for the season - even with Maines firing off her remarks early on in that tour.

Now, more than a few cancelled shows forcing a rather extensive revision of the current tour itinerary.

At least they still have Canada & Australia to replace those cancelled shows with. Looking forward to some new thought provoking Natalie quotes to read soon!

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

Hi guys...

I see that this post has taken on a life of its own. Glad that we all enjoy the freedom to express OUR views openly without having to worry that someone would ostracize US for it!!

Hugs,
Bobbie

Not true Bobbie. Being reckless with where and how we say things, as well as what we choose to say, can easily get any one of us ostracized from a number of things. Go yell 'FIRE' in a public facility and see if they let you return the following day.

We all have freedoms but also the right and responsibility to be accountable with them. Taking those freedoms for granted can be a dangerous and risky proposition.

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

Hi Java,

While your example is certainly true, it is peripheral to the point I was making...we do in this nation have the right to freely express our views on political issues and how our elected leaders are performing at their tasks. However, along with that freedom comes the responsibility to be INFORMED and to contribute to the way our government acts. Blind patriotism (my country right or wrong) is just wrong...no matter WHAT nation is being discussed. That is how Germany got to where it did before WW2. To ostracize anyone for speaking their opinions regarding our leadership, regardless of the forum, to me is much akin to The Emperor's New Clothes. I do not, however, expect everyone to agree with me. THAT is what I think is wrong with what went on with the Chicks. Just because they are singers, why could it possibly be wrong for them to have an opinion and why would anyone feel compelled to dislike them for expressing it? I don't dislike anyone just because they don't see everything the same way I do. That is imcomprehensible to me. I support everyone's right to hold their own opinions..and to express them. That, to me is what the folks are supposedly fighting for over in Iraq at least the last I knew.

If you like someone's music...why would their politics matter at all? YIKES!!! Those two aren't even remotely related IMO.

Hugs,
Bobbie

That is where the line got blurred with the Chicks. They took their freedoms beyond our borders and assumed too much.

Hi Java,

Where anyone says something is, to me, irrelevant. They are still Americans. Do we suddenly follow different rules when we in another country? If so...I don't know where the Constitution states anything like that. You are only an American when you are on American soil? I don't THINK so.

But you are free to hold a differing opinion...after all..you ARE an American (at least that is my assumption...and you know what they say about assumptions!).

Hugs,
Bobbie

By your line of reasoning then, it is ok for the Islam punishment of stoning to take place on our land because Iranians should be able to follow their own rules when they our in our country. Right? After all, they are only an Iranian when they are on Iranican soil? I don't THINK so.

An Ostrich?
Who called Natalie an Ostrich.
I don't think she looks like an Ostrich.
That's outrageous!
I think she is really pretty, sings good too.
I just wish she'd keep her mouth shut when she ain't singin'. Then all this would just go away.

Hi Bobbie

------------------
www.soundclick.com/billrobinson

www.dreamqueststudio.com

Bill
Live with a song in your heart

Hey Bill,
*edit*
Oh . . . I think I see now.
You made a little funny there, didn't you?
aaaahahahahahaaaa


[This message has been edited by JavaMusiK (edited 08-25-2006).]

Now...some of you know my opinion of Mr bush...frankly..I think he's just a bit short of a horses arse on his best day!

(did I really say that?)

You self righteous folks have no problem with an American heralding his love of country and president anywhere in the world..but when this lady says something negative...you're all up in arms.

If she hadf said"George Bush is a great Texan" in England, you'd all say "There...that's a good American...exercising her right to stand up anywhere and say what she believes...Hooray for her!"

Some real hypocrisy going on here...

My friend Bill Robinson is as conservative as I am liberal...pay attention to the way he frames an opinion contrary to mine.

Some of you could learn a good lesson from him.

And..as a long time member of the show biz community, it is my learned opinion that the Chicks have a a great run...but the fact is...they might just have run their course...comments or not.

I think they are incredibly talented...but...I love strawberry ice cream aswell, and, honestly..sometimes I just get a bit too much and don't want any for a while.

Natalie is going to leave the Chicks eventually and she will have a fine and successful solo career.

Remember, you heard it here first.

Bob Young

nonsense. from western eyes one act is acceptable on both sides of the border the other is reprehensible. I'll leave it to you to continue trying to figure out which is which.

Hi Bob

Sounds like you are feeling better. I hope so. I missed seeing you in TN this year. I need to get to Chi-town more and stop by for a cup.

You said;
Now...some of you know my opinion of Mr bush...frankly..I think he's just a bit short of a horses arse on his best day!

Hmmmmm! A bit short of a horse....now what would that be? A Mule...no....ahhh maybe a Donkey.

You're comparing him to a democrat?.....Now I take exception to that.

Now if you'd a said "dumb as a box of rocks" it would a been more reasonable.

------------------
www.soundclick.com/billrobinson

www.dreamqueststudio.com

Bill
Live with a song in your heart

I'm not so sure women voicing their opinions freely is acceptable in Iran.

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

<sigh>

Midnite

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JavaMusiK:
[B] I'm not so sure women voicing their opinions freely is acceptable in Iran.




------------------
Satchel was right...Something is gaining on me....
www.jackcouldntmakeit.com

Eh, what the heck, I'll toss in a musical interlude from King Crimson:

Talk, its only talk
Arguments, agreements, advice, answers,
Articulate announcements
Its only talk

Talk, its only talk
Babble, burble, banter, bicker bicker bicker
Brouhaha, boulderdash, ballyhoo
Its only talk
Back talk

Talk talk talk, its only talk
Comments, cliches, commentary, controversy
Chatter, chit-chat, chit-chat, chit-chat,
Conversation, contradiction, criticism
Its only talk
Cheap talk

Talk, talk, its only talk
Debates, discussions
These are words with a d this time
Dialogue, dualogue, diatribe,
Dissention, declamation
Double talk, double talk

Talk, talk, its all talk
Too much talk
Small talk
Talk that trash
Expressions, editorials, expugnations, exclamations, enfadulations
Its all talk
Elephant talk, elephant talk, elephant talk


------------------
In order to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, think about the guy who invented sliced bread. He didn’t invent bread, he didn’t invent slicing. He just put together two things that hadn’t been put together before in a way people liked.

Great point.

Hey Java,

<sigh> has become my mantra lately. It can be interpretted however anyone wants to interpret it, is very easy to spell & darned hard to argue with.

Midnite





------------------
Satchel was right...Something is gaining on me....
www.jackcouldntmakeit.com

Howdy Java,

It's strange..but nowhere in my comment did I say nor imply that what is acceptable for an American would be acceptable in Iraq or from an Iraqi. We have a Constitution that applies to all Americans. That is all I stated. Extrapolating that comment to other nations or situations is baseless. As is often the case with discussions where one party is unable to present their position with reasonable logic..the tendency is to try to deflect the train of thought into irrelevant diversions. Fortunately most folks are observant enough to see through that. Nice try anyway. LOL

Hugs,
Bobbie

Hi Bobbie,

Let me see if I interpreted this all correctly. You've indicated that I am being unreasonable and irrelevant with your following statement:

As is often the case with discussions where one party is unable to present their position with reasonable logic..the tendency is to try to deflect the train of thought into irrelevant diversions. Fortunately most folks are observant enough to see through that. Nice try anyway.

I'm not sure I see the unreasonableness or irrelevance of my points you are referring to. See below.

You start off your response by stating:
It's strange..but nowhere in my comment did I say nor imply that what is acceptable for an American would be acceptable in Iraq or from an Iraqi.

If that is the case, then how do you explain this particular statement you made in an earlier reply? (I originally was talking about Iran, by the way, not Iraq. But no biggie.)

Do we suddenly follow different rules when we (???) in another country?

Maybe the missing word in that statement is the key which might explain our difference in understanding each other. I don't know.

We have a Constitution that applies to all Americans. That is all I stated.

We may want to explore how far our rights extend. When in Rome . . . show how ugly Americans can truly be? Then wonder why everyone hates us so?
Most countries have some sort of Constitution or list of rules and rights their citizens are expected to follow.

You then noted that:
Extrapolating that comment to other nations or situations is baseless.

Interesting. What is baseless? Are you implying that we can follow our rules wherever we want, but citizens of other countries cannot heed their rules when they are here? How is that comment baseless? Or were you just looking for a great context to use the word extrapolate and throw in a little innuendo implying my "inability to present my (their) position with reasonable logic..the tendency being (is) to try to deflect the train of thought into irrelevant diversions."?

Sorry, I don't see the irrelevant diversion. Bobbie, I have no beef with you and am sure you're a nice person. Your smilies and Hugs and warm greetings indicate so. Even the *cute* little LOL's.

I just wonder if you've remembered to take your rose colored glasses off.

In order for us to have a relevant and meaningful discussion about Natalie, it is necessary to explore what it is that grinds the gears of the other party you're alluding to.

It seems a tad hypocritical to expect visitors to our nation to abide by our government's guidelines, then turn around and say that when we go out and visit their country, we get to follow our own rules.

If this is too much of a leap and you don't follow the logic which you also alluded to as not being reasonable, then I think our discussion cannot go any further.

"Fortunately most folks are observant enough to see through that. Nice try anyway." SINLOL

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

**edited to highlight the bold lettering with the correct direction on the slash mark - [/b].

[This message has been edited by JavaMusiK (edited 08-28-2006).]

Howdy Java,

Yes..for the record, I am a nice person. I may also wear rose colored glasses at times. However, I do not see the connection between an American speaking their "opinion" in another country...and someone from another nation stoning someone here in America. Can you explain to me how those two actions are in any way connected logically? That is where I see the logic breaking down.
Logic goes: If A is true and A=B is true, then C is true..ie: If A=Americans are free to express their opinions and B=Natalie is an American, then C=Natalie is free to express her opinions. You cannot, however, extrapolate from that statement to the stoning issue. There is no law or regulation, Constitutional or otherwise that would state otherwise. Not so with the stoning scenario you propose because there ARE laws to prevent that in some nations including this one. Perhaps I am missing something here...but then, I am an American and I feel as though I am free to express my opinion here...just as you are. I have also traveled abroad. The Ugly American issue is very real..and seems to be perpetuated by narrow-minded citizens of this country who expect to be treated better than everyone else. I also do not see the relevance of that issue to the one being discussed here...which is more closely aligned to Natalie expecting to be treated LIKE everyone else. No one would have paid one whit of attention to her if she had just been a nobody like me. I could have stood on any street corner in London and said the same thing and no one would have thought anything wrong with it...except that some folks there likely would have applauded me. <G> Why make an example of someone just because they are a celebrity? I like their music. I don't care about their politics. That is my point. As Bob Young said...if she had said she was proud that Bush was from TX...folks back home would have thought nothing of it. I just despise the hypocrisy involved. That is my whole point.

And yes..I do give hugs. You know...it is good to keep your friends close...and your enemies closer!!
Bobbie

Bobbie,
Thankfully, we agree more than we disagree.

My extrapolation (such a fun word to use, isn't it?) or inference or estimatation from extending or projecting the known information we have been presented with goes something like this:

A=Natalie is an American & has the right in this country to speak her mind. B=Americans might be free to speak their mind in another country but probably shouldn't make assumptions about the hosting country's rules. C=Natalie was in another country and made an assumption. Luckily, she only got a bunch of country music fans mad at her.

As far as the stoning issue. Iran just recently suspended stoning as a form of justice (for relatively trivial matters like adultry in the opinion of most other countries). There are still countries such as Nigeria which still find it to be a necessary form of punishment.

Now, let's say we have a community of Iranians or Nigerians staying somewhere in this country on an extended visa. (Not that much of a stretch, considering the many immigrant communities and colleges with a high immigrant population.)

Based on making silly assumptions abroad, we could put together a quick logic equation that might go something like this:

A=Somebody within the immigrant population has an affair outside their marriage. B=Their law says the appropriate punishment must be a stoning so a stoning takes place in the middle of the college campus because they all assumed that it is legal and an accepted form of justice here. C=Americans have to accept that because Bobbie said we all follow our own country's rules when we visit other countries.

Bit of a stretch, I know. So is Bob Young's fantasy that Natalie would have good things to say about Bush as well as Natalie's expecting to be treated like everyone else but maintain her celebrity status.

According to Newton's third law, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Natalie discovered the opposing reaction on this one.

While it is a sad and disgusting fact, Natalie wouldn't have necessarily had the right to speak out against her president as a citizen of many other countries. In fact, it might have been punishable by a stoning in several countries.

You said:
If A=Americans are free to express their opinions and B=Natalie is an American, then C=Natalie is free to express her opinions.

Without presenting another logic equation, my issue, and the issue most people who have a contention with this topic, is the issue of assuming our rights travel with us no matter where we travel internationally. Can we indeed assume we have the right to express our freedoms everywhere we go? With a big microphone in hand in another country? By that same assumption, can others assume that all of their cultural and political traditions (inclucing stonings) can carry across our border?

Trust me - there is a connection.

In any case, like I said above:
Thankfully, we agree more than we disagree.

Jeff

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

Hi Jeff...so nice to know what your name is after all this time!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JavaMusiK:
[B]Bobbie,
Thankfully, we agree more than we disagree.

My extrapolation (such a fun word to use, isn't it?) or inference or estimatation from extending or projecting the known information we have been presented with goes something like this:

A=Natalie is an American & has the right in this country to speak her mind. B=Americans might be free to speak their mind in another country but probably shouldn't make assumptions about the hosting country's rules. C=Natalie was in another country and made an assumption. Luckily, she only got a bunch of country music fans mad at her.

Ok..I am with you so far...but...my point is simple. Yes, Natalie was in another country...but the reaction had NOTHING to do with that country's laws, rules or anyone's assumptions. It had to do with the response of a few radio stations in THIS COUNTRY who deliberately tried to stir up a controversy IN ORDER to generate ratings. It doesn't have anything to do with anyone in the UK or anyone else's country. It was something cooked up here in the US to generate a very specific response.

There ARE no laws in the UK that say that Americans can't speak out against their own President over there. There are, however, laws HERE that make it illegal to stone anyone for any reason in this country..regardless of citizenship. That is a quite different scenario...and not one that I see as relevant to the discussion.

JMO, of course... I am not trying to convince you, however. Just hoping you will be gracious enough to allow me to hold an opposing opinion.

Hugs,
Bobbie

OK, this may not directly apply to this thread, but hey, this thread been going on forever and half of what I'm seeing is well, "whatever" so please just let me ramble on a bit. Hey, it's a free country right? Thank You. A couple of years ago my Sister brought over her 3rd or 4th (sorry, I lost track) hubby to dinner. At the time some American teenager was about to be caned as a punishment for vandalising cars in Indonisia or ? He spent a good 20-30 minutes talking about how could they dare to think of harming an American citizen for such a minor crime. Well, I had just finished a great book by a freind of mine about the sexual customs in some African tribes. My question for him was, since one of the tribe's customs was that the widowed women (60+)would take the 13-14 year old boys for a weekend to teach them how to be good husbands, something I'm sure we all should learn, and since we do have a number of refugees from Africa living here and because that was their custom and totally legal where they were from, then he should be totally fine with it. Well, for some reason he wasn't.
Well, thanks for letting me tell my story, and I did see the "Chicks" a couple of weeks ago when they were in Minneapolis and they were great.

------------------
Steve West
Steve's Website
Steve's Myspace site

[This message has been edited by Steviewest (edited 08-28-2006).]

[This message has been edited by Steviewest (edited 08-28-2006).]

Java...I'm sure you're a real smart person...but sometimes you don't read so good.

My remark about Ms Merchant was in no way a "fantasy"
It was a hypothetical...
As such, it certainly is valid, and my time on this planet has proven it to be true.

Did yopu get that?

Bob Young

Sorry Bob,
I thought you were speaking of Ms. Maines of the Dixie Chicks.

Quote:
If she hadf said"George Bush is a great Texan" in England, you'd all say "There...that's a good American...exercising her right to stand up anywhere and say what she believes...Hooray for her!"

In my opinion, it is a fantasy to expect someone like Ms. Maines (&/or Ms. Merchant for that matter) to say something like "George Bush is a great Texan" anywhere. It's fantasty in that it just plain will never happen.

I don't see the problem with listing a hypothesis as a fantasy. Apparently, you do.

Did yopu get that?

Jeff

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

I've been informed I don't read so good. Even so, I thought this point was addressed before by other members on this board. Uh-huh...

Those radio stations are a business first. Where do you think their reaction originated? Take a good close look at their clientele. A specific audience demographic the Chicks used to target.

Cooked up or not, these stations have every right to respond to Natalie (Maines') little overseas diatribe. If she has the right to run her mouth off beyond our borders, the radio stations have every right to stop playing her music here, if they and their clientele so choose.

If their listeners don't want to hear their music anymore, does it make any business sense to keep playing them? Let's not forget, those RATINGS you speak of translate into money - the ONLY thing those and all big stations are in business for.

If you want radio that is trying to do something else besides pay their bills, there is always NPR, college & independent community radio. Take a look at their P&L sometime for an eye opener.

The Chicks took a risk and are paying the price with their original fan base, apparently without remorse.

Oh well. Next???

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

OK, Java...so I got my Natalies mixed up...I meant the one from the Dixie Chix..

My point (which apparently I still have not made simple enough for you to grasp) is that if Ms Maines or ANYONE else went to England or ANYWHERE else and said that mr Bush was a great Texan or a great American or a great sushi chef..that you and your ilk would applaud that person for being a wonbderful American and exercising their right to say how they felt wherever they were.

By your statements you imply that it is wrong for an American to say something negative about the president on foreign soil...so...is it OK to say something positive about him on foreign soil and if so..what's the friggin' difference.

Now...if I need to make that plainer...I'm gonna have to think about it for a while.

Bob

whatever . . .

I have been following this thread with interest. Trying to understand what the disagreement is about. So far it has eluded me.

Bin Laden and his terrorist network brought down the WTC. That's fact. There were also other very serious terrorist attacks around the world perpetrated by these folks before and since September 11. The recently deceased Zaquari(SP) was part of it.
Prior to our invading Iraq Zaquari(SP) was operating openly and with Sadam's approval in Iraq. That's also fact. I still can't figure out why they thought they had to use the "WMD" excuse to invade. The fact that Zaquari and his 1000 or so followers had a terrorist training camp there would have been enough, in my opinion.
There is also the fact that Sadam had murdered somewhere near 300,000 people in his own country. Stopping that would have been enough of an excuse IMO.
Unfortunately, Zaquari(SP) was also successful in causing enough havoc in Iraq that they now are close to civil war. That's a fact.
And we need to get the hell out of there and let them settle it themselves. IMHO

I could go on and on about Iraq, but, what's the point.

But, all that aside.

The Chicks made the mistake of making a very unpopular statement at a time when this country was still hurting from September 11. Had they made the statement last week would the reaction be the same?
Maybe.

But, bottom line is. We have a right to express our opinion in this country regardless of the outcome. The fact that the radio stations quit playing their music is indisputable. Why they did so is up for debate. Whether the listening audience would have quit listening to their stations or continued to listen is also up for debate. Personally I think the stations would have done just fine either way.
Did the radio stations fuel the fire of protest that continued? I dunno. But I do know that attendance to the Chicks concerts is way down. That's a fact.
Recently, One of our local Country stations took a poll(for three weeks) of their listeners. They asked for a yes or no vote on playing the Chick's music. Result, they are not playing the Chick's music. So, did the stations choose to not play the music? Yes. But, the listeners voted NO. That's a fact

I find that sad. I like the Chicks music. Traveling Soldier gives me goose bumps. And, if they had kept their mouth shut in front of the whole world we would still be hearing them.
I don't care what Natalie thinks of George Bush. But to stand up in front of an audience and announce that she is ashamed of our President was a mistake. If she had stood up and said she did not agree with the War and offered some incite as to how we should proceed I think that would have been O.K. with the listeners.
I wonder if she was ashamed of MR. "Cheat on my wife and then lie about it on the witness stand after swearing before God to tell the truth". I don't think she mentioned that.
I know she was ashamed of a fellow actor for driving drunk. And she said so. That was good. Sends a good message to our younguns.
I woulda liked to see a statement about fidelity in marriage and lying after putting your hand on a bible and swearing to tell the truth. That also would have been a good message to the younguns.
Hmmmmp. priorities I guess.

Hmmmm! I think I am rambling.

So, back to my original thought. What is the disagreement about. She had the right to say it. It might have been a dumb thing to do, but she had the right.
Like Bob Young said. If she had stood up and said she loved George Bush NOTHING would have happened. Well, maybe not nothing. The Anti War folks might have bitched.
But we would still be hearing them on the radio.

This is America. We are a free people. We have the right to be DUMB and free. We have the right to be SENSIBLE and free. Natalie chose DUMB and free.
If you are a performer, and your fan base is a bunch of redneck conservatives, you don't stand up in front of them and spout liberal rhetoric. You'll get booed off the stage.

So, if you are going to have a debate about this I would suggest debating CHOICES.

I still wish she would just shut up and sing. Then this would all just go away.

Now I got to read this before I post to see if it makes sense.....
Hmmm! not sure...Oh! what the hell




------------------
www.soundclick.com/billrobinson

www.dreamqueststudio.com

Bill
Live with a song in your heart

oh hummmmmm ..... OK ... maybe its NOT a question of whether of not someone has the right to go to another country & bash one's own leader .... maybe its more like WHYYYYYY would one do so during such a turbulent time; when there are those who HATE US and are looking for more reasons to further their own cause ... WHY add such fuel to the fire!?!?!? WHAT would possess someone to speak out at such a time ... other than simply for a little attention ... and she got it ... sure she CAN speak freely ... but WHYYYYYYYYYYY!?!??!?! How about a little common sense for all our sakes!!!
thats all I have to say
Joanne

------------------
[*]The Best is Yet to Be,Joanne Lurgio-singer/songwriter www.joannelurgio.com

[*] Joanne's Gig Calendar - http://www.musi-cal.com/search?key=performers&value=Lurgio

[*] http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=100751
[*] www.cdbaby.com/cd/lurgio
[*] MySpace - www.myspace.com/joannelurgio
[*]www.cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks

[This message has been edited by Joanne (edited 08-29-2006).]

Sheesh Joanne
How about a little common sense for all our sakes!!!

You said what I was trying to say and did it in less than a hunnert words.
sorta.

------------------
www.soundclick.com/billrobinson

www.dreamqueststudio.com

Bill
Live with a song in your heart

[This message has been edited by bill robinson (edited 08-29-2006).]

Thanks Bill But your's is so much more dramatic!
by the way..... How are ya
Joanne

------------------
[*]The Best is Yet to Be,Joanne Lurgio-singer/songwriter www.joannelurgio.com

[*] Joanne's Gig Calendar - http://www.musi-cal.com/search?key=performers&value=Lurgio

[*] http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=100751
[*] www.cdbaby.com/cd/lurgio
[*] MySpace - www.myspace.com/joannelurgio
[*]www.cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks

[This message has been edited by Joanne (edited 08-29-2006).]

Duce! Duce!

If we shut ourselves up on account of the terrorists, they win.

LOL Joanne

I'm a little winded from my speech but doing just fine.
I was at your my space page earlier listening to your songs.

Like your stuff.

------------------
www.soundclick.com/billrobinson

www.dreamqueststudio.com

Bill
Live with a song in your heart

We don't have to "shut ourselves up" ... how about saying something productive instead of .... destructive.... COMMON SENSE

Joanne



------------------

[*]The Best is Yet to Be,Joanne Lurgio-singer/songwriter www.joannelurgio.com


[*] Joanne's Gig Calendar - http://www.musi-cal.com/search?key=performers&value=Lurgio

[*] http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=100751

[*] www.cdbaby.com/cd/lurgio

[*] MySpace - www.myspace.com/joannelurgio

[*]www.cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks

get serious. she was doing a concert, not a guest spot for Romper Room.

besides,

maybe its a guy thing but it would probably take me all week to cook up a constructive way of expressing that sort of shame.

even if it wasn't about Bush. definitely not worth the effort. better off spitting it out.

[This message has been edited by BitWhys (edited 08-29-2006).]

"Be glad you only got The Poodle"?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bill robinson:


The Chicks made the mistake of making a very unpopular statement at a time...But to stand up in front of an audience and announce that she is ashamed of our President was a mistake...

I think it could be wrong to characterize her comment as a mistake. The comment has eroded the Chix popularity in some quarters and cost them some revenue for sure. Those who see every issue as dollars and cents, will certainly see this as a mistake. For most of us, who cannot fathom losing jillions of potential dollars, it could be characterized as a mistake. But Ms. Maines seems to be perfectly at peace with her remark and her refusal to back off from it. The Emancipation Proclamation cost Lincoln a lot politically. Newspapers carried cartoons that actually characterized him as an ape (imagine that happening today, if you think Natalie was harsh). But he did what he thought was right and was willing to take the heat. Now, before any of you excoriate me for making a ridiculous analogy, I am aware that I have done just that. I certainly don't mean to compare the gravity of the two situations, but the analogy just serves to demonstrate that the principle is the same. Sometimes what others think is a mistake, is not a mistake in your own eyes, no matter what the cost.

I wonder if she was ashamed of MR. "Cheat on my wife and then lie about it on the witness stand after swearing before God to tell the truth". I don't think she mentioned that.

This begs a good question: would country radio have quit playing the Chix, had Natalie said, in England or anywhere else, "If I was from Arkansas, I would be ashamed of Bill Clinton." Your mileage may vary, but I'd say the answer is a resounding "no."

Natalie chose DUMB and free.

I think you will know that I don't agree with this. If she has secret regets about having said it, then I guess she also thinks it was dumb. If she is proud of it, and she probably thinks of the extra revenue as "f--- you" money, then I doubt she thinks of it as dumb.

If you are a performer, and your fan base is a bunch of redneck conservatives, you don't stand up in front of them and spout liberal rhetoric. You'll get booed off the stage.

I think this is a very key point, and it is, of course, accurate. But I think it is debatable that the Chix characterize their fan base in such a way, and have even indicated publicly that they don't much care to have them as fans.

Now I got to read this before I post to see if it makes sense.....
Hmmm! not sure...Oh! what the hell.

Sure it makes sense. Well-reasoned and well-stated.

OK, don't say I didn't warn you but I got a million of these (just ask my family)and I can go on forever........believe me....
About 15 years ago or so, my lovey wife and I, with a very good freind, were all able to get cheap flights ($690 round trip) from Mpls. to Sydney. It was a long trip (24+ hours) with the layovers but we were still young then and we took it all in stride, LOL. When we got to OZ, it was great. Any JPF'er who doesn't live there or hasn't been there really needs to go. Am I right Graham, Wirdaz, Eliot, and the rest of you Aussies ;-)Anyway, the point to this post is that while we were camping out at a very nice Campground (you need to go there)I went over to the communal grill area only to find a group of 20 year old Aussies. Being freindly (I am, really) I asked them where they were from? A young man told me they were from Melbourne. I guess I must have asked something like "Oh, are you guys all from Melbourne?" but in my Minnesota accent. Well, the next thing you know this 20 year old is ragging on me because I can not pronounce his city's name correctly. Turns out an older couple was within earshot and came over and told the "Bugger" off and after introducing themselves it turned out they had camped in the BWCA in northen Minnesota a few years earlier. Anyway we had a great time talking about camping around the world. OK, that's it's for now but, remember I have many more of these... so... as long as this thread survives.........

------------------
Steve West
Steve's Website
Steve's Myspace site

Ask to see his Pit Bull.
You might get lucky (or Lucky).

'Turns out an older couple was within earshot and came over and told the "Bugger" off'

constructively, I'm sure.

People whose business is dealing with the general populace make politically charged statements in public forums at the peril of losing part of their potential customer base.

Hmmm. That's what a lot of you folks are doing by posting here

Mike

------------------
You have to practice improvisation. -Art Tatum

Mike Dunbar Music

heh

Like I need to be afraid losing out on my share of the hush money.

...but you won't see me complaining that there is a radio conspiracy against my music. I don't get played simply because I suck.

ROFL...that was great, Jeff!! Levity does help. I learned long ago that my voice is NOT my gift!! So I don't have to worry about radio not playing me either. SongWRITERS sorta remain anonymous, for the most part!

Hugs,
Bobbie

Thanks for the highlight.
At least I can acknowledge it.

...

Don't worry Bit.
It's all subjective.
Bet there's lot's of stations up there itching for your tunage.

Yes this is a freedom of speech issue...If you saying something whatever it is... be willing and ready to face the music, so to speak....for what you say...popular opinion told the "Chicks" what they thought about it....

Good for her whatever she thinks her right to say what she wants.... but live by it....she's ok with it...she just cost her and her friends a lot of money....live by it...that's what freedom is all about....

funny you knew what I meant by that.

funny you didn't know what I meant.

no its not

if you can't beat em, confuse em.

I prefer to make 'em show their true colours and leave it at that.

and your colors are...?

Hey Bobbie,
Sorry for hijacking your thread here the last few days.

A little background on why I beat the drum here: (Then I'm done with this topic.)

The Dixie Chicks are actually one of my wife's favorite groups and even before "the flap" I could never really figure out why.

Natalie's voice just grates on my nerves when I hear it. To me, it is just not a pretty sound. Give me Eva Cassidy any day. Not Natalie's nasty nasal nuances!

So, once she took her stand and dug in with her heels against Toby, the South and 90 percent of her original fanbase, I kind of lost whatever motivation I may have had to start to give their music a chance.

On the other hand, I look at U2 who likewise have been rather politically charged all these years in their lyrics and some of their actions. What is the difference between these two groups?

I see Bono going straight to the people he may even detest, sitting down and at least searching for some common ground, something to lay a foundation on for a positive advance. He kills with his charm.

Poor Bush doesn't stand a chance around Bono. He probably looks in the mirror after meeting with Bono and says to his reflection, "What did I just do??" LOL On top of that, their music turns me on.

Have U2 ever turned their backs on their original fanbase? Not that I'm aware of. The Dixie Chicks have. They've basically called their original fans a bunch of rednecks and turned their backs on the people who initially supported them and bought their cd's and came to their shows in the beginning.

I think I've said enough here and again wish to offer my apologies for anything that may have drifted out of line on my part with this thread.

Bit's right - I've "shown my true colors" here. As far as Bob's condescension... whatever.

At least I've been honest and forthright. Beats sitting, reading and wishing I had the nads to say something. (Kinda like Natalie, only in my own country.) I already know where that leads. I can do w/out another ulcer and angiogram, if possible. Suppressing sucks.

I'll be done with this thread now. I've said plenty. Tip your waiters & waitresses!

Good luck with your music Bobbie. Take whatever I've said here with a grain of proverbial salt. It's hardly worth even that.

Sincerely,

Jeff

------------------
JavaMusiK

Post here to get your cd added to the
JustPlainFolks Gallery at:
cdbaby.com/group/justplainfolks
AND
here to get your iTunes hosted songs listed on the
Just Plain Folks iMix! (You must already be on iTunes to participate)

If anything, the lesson to be learned from the Chicks scenario is: if you're quiet about expressing your opinions early in your career, you risk getting burned later when you surprise your fans with an unpopular view.

Ani DiFranco doesn't have that problem, nor do people like Billy Bragg or Steve Earle. They more or less said whatever they damn well pleased early on. U2 has ALWAYS been a political band from their very first album.

Sure, none of them are as big as the Chicks in terms of record sales (except of course U2), but who cares. They can sing about -- and say -- what they really feel, and no radio stations are suddenly gonna start smashing their records in a stadium. You certainly don't hear people telling Earle to "shut up and sing."

It's probably true that if the Chicks were upfront about their political views early on, they'd never have the mega-success they have now. But that's one of the choices you have to make. If you play along and are silent in order to gain favor from a particular audience, you'll have a lot more to lose when you open your mouth later.

I think the Chicks are better off without those fans who abandoned them. They'll take a hit in the pocketbook and still be wildly successful by any measure, with a more solid fanbase that actually cares what they think as opposed to just liking the pretty pretty songs.

If you don't want to be told "shut up and sing," say it loud and believe it.

------------------
Scott Andrew
Lo-fi acoustic pop superhero!
http://www.scottandrew.com/music

[This message has been edited by scottandrew (edited 09-01-2006).]