Whistlin’ Dixie

My daughters Renee and Avery have taken some umbrage at my negative reference to those silly girls who call themselves Dixie Chicks.

One of the things I liked about Team America: World Police was the way it lampooned entertainers who mindlessly mouth left wing talking points and expect their celebrity to somehow make what they say unassailably the truth. All it really proves is that you can be extraordinarily talented in one regard, and yet still be completely ignorant. The massive egos of these “stars” somehow leads them to believe that they are experts in matters of politics and foreign policy and the unwashed masses should unquestioningly heed the wisdom of their betters.

Bullshit.

And my issue with the Dixie Bitches has never been about free speech. Yes, I believe it is wrong to trash your country in front of an overseas audience. A nation is a family and while I’m fine with vehement disagreements within the family, you don’t bring your neighbors into the fight. But that’s just me. No question, Ms. Maines had every right to say what she said. Just as I have every right to criticize her for saying it. And I can choose not to listen to their music or buy their CDs. And if I owned a radio station I could decline to add them to my play list.

What pissed me off more than what she said is all her whining about “censorship”. The Constitution guarantees that the state will take no action to abridge freedom of speech. I am unaware of any arrests or government intervention to stop these ignorant women from saying foolish things. What Ms. Maines really desires is freedom to say what she wants without consequences. She is all courageous up on stage mouthing her idiocies but doesn’t think it fair when people react by exercising their freedom to speak against her or boycott her music. That is just pure chickenshit.

Sorry daughters, but Dad is sticking to his guns on this one.

11 thoughts on “Whistlin’ Dixie

  1. What was said “Just so you know, we are on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence and we are ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.” The group went on to express their support for our American troops. The comment was not about our military or our country. It was about the President, who at that time was being described as a “cowboy’ as if his being from Texas explained his actions. At the time that this comment was made many in this country and Europe were protesting the rush to war with Iraq. The concerns of half the citizens of this country, including those in the military and many of our top commanders were brushed aside; ignored.

    Two days later she apologized for her comment calling it disrespectful to the President. She explained that she wanted to see all options exercised before we sacrificed the lives of our soldiers. She concluded that she was a proud American who supported her country.

    She didn’t whine she critized and rightly so. Those of your ilk distorted her remarks and ignored her apology. Moreover, to imply that an American citizen cannot criticize a president is unAmerican. Funny how she was whining but everyone on your side of the issue was merely repeating their opinions. Well that little gal had an opinion too and she had balls. She stood by her convictions and she weathered the storm. Kudos to her. With her 5 grammy’s I don’t think she is too worried about whether or not you like her music and quite frankly its your loss if you choose to ignore her very fine music because you don’t think she is entitled to express her opinion when it differs from yours.

    And lets be honest that was what it was really about. It isn’t that she expressed an opinionl its that her opinion didn’t agree with the opinion of you and others that supported the war. You can put lipstick on a pig and its still a pig. Trying to dress up her comments or portraying her actions as unpatriotic or whinny when really you are just pissed that she didn’t keep quiet when she didn’t agree with your opinion is lipsticking the pig.

  2. The whole ‘appeal to celebrity’ bit makes my stomach turn as well. I don’t mind the airing of the dirty laundry (so to speak) as long as it is presented in a rational and logical manner. But since we are talking about celebrities, that rarely is the case as most lack the above attributes. Furthermore, most of these people have pretty much ZERO connection with the real world and even less with me. I think that they should just STFU…or if they choose otherwise, be prepared to face the consequences of their decisions…probably for the first time in their lives.

    Fight the power, man! Don’t give in!

  3. I whole-heartedly agree. That is exactly what they want, to say whatever they want and not have to here other people’s opinions on the subject. You said it right the first time, they are talented to one degree, but totally ignorant in another. And not only do they feel since they are celebrities that they are automatically experts on government policy but that us, as the public, are desperately awaiting there new verdicts. But God forbid we disagree.

  4. I hadn’t really followed the controversy over the Natalie Maine’s remarks in London back in 2003. I didn’t (and still don’t, really) understand what all the fuss is about voicing dissent on foreign soil. And was she “trashing her country?” Didn’t she just say that she was ashamed Bush hailed from her home state?
    I’ve been trying to find articles where she’s whining about censorship, and I’m not having much luck. I don’t think I’d describe her as “chickenshit,” though.

  5. My apologies to Carol and Jenn. Your comments got stuck in moderation and I have not checked it recently. Seeing as how you both disagree with me I didn’t want it to appear that you were being censored or anything. I am all about free speech, don’t ya know….

  6. With all due respect to those that disagree…I disagree.

    She, and others of her ‘ilk’ use her celebrity status as a platform for their grandstanding – and that is all it is. Feel free to express your opinion…just don’t do it live through a non-political medium (ie. award shows).

    Those that give her more credibility because she can sing (more often than not) on key…well I feel sorry for you.

  7. So what you are saying is she is not entitled to voice an opinion when performing? Why? Is it because it is a political opinion? Again how does that make a difference?

    The fact that she is a performer does not give her opinion more weight. It simply gives her an audience. Is that what you feel in innately unfair-the fact that she has access to an audience to hear her opinion that was not gathered for the express purpose of hearing a political opinion? The President and his cohorts had access to audiences that the average American does not have in which to express thier opinions so it has to be that your objection is based on the fact that the audience wasn’t gathered to hear a political opinion. In that case the only person who should object are those audience members who feel cheated of song time.

    The reality is you feel threatened that she could get her dissenting opinion out and thus sway others. That’s foolish. Those most likely to blindly follow are following Bush.

  8. You are making rather quick judgments about (perhaps) my nationality and my political opinions. You also seem to assume that my feelings would only be applied to certain opinions. However, these are not really on topic at all.

    Comparing them with the president is…well…asinine when you consider their occupations.

    If she wants to voice an opinion, do it with a performance. The industry has a long history of voicing politics through the music itself. If I, as a consumer, opt to watch or attend a music show, awards show, or concert – that is what I expect to see. That is what I pay to see.

    Using mic time that was a result of a perfomance (winning something) to talk about politics is a completely different animal. Shameless opportunism and grandstanding.

    If they want to express their political leanings, they can use their status to gain a willing audience. Do either print or tv interviews with the specific intent to say what is on their mind.

    I just hope that next time they can come up with something a little less trite than “…we are ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.”

    Your conclusion is almost worth ignoring due to the sheer number of assumptions it is based on. You assume that since I don’t like what the group in question did that I must (blindly) follow Bush and that my (foolish) ‘neo-con’ bastion of war mongering is threatened.

    Just for the record, I think Bush is an idiot (regardless of his home state) and the war was a bad idea. These too are irrelevant to the issue of expressing your political views to a captive and perhaps unwilling audience.

  9. I’m not saying that celebrity turned political pundit hasn’t grown tiresome-especially during award shows. However, unless one was a captive audience member I see no grounds to object. Moreover, that is not the basis of John’s objection nor it seems (I’m assuming here) your’s.

  10. I guess there are a few things on the go here. My main beef is with the ‘captive audience’ thing.

    What John was on about (and I also agree) is the fact that many of the celebs doing this kind of thing:

    “mindlessly mouth left wing talking points and expect their celebrity to somehow make what they say unassailably the truth. The massive egos of these “stars” somehow leads them to believe that they are experts in matters of politics and foreign policy and the unwashed masses should unquestioningly heed the wisdom of their betters.”

    That attitude comes through and it can be rather comical.

    Ciao!

  11. All of you seem to have wasted a lot of breath in justifying one side or the other when the simple facts are:

    1) The Freedom of speech defense has been abused too much, people need to show more respect for the country.
    2) The Chicks were right about Bush.
    3) Bush is an Idiot!
    4) The government as a whole is jacked up…we need to scrap it all and start over but instead must try to elect better politicians.
    5) We can’t go back in time to change what was done, so we must deal with what is happening now in Iraq.
    6) …and finally, it sucks that my tour in Baghdad will be extended by 4 months but I’m still going home for Cinco de Mayo!

    P.S. John…I made the E7 list on the first look.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *