I am not sure of the appropriate forum for my OP, it could be moved as needed.
So DC are continuing to speak their minds freely , and showing us a fair amount of Dixie skins
**DC **appears on Prime Time Live w/Diane Sawyer *“It was the wrong wording with genuine emotion and questions and concern behind it. … Am I sorry that I asked questions and that I just don’t follow? No.” *
It would also appear some true patriotic Americans have taken offense with Natalie Maines’ earlier comment about Bush.
The Chicks are to appear on the cover of the May 5 edition of Entertainment Weekly unclothed, but with various epithets printed on them.
Anyway, it is good to see someone standing up for their beliefs even when, especially when-- it might cost them money out of their own pockets.
My second thought: Good for them. I’m glad they haven’t backed down. They were against the war. So what? Since when did speaking out about the president or a specific issue become verboten in this country? Lord knows these same “conservatives” that are decrying the Chicks probably said a lot worse about Clinton during his term than what Natalie said about Bush.
Since when is not liking the president unpatriotic? Hell, I think it’s our patriotic duty as Americans not to like a president every now and then…and speak out about it. This is the kind of freedom everyone deserves.
FWIW, I hope the Chicks stick to their liberal guns. (This coming from someone who is not a liberal himself.)
And I’ll go on enjoying their music, hopefully for many more years.
My thought was “at least they’re prettier than they are smart”. One of them was so stupid as to say that they did it to show how “clothes get in the way of labels”. Duh?
Servant, it has and will continue to cost them plenty of money. Many radio stations have stopped playing the Chicks, rallies have been held to bulldoze their cds, and I heard that they are about to lose a lucrative endorsement deal.
In the interest of full disclosure, I was not crazy about their anti-war stance, but I fully endorse their right to take it; and I endorse people’s right to boycott them.
That said, I watched the DC interview tonight with Diane Sawer, hoping that they would, at least, explain their position in a well-constructed argument. Ugh, what a disappointment. Just a trio of blubbering half-contrite-half-defiant muddle-headed little girls, if you ask me.
Ladies, take any position you want. Just be sure you can explain yourself when you do.
We seem to have a new definition of McCarthyism: not buying the products of wealthy entertainers who don’t entertain you.
I’ve never paid much attention to the Dixie Chicks, but I’m all for fighting McCarthyism. Don’t really want to buy their CDs, though, but I can’t let McCarthyism triumph. Maybe I’ll just learn how to hum “Bloody Mary Morning” – in defiance of the facists who would strangle our liberty on the vine.
It’s about as much like McCarthyism as a five pound bag of onions. How 'bout a cite that shows where the U.S. Government has taken any action against the Chicks. Do you even know what McCarthyism is?
Sorry if this is a little bit off topic but does anyone else think they look . . . weird? And not just in that picture from the OP, I mean in general. I don’t want to use the word ‘ugly’ (if only because it wouldn’t be very nice of me) but I’ve always thought the DCs looked really really weird. Not attractive at all.
Sounds like this little furor is going to hurt the Dixie Chicks in the long run about as much as those boycotts and record burnings ended up hurting the Beatles when John Lennon made his remark about Jesus. So good for them, I say. And I think the picture looks hot–even if it is a really crass move.
