# Shut Up & Sing- Freedom of speech is fine, as long as you don't do it in public. **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 30, 2006, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392 "2006-10-30T02:40:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/81 "2006-10-31T19:53:30Z")
[QUOTE=sqweels] You don’t think people are sick and tired of having Americans travel overseas, starting disasterous wars and otherwise imposing our will? [/QUOTE] As I said in the post you’re quoting: “And I see this coming, so I’ll head it off at the pass: it doesn’t matter whether the politician you’re attacking is making us look bad. That’s no excuse to provide more bad P.R. for the U.S.” You need to read the entire post before responding. [QUOTE=sqweels] And why the persistence in equating George W. Bush with America? [/QUOTE] I in no way equate GWB with the U.S., but you must admit that GWB is a _part_ of the U.S. government. Is the guy who gripes all day long about the lousy fuel pump in his Chrysler not criticizing Chrysler? If I complain about the president of Enron, am I not at least partially complaining about Enron itself? I said clearly above that I have no problem with criticizing the President of the U.S. I do it myself. I’m not a GWB fan. But I do it here. At home. With other Americans. When I travel abroad, I don’t make public disparaging comments about our President or any other part of the government. [QUOTE=sqweels] I get the impression you have no idea what Natalie actually said, which was, “We’re ashamed George W. Bush is from Texas”. [/QUOTE] Yep. I actually read the newspaper. Imagine that. [QUOTE=sqweels] Because they’re from Texas, the Dixie Chicks bear more responsiblity than most for what is happening in Iraq. They felt they owed their audience an apology and that’s what their remark was, an apology. [/QUOTE] That’s ridiculous. First of all, where you live doesn’t make you responsible for others who live there. The citizens of London didn’t have to apologize for Jack the Ripper. Second of all, there’s nothing to apologize for. I very much doubt that Natalie voted for George W. Bush. She participated in a democratic election and someone she didn’t like got elected. That happens all the time and doesn’t make her responsible for the actions of the president. At least I assume she voted. If not, I think she should shut up. [QUOTE=spoke-] As **jlrepka** pointed out, we’re not talking about a popular groundswell that forced the Dixie Chicks off the air. We’re talking about a corporate decision made from the top down, by corporate executives seeking to curry favor with the Administration. Do you see the difference? [/QUOTE] Sure. The first one represents a plausible reality. The second is a conspiracy theory. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/82 "2006-10-31T20:17:48Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] The citizens of London didn’t have to apologize for Jack the Ripper. [/QUOTE] Why, of course they did! Well, they needed to, that is. And IIRC, they never bothered to do it. Limey barstids. Tellyawhat, until those remorseless creeps come up with that apology, not a morsel of black pudding, spotted dick, or blood sausage shall pass my lips. Or room temperature beer. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/83 "2006-10-31T20:18:37Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] Sure. The first one represents a plausible reality. The second is a conspiracy theory. [/QUOTE] Like the Hollywood Blacklist was a conspiracy theory? ---
**Author:** ![NDP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ndp/32/55_2.png) [@NDP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NDP)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/84 "2006-10-31T20:32:37Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] I in no way equate GWB with the U.S., but you must admit that GWB is a _part_ of the U.S. government. Is the guy who gripes all day long about the lousy fuel pump in his Chrysler not criticizing Chrysler? If I complain about the president of Enron, am I not at least partially complaining about Enron itself? I said clearly above that I have no problem with criticizing the President of the U.S. I do it myself. I’m not a GWB fan. But I do it here. At home. With other Americans. When I travel abroad, I don’t make public disparaging comments about our President or any other part of the government. [/QUOTE] But why should Americans refrain from doing something abroad that other foreigners frequently do when they’re visiting the U.S. (i.e., criticize their leaders and/or a particular policy of their home governments)? From my personal experience, I’ve often heard people from other countries badmouth their presidents and prime ministers while in the U.S. I’m not going to suddenly do a political 180 and start defending the Bush Administration and its domestic and foreign policies just because I step across the Canadian or Mexican border and discuss politics with a Canadian or Mexican citizen. Anyway, I have a strong feeling that if it had been 1998 and Maines had made an anti-Clinton crack while abroad, there would not have been one-tenth of 1% of the outrage expressed by the right-wingers after the 2003 incident. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/85 "2006-10-31T20:33:03Z")
[QUOTE=jrepka] The “market research shows” argument is reductionist. Not all C&W fans are flag-waving, my-country-right-or-wrong types who are also NASCAR fans and prefer Heinz over Hunts and corn flakes over Rice Crispies. [/QUOTE] Absolutely not all of them are like that. For better or for worse, however, that is how marketers see them. Marketers think in statistics, and demographics…you may see this as reductionist, but that’s how marketing works. > [@](#): > > The cable broadcast of the 2004 Vote For Change Tour included man-on-the-street interviews with attendees who made it clear that they absolutely intended to vote for Bush but that they couldn’t pass up the concert, _knowing_ that they would be inundated with political messages for the entire show. > > People walked out of Pearl Jam shows and Streisand had someone throw a cup of soda at her last night when she “disparaged” the President. Those people presumably knew how Eddie and Barbara felt before they went to the show, and they went anyway. In general the number of people who are going to boycott an act because of politics is small. The number of listeners who are going to stop listening to station KXYZ-FM because they played a cut from the new album or promoted the concert would fit in my dentist’s waiting room (ok, it’s a larger-than-average waiting room, but still…). > > I’ve gone to movies that feature Gary Oldman, Ron Silver, Bruce Willis, Arnold (though I won’t vote for him), even though I disagree with their politics. Of course. I love Pearl Jam, and I would go to see them again in a minute, no matter what they had to say about the President. That doesn’t mean that everyone has that attitude, however, and if I wasn’t AS big of a fan, I might well pass on them, because the enjoyment I would get from the show wouldn’t be enough to counteract my annoyance at hearing their political opinions. Barbra is a perfect example…I actively avoid her, because she irritates me to no end, and while I think she has a beautiful voice and I enjoy hearing her sing, I don’t enjoy it enough to want to support her with my entertainment dollars. So, I agree…not everyone would boycott. But maybe enough would suddenly lose interest enough to have an effect. > [@](#): > > I contend that “market research” would show that, in 2003, there were (was?) a significant minority of Dixie Chicks fans who agreed with the band’s politics. Put that together with the group who might not agree, but still like the band well enough to buy the album and to see the show, and you’ve got a market. If I recall correctly there were no concerts cancelled in the 2003 tour, and attendance was good at all of the shows. > > Any musical act that “comes out” politically (or any other way, for that matter) is going to lose a segment of its audience, and that is something for which they should be ready and willing to accept responsibility. But this group has been _isolated_ from a large segment of their audience by a few corporations. In 2006 the banning of the group from C&W airwaves is not a boycott, it is a blacklist. > > As I said earlier, it is perfectly legal for these companies to do this but arguing that the decisions are being made on pure economic grounds are weasely (weaselly? weasel-ly?) at best. This is politics. I remain unconvinced of this, as 1) I haven’t seen any evidence that currently it is impossible to find the Dixie Chicks being played on the radio (I don’t listen to C&W at all), and they are clearly still able to get records made on a major label, and 2) I don’t see what makes the corporate desires to curry favor with the administration any different from a rock station’s desire, or any other type of station’s desire. The benefits of having the FCC on one’s side would be the same for both. And, as I said, these stations are likely owned by the same conglomerates, anyway. The only reason I can see that those two types of stations would react differently to the same situation is the perceived differences in how the audience would react. > [@](#): > > And, to reiterate my point from earlier, the meta-story here is not about the Dixie Chicks, or about what music most Americans get to hear on the radio. It is about fewer and fewer media companies, with larger and larger shares of the media pie (much of which consists, again, of a publically-owned resource), able to make decisions about what information the public has access to (and telling us, despite evidence to the contrary, that choices are being made on a rational economic basis, not a political one). This supports my point above. Why is Pearl Jam still being played on the radio? > [@](#): > > _(by the way, I work in physical science. The “paranoid speculation” crack I made was my inelegant way of saying that I can’t demonstrate my assertion beyond all doubt – it seems pretty obvious to me. Those who think all of these decisions are being made by cool heads who are unmoved by political considerations or alliances seem to be speculating as much, if not a great deal more, than I am…)_ The profit motive seems much more obvious to me. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/86 "2006-10-31T23:15:08Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] The profit motive seems much more obvious to me. [/QUOTE] Exactly. Just what political gains would the owner of a radio station expect? “Okay, I’m not playing the Dixie Chicks anymore–now the White House will arrange for me to get a huge tax break.” Sounds farfetched. Especially when you consider that most radio stations these days are owned by groups that have multiple stations with multiple formats. Are you really telling me that the management would find significant political capital in not playing Dixie Chicks on one station while still playing anti-administration punk rock or Bush-bashing comedians on another? [QUOTE=NDP] Anyway, I have a strong feeling that if it had been 1998 and Maines had made an anti-Clinton crack while abroad, there would not have been one-tenth of 1% of the outrage expressed by the right-wingers after the 2003 incident. [/QUOTE] Not by the right-wingers, anyway 😃 The rabid pro-Clinton forces were no less loud and closed-minded than the rabid pro-Bush forces. Far too many people in this country fail to see that both men have good and bad points to them. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2006, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/87 "2006-10-31T23:35:46Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] Regarding the concern that viewpoints are stifled, I don’t see how this applies in this case. The Dixie Chicks’ unhappiness with the president was reported far and wide in every news media outlet available. There was no attempt to hide their views whatsoever. The charge that their MUSIC, which as far as I know doesn’t have much of political message, is not being played because of protests and concern for profits does not seem to me to be inhibiting debate in any way…quite to the contrary, it seems to have sparked debate more than stifled it. [/QUOTE] Fans not buying their CDs I have no problem with. Radio stations attempting to stifle their opinions (and hurt their livelihoods) but not playing their music for purely political reasons I do. Book burning (CD burning in this case) I have a big problem with - we all know who did it 70 years ago. I’m not going to buy any books by Ann Coulter, but I’m against burning her books also. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/88 "2006-11-01T00:38:43Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] Exactly. Just what political gains would the owner of a radio station expect? “Okay, I’m not playing the Dixie Chicks anymore–now the White House will arrange for me to get a huge tax break.” Sounds farfetched. [/quote] How about “Okay, I’m not playing the Dixie Chicks anymore–now the White House will arrange FCC approval for me to [buy more radio and TV stations](http://www.citypages.com/databank/26/1263/article12961.asp) and become the nation’s biggest media conglomerate”? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/89 "2006-11-01T00:39:21Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] It’s not a red herring. It’s the entire point. Entertainers criticize politicians in the U.S. every day, and although it annoys me, it’s never angered me. This one did, because they left the U.S. to make disparaging statements to a foreign crowd about our government. I think that’s tacky, cowardly, and makes the U.S. look bad. And I see this coming, so I’ll head it off at the pass: it doesn’t _matter_ whether the politician you’re attacking is making us look bad. That’s no excuse to provide more bad P.R. for the U.S. If you want to live here, step up and perform your political activism _here_. Try to fix the problem rather than whining about it overseas. [/QUOTE] This makes no sense to me, but I’ve started a [GD thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=394436) on it. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/90 "2006-11-01T00:43:47Z")
[QUOTE=rjung] How about “Okay, I’m not playing the Dixie Chicks anymore–now the White House will arrange FCC approval for me to [buy more radio and TV stations](http://www.citypages.com/databank/26/1263/article12961.asp) and become the nation’s biggest media conglomerate”? [/QUOTE] And Clear Channel owns NO stations that play other artists that are vocally anti-war/anti-Bush? Seems to me if they are trying to stifle left-wing political commentary in order to make the administration happy, they could do a much better job than they are doing. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/91 "2006-11-01T01:17:48Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] And Clear Channel owns NO stations that play other artists that are vocally anti-war/anti-Bush? [/QUOTE] I dunno, but some CC stations carry Air America. See [here.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=382981) ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/92 "2006-11-01T01:50:35Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I dunno, but some CC stations carry Air America. See [here.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=382981) [/QUOTE] Don’t you think that if they were trying to curry favor with the Bush administration, they would get a lot more mileage out of refusing to carry Air America than refusing to play the Dixie Chicks? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/93 "2006-11-01T01:52:31Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] Don’t you think that if they were trying to curry favor with the Bush administration, they would get a lot more mileage out of refusing to carry Air America than refusing to play the Dixie Chicks? [/QUOTE] I think the difference is that W is at least vaguely aware the Dixie Chicks exist. ---
**Author:** ![jlrepka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/22d042/32.png) [@jlrepka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jlrepka)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/94 "2006-11-01T05:36:07Z")
Yes, Clear Channel carries Air America, and they own stations that carry artists that are also critical of the administration. I don’t contend that decisions about programming are made purely for political reasons, I just don’t buy that they are always made for purely economic reasons (at least for marketing reasons – obviously if you’re sucking up to an administration hoping for favorable decisions from the FCC, that’s economic). Hard as it is to believe, the political climate now is different from what it was in 2003. And in the right climate decisions can be made for purely political reasons: when MSNBC cancelled Phil Donahue’s show on the eve of the war – it was the highest rated show they had at the time – the executive in charge actually said “we can’t afford to be perceived as the anti-war network at this time.” My big issue in this thread, one which no one has really addressed, is: as media becomes more consolidated, and the public’s choices become fewer, democracy dies a little more. This is not about music, it’s about information – local news has pretty much been reduced to car chases, celebrity gossip, product placement, and promos for the prime-time programming – you know, “news you can use.” Americans (present company excepted) are generally more ignorant about the rest of the world than they are of us. 35-40% of the American public _still_ believe that we found WMD in Iraq. I just see this getting worse as consolidation continues. Not because the corporations involved are all necessarily evil or right wing, but because they control the flow of information and there’s no market for creating an informed public – news for profit is not profitable (Fox News may be making money now, I’m not sure, but they are not profiting by reporting “news.” Their profits come from the Talking Heads shows like O’Reilly and Hannity). Oh, and P.S. – someone at ABC just leaked a [memo](http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/hp-aa-20061031-lg.jpg) with a list of ~90 companies who have purchased bulk advertising on ABC radio, but requested that their ads be blacked out from all Air America programming on stations owned by ABC. Now there are certainly companies on the list who may not feel that the audience at Air America falls within their target demo, but would that include Microsoft, FedEx, Coke and Pepsi? Someone, somewhere is making decisions based on politics and not on whether they can sell their product to this audience. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/95 "2006-11-01T08:18:29Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] You’re kidding, right? President Bush is criticized on virtually every TV network and radio network out there on a weekly, if not daily, basis–and I’m including the conservative stations there. Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter may not hit him as hard as CBS News or the New York Times, but they do hit him. Do you _really_ think that the news media is trying to suppress the opinions of the Dixie Chicks? Do you _really_ not classify Natalie’s comments as propoganda? [/QUOTE] Hers was an opinion that was crushed under the propaganda machine. When her statement was made, it was during the long and lying, black drumbeat of the Neo Con psyoperations that rode our fervor into this war. Yes, I do think that the media was propagating her opinion in an unfair way. When the stations are holding rallies to crush and burn your records, ideological and hence wars of propaganda are inflamed and treatised. Your treatise sucks. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/96 "2006-11-01T18:11:10Z")
[QUOTE=jlrepka] Now there are certainly companies on the list who may not feel that the audience at Air America falls within their target demo, but would that include Microsoft, FedEx, Coke and Pepsi? Someone, somewhere is making decisions based on politics and not on whether they can sell their product to this audience. [/QUOTE] Actually, I can think of lots of non-political reasons why they would not want to advertise on Air America. Heck, didn’t they file for bankruptcy just recently? I might not want to spend money on a media outlet that I fear might not get a chance to air the ads. While mainstream radio is certainly being consolidated, here in Boston for example I have access to 50+ radio stations, many smaller independent and college ones that play pretty much anything under the sun. The music is out there, people may have to work a little harder to find it, but I don’t see how that invalidates the business decisions made by radio station owners. Even if the decisions are politically motivated and take place on publicly licensed airwaves, that’s all part of free speech. If those little stations are forced off the air then it’s more of an issue. But if people don’t listen to them and they go out of business, I don’t think the case holds water. Should we subsidize unpopular music? How would you propose we get this music out to the people? ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/97 "2006-11-01T22:29:30Z")
[QUOTE=Telemark] Actually, I can think of lots of non-political reasons why they would not want to advertise on Air America. Heck, didn’t they file for bankruptcy just recently? I might not want to spend money on a media outlet that I fear might not get a chance to air the ads. [/quote] I could be wrong, but the wording of the memo seems to indicate that the list has been around _prior_ to Air America’s bankrupcy declaration (since the memo talks about an “update” to the list), which suggests that the list might be the cause of the problems and not a result of them. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/98 "2006-11-01T22:48:21Z")
> [@InvisibleWombat](#): > > That’s ridiculous. First of all, where you live doesn’t make you responsible for others who live there. The citizens of London didn’t have to apologize for Jack the Ripper. Second of all, there’s nothing to apologize for. I very much doubt that Natalie voted for George W. Bush. She participated in a democratic election and someone she didn’t like got elected. That happens all the time and doesn’t make her responsible for the actions of the president. At least I assume she voted. If not, I think she should shut up. I’m not accusing them of being responsible for Bush so much as trying to get inside their heads as to why they say they are ashamed he’s from Texas. Surely there’s a certain _sense_ of _collective_ responsibility when “one of us” inflicts something heinous upon the world. Like with the Germans and you-know-who. People closer to Mr. Bad Guy had a better chance of stopping him than people further away, so it’s not suprising some of them would express a certain regret for not having done more. > **[Squeaky Wheels](http://squeakywheelsblog.com)** > > patrick douglas mccauley edina ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2006, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/99 "2006-11-01T22:53:13Z")
[QUOTE=NDP] Anyway, I have a strong feeling that if it had been 1998 and Maines had made an anti-Clinton crack while abroad, there would not have been one-tenth of 1% of the outrage expressed by the right-wingers after the 2003 incident. [/QUOTE] Damn straight. And I’ve never seen a satisfactory response to the question WWCHD? (What Would Clinton Haters Do?) ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2006, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392/100 "2006-11-02T03:53:59Z")
[QUOTE=rjung] I could be wrong, but the wording of the memo seems to indicate that the list has been around _prior_ to Air America’s bankrupcy declaration (since the memo talks about an “update” to the list), which suggests that the list might be the cause of the problems and not a result of them. [/QUOTE] They’ve been in a shaky financial state since Day 1, so I could definitely see a business questioning signing a big sales contract with them. But I could see a variety of other valid business reasons for those big companies deciding that the audience of Air America wouldn’t be a good choice. It’s not that big a stretch. But even if it was for political reasons, don’t companies have the right to political speech? If a company decides to advertise on Air America, is that political speech as well? If a company sponsors a political activity, isn’t that a valid use of their resources? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shut-up-sing-freedom-of-speech-is-fine-as-long-as-you-dont-do-it-in-public/378392.md?page=6)