The Dixie Chicks, revisited

[sqweels]

@Cisco

Liberals allow conservatives to control the tone of the political climate.

2001 - 2005: Criticism of the president is treason and anyone engaging in it should be put to death

2006 - 2008: Mumblemumblemumble

2009 - Current: Dissent is PATRIOTIC!

This is what this thread is about. Conservatives must address the hypocrisy apparent in the difference in reaction between the Dixie Chick’s momentary distancing themselves from the then-President and plans to block the current President from addressing all the nation’s public school children.

I’m sure if Bush had wanted to make an address the public schools after 9/11, the right would have been pretty tough on anyone who tried to organize a boycott of it.

[Mr.Moto]

Cuts both ways, though - weren’t there liberals on these boards swearing off Whole Foods after their CEO made comments critical of Obama?

How isn’t that exactly the same thing?

[Waenara]

@Mr.Moto

Cuts both ways, though - weren’t there liberals on these boards swearing off Whole Foods after their CEO made comments critical of Obama?

How isn’t that exactly the same thing?

Are you serious? How can you say the President and the CEO of Whole Foods are in any way equivalent?

Many conservatives in the W era said that everyone must respect the office of the President, even if you don’t agree with him politically. That it’s practically treason to openly contradict the President while the country is at war.

I seriously doubt that even the most pro-business conservative would say the everyone must respect the office of the CEO of some supermarket chain.

[Mr.Moto]

@Waenara

Many conservatives in the W era said that everyone must respect the office of the President, even if you don’t agree with him politically. That it’s practically treason to openly contradict the President while the country is at war.

And I’m sure you have cites for this, since there were so many.

Right?

[Kimstu]

@Mr Moto

And I’m sure you have cites for this, since there were so many.

Well, I’m not Waenara, but I don’t think it’s hard to find cites for many prominent conservatives (including the President and Vice-President themselves) saying that it was inappropriate for patriotic Americans to criticize the Bush administration:

• ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT: When concerned citizens voiced opposition to excessive provisions of the Patriot Act, Attorney General John Ashcroft said on 12/6/01, “your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies, and pause to America’s friends.”
• VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY: When legitimate questions were asked about revelations that the White House was warned about a hijacking threat prior to 9/11, Vice President Cheney said on 5/16/02 that ”such commentary is thoroughly irresponsible and totally unworthy of national leaders in a time of war.”
• HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER TOM DELAY: When criticism was raised about poor planning in the creation of the Homeland Security Department, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) said on 9/25/02, “These are people that don’t want to protect the American people. They will do anything, spend all the time and resources they can, to avoid confronting evil.” (This from a man who said “Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes.”)
• SENATE MAJORITY LEADER BILL FRIST: When a Senator said there needed to be a radical change in the Bush Administration’s unilateralist foreign policy, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) said on 4/3/03, “Partisan insults launched solely for personal political gain are highly inappropriate at a time when American men and women are in harm’s way.”
• SECRETARY OF DEFENSE DONALD RUMSFELD: Under the headline “Rumsfeld: Critics Give Terrorists Hope,” Newsday reported on 9/9/03 that Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld said “that critics of the Bush Administration’s Iraq policy are encouraging terrorists and complicating the ongoing U.S. war on terrorism.”
• PRESIDENT BUSH: When some raised objections to how the Homeland Security Department was being structured, President Bush said the Democratic-led “Senate is not interested in the security of the American people.”
• WHITE HOUSE: When people questioned whether the President’s aircraft carrier speech was appropriate with combat still taking place, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said on 5/7/03, “It does a disservice to the men and women of our military to suggest that the president, or the manner in which the president visited the military would be anything other than the exact appropriate thing to do."

However, I think you’re right that conservatives boycotting the Dixie Chicks for criticizing Bush is analogous to liberals boycotting Whole Foods because of their CEO criticizing Obama. AFAIK, though, the furor from conservatives over the former event was orders of magnitude greater than the furor from liberals over the latter.

And certainly, no conservative who denounced liberal dissent from Bush’s views on the grounds that it was unpatriotic to criticize the President is anything but a barefaced hypocrite if they can’t even stand to have a speech by Obama shown to schoolchildren. However, I don’t think that the conservatives who are trying to whip up this alarm and protest among parents are particularly concerned with logical consistency.

[Waenara]

@Waenara

Many conservatives in the W era said that everyone must respect the office of the President, even if you don’t agree with him politically. That it’s practically treason to openly contradict the President while the country is at war.

@Mr.Moto

And I’m sure you have cites for this, since there were so many.

Right?

Well as to the first sentence, where conservatives said you should respect the president and be civil even if you disagree with him, I assume would not disagree with yourself (from 2005):

@Mr. Moto

It says something about a person setting up an event that the President is invited to that he cannot show the minimum of civility required toward the office at least.

I once expressed similar thoughts, in person, to Bill Clinton. The difference was that it was a campaign event, he was not president at the time, and my statement was a polite and friendly “I’m not voting for you, but I’m glad to meet you anyway,” while shaking his hand. I will say he responded in a similarly friendly manner.

Regarding my second sentence, that some conservatives said that disagreeing with Bush was practically treason, have you watched any Fox News political shows? Perhaps you read one of Ann Coulter’s books where she goes further and says that simply being a Liberal makes you a traitor?

[foolsguinea]

@elucidator

That’s “crucifying”? Dick fucking Gephardt? Will you be here all week, should I try my waitress and tip the veal?

Yeah, I’m from Missouri & I don’t care that much what Gephardt said on the house floor. Politicians say a lot of things, they don’t all stick. An angry speech from someone trying to rise in the party (wasn’t Gephardt running for President that year?) is not a crucifixion.

Of course, I was GOP then. I may not have noticed how Dems were reacting around the country. Do you have some cites for that?

[C3]

@Mr.Moto

Cuts both ways, though - weren’t there liberals on these boards swearing off Whole Foods after their CEO made comments critical of Obama?

@Kimstu

However, I think you’re right that conservatives boycotting the Dixie Chicks for criticizing Bush is analogous to liberals boycotting Whole Foods because of their CEO criticizing Obama.

Hold on a second. People weren’t threatening to boycott Whole Foods because the CEO criticized Obama. The people who were upset were angry that he criticized the Congressional plan(s) for health care reform. In fact, except for the headline (which was in all probability written by someone else), Mackey did not even mention Obama in his editorial.

[tacoloco]

Tempest in a teapot, IMO. The comments she made weren’t worthy of the storm they created. Once right wing radio got hold of it, Natalie Maines was painted as being unpatriotic, which was typical of the BS we had to endure under Shrubya’s reign.

In all honesty, I don’t care what any artist has to say. If I like someone’s music, I like their music (or movies or …). Personally I think Bono is a blowhard, but I still listen to and buy music made by U2.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Mr.Moto

First of all, how can you destroy a CD in effigy? Burn an empty jewel case?

Second, it puzzles me that people will defend to the death the right of the Dixie Chicks to say what they wish but look askance when their fans do the same thing. Free speech does not mean the freedom to be immune from consequences.

Similarly the people refusing to let their kids hear President Obamas address have that right - we don’t live in a country where we have to listen when anyone gives a speech and by and large parents can make these choices for their children. OTOH, if it causes a political backlash, so be it.

My kids haven’t started school yet, and I haven’t checked to see which grades are going to be watching President Obama. I wouldn’t stop them from watching, but if they asked me what I thought about the speech I would tell them - including the fact that I oppose much of Barack Obama’s agenda. They know their mom voted for Obama and their dad for McCain - they seem cool with this.

I think its the hypocrisy that is bothering people not the fact that people have different opinions.

[sqweels]

@Kimstu

However, I think you’re right that conservatives boycotting the Dixie Chicks for criticizing Bush is analogous to liberals boycotting Whole Foods because of their CEO criticizing Obama. AFAIK, though, the furor from conservatives over the former event was orders of magnitude greater than the furor from liberals over the latter.

Not to mention the fact that Bush himself was orders of magnitude worse than Obama is at this point.

@Mr. Moto

Second, it puzzles me that people will defend to the death the right of the Dixie Chicks to say what they wish but look askance when their fans do the same thing.

I think that the Dixie Chicks got more than “looked askance” at.

It would take a trillion angry protesters (and let’s say a couple hundred million making death threats) to do to each of the Dixie Chick haters what was done to the DCs themselves.

[sqweels]

Actually, I think my estimate of a trillion is a bit low.

Let’s assume there were 10 million Dixie Chick haters (a conservative* estimate, I think). There would therefore need to be a hundred trillion Dixie Chick hater haters is order for each of them to properly enjoy the Dixie Chicks experience.

Instead, they just got “looked askance” at as a group.
*meaning a tightly restricted estimate, not a free from big government estimate.