• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

My Dixie Chicks Mindless Rant

I submit that the OP main problem with the Dixie Chicks is a few year later the Chicks are using there outspoken comment to propel themselves into the media spotlight again.

I sensed some distain for their Oprah appearance; add in a documentary of their experience from the backlash is being released today; plus the album and concert sales were strong over the summer. I sense that some like our OP resent the fact the Dixie Chicks have used their anti-bush anti-war sentiment into a brand new marketing opportunity. I on the other hand applaud them for their efforts..
 
Last edited:
RANT! Honestly, I just want to ask: Who gives a flying f- what the Dixie Chicks said about Bush or the war?

I sure as hell don't. You can be pretty sure that Al Qaeda wasn't listening either. There are much louder voices around the world than the Dixie Chicks chiding Bush, the war in Iraq, and all of the other failings of this administration and its policies. What we have here is a mediocre trio of country singers-not exactly voices that resonate across the world.

They had every right to say what they did, and the fans who ditched them as a result had every right to do so. However, I don't understand why they did. Good grief. Was that really the first time that they heard a celebrity express a political view different from their own? Or a criticism of Bush for that matter? If this is their reaction every time, then the list of acceptable CDs, movies, and TV shows must be pretty miniscule at this point.

Give me a friggin' break.
 
Sally said:
I submit that the OP main problem with the Dixie Chicks is a few year later the Chicks are using there outspoken comment to propel themselves into the media spotlight again.

I sensed some distain for their Oprah appearance; add in a documentary of their experience from the backlash is being released today; plus the album and concert sales were strong over the summer. I sense that some like our OP resent the fact the Dixie Chicks have used their anti-bush anti-war sentiment into a brand new marketing opportunity. I on the other hand applaud them for their efforts..
Click to expand...
Truth is that while they are doing well critically and are also doing well on album sales they had to cancel a lot of their shows and they have lost a large portion of their audience.
 
RandFan said:
Truth is that while they are doing well critically and are also doing well on album sales they had to cancel a lot of their shows and they have lost a large portion of their audience.
Click to expand...

Which I understand but at the same time they have been successful at remarketing themselves to a new and different audience that is why I think the OP has some resentment towards them. They are using the old controversy to re-brand themselves and are being pretty successful at it given these facts:


The album reached number one on cd sales charts...
A documentary is out on their lives..
They have been featured on national TV and radio shows including a prime Oprah gig...
 
Katana said:
Give me a friggin' break.
Click to expand...
Their audience is as free as the Dixie Chicks to form their own opinions and judgments, and to lobby as they see fit to radio stations they listen to. The radio stations, who have to keep an eye on the bottom line, have to consider their audience in their decisions, as losing their audience costs them money. The DC's sell their wares based on image and hype, and a certain connection to their audience. I don't see them as much more talented, musically, than a hundred other country or pop acts. It's the synergy between the style, music, lyric, and packaging that made them a successful act. Any act is dependent upon keeping an audience for its continued succcess. It cannot be taken for granted, and no one is obliged to like them, nor to buy their stuff.

As I see it, the Dixie Chicks exercise the almost perfect right of free expression: say what you like, and face the consequences of your actions. If what you say is unpopular, expect criticism.

Any complaint they had with the reaction to their opinions is moral cowardice. Folks are not bound to buy their albums if they don't care for the group's image, just as the group voicing their opinions was an act of conscience: they did not feel that it was right to remain mute when they had a chance to speak out, and an audience to listen, on a matter they (or at least one) cared deeply about.

It's a wash.

As I don't much care for high pitched, whining, country music acts, they and most other country groups these days don't get my consumer dollar. I'd rather hear something that does not remind me of a cat being neutered without anesthetics.

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
Their audience is as free as the Dixie Chicks to form their own opinions and judgments, and to lobby as they see fit to radio stations they listen to. The radio stations, who have to keep an eye on the bottom line, have to consider their audience in their decisions, as losing their audience costs them money. The DC's sell their wares based on image and hype, and a certain connection to their audience. I don't see them as much more talented, musically, than a hundred other country or pop acts. It's the synergy between the style, music, lyric, and packaging that made them a successful act. Any act is dependent upon keeping an audience for its continued succcess. It cannot be taken for granted, and no one is obliged to like them, nor to buy their stuff.

As I see it, the Dixie Chicks exercise the almost perfect right of free expression: say what you like, and face the consequences of your actions. If what you say is unpopular, expect criticism.

Any complaint they had with the reaction to their opinions is moral cowardice. Folks are not bound to buy their albums if they don't care for the group's image, just as the group voicing their opinions was an act of conscience: they did not feel that it was right to remain mute when they had a chance to speak out, and an audience to listen, on a matter they (or at least one) cared deeply about.

It's a wash.

As I don't much care for high pitched, whining, country music acts, they and most other country groups these days don't get my consumer dollar. I'd rather hear something that does not remind me of a cat being neutered without anesthetics.

DR
Click to expand...

Agreed. Were you taking issue with something that I said?
 
Katana said:
Agreed. Were you taking issue with something that I said?
Click to expand...
Not really. The part of your rant against the fans who ditched them didn't make as much sense as the general position you presented. Perhaps I should have hit a general 'reply' button rather than a reply to your specific post.

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
Not really. The part of your rant against the fans who ditched them didn't make as much sense as the general position you presented. Perhaps I should have hit a general 'reply' button rather than a reply to your specific post.

DR
Click to expand...

Ah.

The fans had every right to behave as they did, but I just didn't think that the Dixie Chicks' actions warranted it. I don't take them (or most celebrities) that seriously. Only an opinon, of course. I do understand what you were saying about image, market forces, and accepting consequences when you speak your mind.
 
Katana said:
Ah.

The fans had every right to behave as they did, but I just didn't think that the Dixie Chicks' actions warranted it. I don't take them (or most celebrities) that seriously. Only an opinon, of course. I do understand what you were saying about image, market forces, and accepting consequences when you speak your mind.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, we seem to agree. Are we allowed to do that? Does this violate some forum rule? :boggled: :confused: :)

DR
 
Sally said:
Which I understand but at the same time they have been successful at remarketing themselves to a new and different audience that is why I think the OP has some resentment towards them. They are using the old controversy to re-brand themselves and are being pretty successful at it given these facts:


The album reached number one on cd sales charts...
A documentary is out on their lives..
They have been featured on national TV and radio shows including a prime Oprah gig...
Click to expand...
I agree. I don't think there is anything cautionary in this tale. The Dixie Chicks showed the strength of their convictions. Many of the fans rebelled and exercised their rights. The Dixie Chicks were patient and stuck to their convictions and persevered. Sound like a win-win to me.

Hey, Toby Kieth got over this whole thing 2 years ago. Maybe everyone else should do the same?
 
Maybe somebody said this, I read most of what was posted but not all, but here's my opinion:

Don't air your dirty laundry on your neighbours porch.

Free speech? Sure.

Insulting your own country on foreign soil? No. Against the rules (for me anyway).

Say what you want when you are here but out of your country you should show respect for it.

And honestly, I never liked the Chixie Dicks anyway.
 
I had better things to do last night, like sleep. Now, my point: You drew an analogy between criticizing U.S. leadership during WWII and criticizing U.S. leadership today. There is a HUGE difference between attacking Germany and attacking Iraq/Saddam. When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, there had already been a declared war going on Europe for over two years between Germany and several U.S. allies. Germany was a proven ally of Japan. Pearl Harbor was merely the event that finally pushed us into the war. Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, has never been proven to have had any hand in the 9/11 attacks. To suggest that the Dixie Chicks have committed a treasonous act is just plain silly.

Since last night, you've shown yourself to be little more than a troll, so I will take no further part in this thread.
 
Last edited:
Axenos said:
Insulting your own country on foreign soil? No. Against the rules (for me anyway).

.
Click to expand...

I thought they were critical of current political policies, not America. There are many Americans who also disagree with policies.

Speaking up against bad policy is one of the most patriotic things you can do, staying quiet about policies you disagree with is one of the least patriotic (and cowardly) things I can think of.
 
Axenos said:
Insulting your own country on foreign soil? No. Against the rules (for me anyway).

Say what you want when you are here but out of your country you should show respect for it.
Click to expand...

You are confusing criticism of the president with insulting the country.
 
Axenos said:
Maybe somebody said this, I read most of what was posted but not all, but here's my opinion:

Don't air your dirty laundry on your neighbours porch.

Free speech? Sure.

Insulting your own country on foreign soil? No. Against the rules (for me anyway).

Say what you want when you are here but out of your country you should show respect for it.

And honestly, I never liked the Chixie Dicks anyway.
Click to expand...
So, US citizens shouldn't have the right to free speech when they leave the country? That sucks.
 
fishbob said:
You are confusing criticism of the president with insulting the country.
Click to expand...

Not at all. To me, criticising the President on foreign soil, no matter who the Pres. is at the time, is insulting to the country. I don't care what any American says on American soil because that is their right (these days a sorely abused one but their right nonetheless).

On foreign soil, you should show respect to your country and your countrymen. Simple.

I can't speak for anyone but myself, and this is how I feel about it.
 
bob_kark said:
So, US citizens shouldn't have the right to free speech when they leave the country? That sucks.
Click to expand...

People can do what they want. As posted above, I feel people should show respect for their country and their countrymen.

Sometimes free speech goes too far. (That oughta rile some feathers...)
 
So I hope the people who think it's treason to be critical of the current leader of the United States also think it was treason to criticism Clinton? What about Nixon? JFK? I really hope those same people didn't commit hypocrisy by criticizing Clinton when he was in power. And I am sure you won’t be critical of the next Democratic president after making these statements.
 
If you are referring to me, I never said treason. I said disrespectful.

If you're not referring to me, carry on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom