Dixie Chicks earn my respect.

I’m generally not a fan of Country music in general, just ask my wife, but the couple of songs that the Dixie Chicks have had cross-over to the pop charts have worked a little magic in changing my opinion. I’m not ready to slap on some cowboy boots and go out line dancing anytime soon, but the Chicks have managed to get me to consider buying my first Country CD ever. If you knew me well you’d know how much of a feat that is.

The fact that their lead singer, Natalie Maines, had the guts to tell a London audience that they were ashamed that the President is from Texas only deepened my growing respect for them.

Naturally, there’s a backlash against the group by fans who are upset they don’t like the President and Natalie has already issued an apology for her comments. That’s somewhat disappointing, but not surprising.

I think that Natalie’s apology would have been much better had it been more like this.

Found via Chari’s site who found it via Nicole’s site.

49 thoughts on “Dixie Chicks earn my respect.

  1. It’s getting tiresome listening to the hyprocrits throw their insults and boycotts at the Chicks. These are the same loathesome couch-potatoes that jabbed former President Clinton for the eight years he was in office. Where was their respect for the presidency then?

    What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Shrub doesn’t deserve any more respect than anyone else—he needs to earn it first. He apparently didn’t earn Natalie’s. And he certainly hasn’t earned mine.

    I do respect the office of the President. That’s an entirely different matter—and doesn’t have anything to do with what Natalie had said.

    Besides, Shrub was actually born and raised in Connecticut. He’s a damn yankee! smile

  2. Well I think everone should be able to speak there mind but when you talk about hyprocrits how do you write a sond about killing someone “Earls got to Die” and then say you are just a concerned moter that doesnt want to go to war.

  3. If the DCs ever take a look at this rational site:

    Dear DCs,

    I do hope this gets to you three, who are now suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous Rush-Fox crapola, re: your dead-on remark about Bush’s war mongering “policy”  in Britain last week.

    I just missed out on experiencing the McCarthy era in the ‘50’s with its blacklisted artists, et al., but I think this is an accurate replay of it. It certainly arises from the same far right-wing ideologies that have always ended up poisoning our grand American nation and ideal.  DeLay personifies the toxic effect, with the KKK being its century-old old demon seed.  It is purely un-American in its denial of discourse and debate.  Period.

    Do not be deterred in the face of blistering neo-con criticism.  Hang tough, ladies.  You will prevail.

  4. Robert there is a very real difference between singing about killing someone and actually going out and doing it. It’s also apparent from the song’s lyrics that they felt the act they were singing about was justifiable. They don’t feel this war is justifiable. I’d be willing to bet that if the did feel it was justifiable they’d happily sing a song about it.

    The truth is they were playing to the crowd as most of England is not happy with the war or their Prime Minister. Their apology is obviously more for business purposes than any sincerely felt remorse over the comment. I doubt the outcry has changed their opinion of Bush, it’s just shown them how when you’re popular with a certain demographic it sometimes doesn’t pay to be honest.

    JT, I don’t think it’s quite fair to characterize the backlash against the Dixie Chicks as being close to McCarthyism. This backlash is from their fans, not from a congressional panel hell-bent on suppressing dissent.

  5. Les, you make a good point, re: my allusion to McCarthyism—except where the “rubber meets the road” in America:  the marketplace. 

    I do think also that there is clear though tacit collusion between the media righties and their pol-base: the neo-cons now overplaying their hand and being held in check for it.  It does call for regulation when a single company channels its opinion through its thousand-plus stations.  We had some trouble with Hearst (of San Simeon) a century ago on this.

  6. you know, i think someone should just kill bush and sadaam and get it over with. they way i see it, both of them are as evil as the other. bush is purposely making the whole world hate america. by going to war and making pre-emptive attacks which he knows can kill hundreds and thousands of innocent people, hes no less than an evil dictator himself. the same with sadaam. so why cant both these guys just die and the world can go on living as it once was. thank you

  7. what happended to freedom of speech anyone can say anything they want as far as I’m concerned…
    And I say George Bush sucks…

  8. Nothings happened to it. It’s just another example of the maxim that “freedom isn’t free, it comes at a price.”

    Again, I don’t have a problem with the fans suddenly deciding they don’t like the Dixie Chicks for their comments. That’s their right no matter how silly I think their decision is. My point was only that it takes a lot of guts to make comments like that when you’re sitting at the top of the charts and it could impact your bottom line.

  9. Yet another example of the sort of person they make shows like Joe Millionaire for rears it’s head and belches out a random comment.

  10. Dixie Chicks suck anyway! They couldn’t sing their way out of empty beer bottle! President Bush rocks for reasons, that he’s a leader and don’t need to ask the citizens, who have no idea what all’s going on anyway, there opinion. Did any other president make a descision based off the public? Heck no! Why should he? You think Bush is gonna tell half the stupid population in America everything they know! Wake up you ignorant protesters! What’s evil about Bush and so awesome about Saddam? Don’t you have them mixed around or are you part of the stupid, less than 20% percent population who opposes Bush. You are a unpatriotic brainless Dipstick!

  11. If Jason is representative of what being “enlightened” is then I think we need to re-define the word.

  12. I somewhat agree with Les….President Bush knows so much more about the pros and cons of this war than any of us do.  I don’t care who you think you are or how much you think you know…you will never have all of the information that President Bush knows.  Half of America had no problem with President Clinton having an affair right in the White House…but the same people oppose President Bush declaring war so that we will continue to have freedom.  Innocent people WILL die…innocent people HAVED died in the past…it is all part of them fighting for the freedom that we all have…the freedom to type whatever we want on the internet.  Every country envies America because we have so much freedom…freedom of speech, religion, the press, etc.  Why do you suppose we have all that freedom.  Winning the wars!  Have you people forgotten what happened on September 11th….are you content with moving on and causing no reprocution to those people who took thousands of innocent lives in New York…in America!  What goes around comes around…they need to pay for what they did.  No one had a problem killing Timothy McVay (sp) for what he did at the Murrah Building in Oklahoma because he was one of our own and it didn’t lead to war…you people have no problem killing your own but oppose the President for wanting to take care of those countries who live to take us out.  All of us!  They are no respector of persons…they want us all to die.  The problem with American’s today is that they value their own life more than others…if you died in the September 11th…you would want this country to fight for you….I commend President Bush for his leadership, christian values, perserverance, and confidence in his decisions.  I am 22 years old and he is the BEST President I have ever lived through.  Go George Bush!!

  13. The Hollywood group is at it again.  Holding anti-war rallies, screaming about the Bush Administration, running ads in major newspapers, defaming the President and his Cabinet every chance they get,  to anyone and everyone who will listen. They publicly defile them and call them names like “stupid” , “morons”, and “idiots”.  Jessica Lange went so far as to tell a crowd in Spain that she hates President Bush and is embarrassed to be an American.

    So, just how ignorant are these people who are running the country? Let’s look at the biographies of these “stupid”,  “ignorant” , “moronic” leaders, and then at the celebrities who are castigating them:

    President George W. Bush: Received a Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. He served as an F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard. He began his career in the oil and gas business in Midland in 1975 and worked in the energy industry until 1986. He was elected Governor on November 8, 1994, with
    53.5 percent of the vote. In a historic re-election victory, he became the first Texas Governor to be elected to consecutive four-year terms on November 3, 1998 winning 68.6 percent of the vote. In 1998 Governor Bush won 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, 27 percent of the African-American vote, 27 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of women. He won more Texas counties, 240 of 254, than any modern Republican other than Richard Nixon in 1972 and is the first Republican gubernatorial candidate to win the heavily Hispanic and Democratic border counties of El Paso, Cameron and Hidalgo. (Someone began circulating a false story about his I.Q. being lower than any other President.  If you believed it, you might want to go to URBANLEGENDS.COM and see the truth.)

    Vice President Dick Cheney: Earned a B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science. Two years later, he won an American Political Science Association congressional fellowship. One of Vice President Cheney’s primary duties is to share with individuals, members of Congress and foreign leaders, President Bush’s vision to strengthen our
    economy, secure our homeland and win the War on Terrorism. In his official role as President of the Senate, Vice President Cheney regularly goes to Capital Hill to meet with Senators and members of the House of Representatives to work on the Administration’s legislative goals. In his travels as Vice President, he has seen first hand the great demands the war on terrorism is placing on the men and women of our military, and he is proud of the tremendous job they are doing for the United States of America.

    Secretary of State Colin Powell: Educated in the New York City public schools, graduating from the City College of New York (CCNY), where he earned a Bachelor’s Degree in geology. He also participated in ROTC at CCNY and received a commission as an Army second lieutenant upon graduation in June 1958. His further academic achievements include a Master of Business Administration Degree from George Washington University. Secretary Powell is the recipient of numerous U.S. and foreign military awards and decorations. Secretary Powell’s civilian
    awards include two Presidential Medals of Freedom, the President’s Citizens Medal, the Congressional Gold Medal, the Secretary of State Distinguished Service Medal, and the Secretary of Energy Distinguished Service Medal. Several schools and other institutions have been named in his honor and he holds honorary degrees from universities and colleges across the country.  (Note: He retired as Four Star General in the United States Army)

    Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: Attended Princeton University on Scholarship (AB, 1954) and served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as a Naval aviator; Congressional Assistant to Rep. Robert Griffin (R-MI), 1957-59; U.S. Representative, Illinois, 1962-69; Assistant to the President, Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Director of the Cost of Living Council, 1969-74; U.S. Ambassador to NATO, 1973-74; head of Presidential Transition Team, 1974; Assistant to the President, Director of White House Office of Operations, White House Chief of Staff, 1974-77; Secretary of Defense, 1975-77.

    Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge: Raised in a working class family in veterans’ public housing in Erie. He earned a scholarship to Harvard, graduating with honors in 1967. After his first year at The Dickinson School of Law, he was drafted into the U.S. Army, where he served as an infantry staff sergeant in Vietnam, earning the Bronze Star
    for Valor.  After returning to Pennsylvania, he earned his Law Degree and was in private practice before becoming Assistant District Attorney in Erie County. He was elected to Congress in 1982. He was the first enlisted Vietnam combat veteran elected to the U.S. House, and was overwhelmingly re-elected six times.

    National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice: Earned her Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science, Cum Laude and
    Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master’s from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. (Note:  Rice enrolled at the University of Denver at the age of 15, graduating at 19 with a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science (Cum Laude). She earned a Master’s Degree at the University of Notre Dame and a Doctorate from the University of Denver’s Graduate School of International Studies. Both of her advanced degrees are also in Political Science.)  She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre Dame in 1995. At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador’s Residence in Moscow to the
    Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions. From 1989 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as
    Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender—Integrated Training in the Military. She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the University of Notre Dame, the International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Symphony Board of Governors. She was a Founding Board member of the Center for a New Generation, an educational support fund for schools in East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California and was Vice President of the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula. In addition, her past board service has encompassed such organizations as Transamerica Corporation,
    Hewlett Packard, the Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Rand Corporation, the National Council for Soviet and East European Studies, the Mid-Peninsula Urban Coalition and KQED, public broadcasting for San Francisco. Born November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama, she resides in Washington, D.C.

    So who are these celebrities? What is their education? What is their experience in affairs of State or in National Security?  While I will defend to the death their right to express their opinions, I think that if they are going to call into question the intelligence of our leaders, we should also have all the facts on their educations and background:

    Barbra Streisand : Completed high school     Career: Singing and acting

    Cher: Dropped out of school in 9th grade.      Career: Singing and acting

    Martin Sheen: Flunked exam to enter University of Dayton.      Career: Acting

    Jessica Lange: Dropped out college mid-freshman year.    Career: Acting

    Alec Baldwin: Dropped out of George Washington U. after scandal.    Career: Acting

    Julia Roberts: Completed high school.    Career: Acting

    Sean Penn: Completed High school.    Career: Acting

    Susan Sarandon: Degree in Drama from Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.  Career: Acting

    Ed Asner; Completed High school.    Career: Acting

    George Clooney: Dropped out of University of Kentucky.    Career: Acting

    Michael Moore: Dropped out first year University of Michigan.    Career: Movie Director

    Sarah Jessica Parker:  Completed High School.    Career: Acting

    Jennifer Anniston: Completed High School.    Career: Acting

    Mike Farrell: Completed High school.    Career: Acting

    Janeane Garofelo: Dropped out of College.    Career: Stand up comedienne

    Larry Hagman: Attended Bard College for one year.    Career: Acting

    While comparing the education and experience of these two groups, we should also remember that President Bush and his cabinet are briefed daily, even hourly, on the War on Terror and threats to our security. They are privy to information gathered around the world concerning the Middle East, the threats to America, the intentions of terrorists and terrorist-supporting governments. They are in constant communication with the CIA, the FBI, Interpol, NATO, The United Nations, our own military,  and that of our allies around the world.  We cannot simply believe that we have full knowledge of the threats because we watch CNN!!  We cannot believe that we are in any way as informed as our

    These celebrities have no intelligence-gathering agents, no fact-finding groups, no insight into the minds of those who would destroy our country. They only have a deep seated hatred for all things Republican. By nature, and no one knows quite why, the Hollywood elitists detest Conservative views and anything that supports or uplifts the United
    States of America.  The silence was deafening from the Left when Bill Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical factory outside of Khartoum, or when he attacked the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 and 1999.  He bombed Serbia itself to get Slobodan Milosevic out of Kosovo, and not a single peace rally was held.  When our Rangers were ambushed in Somalia and 18 young American lives were lost, not a peep was heard from Hollywood.  Yet now, after our nation has been attacked on its own soil, after 3,000 Americans were killed, by freedom-hating terrorists, while going about
    their routine lives, they want to hold rallies against the war.  Why the change?  Because an honest, God-fearing Republican sits in the White House. 

    Another irony is that in 1987, when Ronald Reagan was in office,  the Hollywood group aligned themselves with disarmament groups like SANE, FREEZE and PEACE ACTION, urging our own government to disarm and freeze
    the manufacturing of any further nuclear weapons, in order to promote world peace.  It is curious that now, even after we have heard all the evidence that Saddam Hussein has chemical, biological and is very close to obtaining nuclear weapons, their is no cry from this group for HIM to disarm.  They believe we should leave him alone in his quest for these weapons of mass destruction, even though it is certain that these deadly weapons will eventually be used against us in our own cities.

    So why the hype out of Hollywood?  Could these celebrities believe that since they draw such astronomical salaries, they are entitled to also determine the course of our Nation?  That they can make viable decisions concerning war and peace?  Did Michael Moore have the backing of the Nation when he recently thanked France, on our behalf, for being a “good enough friend to tell us we were wrong”?  I know for certain he was not speaking for me.  Does Sean Penn fancy himself a Diplomat, in going to Iraq when we are just weeks away from war?  Does he believe that his High School Diploma gives him the knowledge (and the right) to go to a country that is controlled by a maniacal dictator, and speak on behalf of the American people?  Or is it the fact that he pulls in more money per year than the average American worker will see in a lifetime? Does his bank account give him clout?

    The ultimate irony is that many of these celebrities have made a shambles of their own lives, with drug abuse, alcoholism, numerous marriages and divorces, scrapes with the law, publicized temper tantrums, etc.  How dare they pretend to know what is best for an entire nation!  What is even more bizarre is how many people in this country will listen and accept their views, simply because they liked them in a certain movie, or have fond memories of an old television sitcom! 

    It is time for us, as citizens of the United States, to educate ourselves about the world around us.  If future generations are going to enjoy the freedoms that our forefathers bequeathed us, if they are ever to know peace in their own country and their world, to live without fear of terrorism striking in their own cities, we must assure that this
    nation remains strong.  We must make certain that those who would destroy us are made aware of the severe consequences that will befall them. 

    Yes, it is a wonderful dream to sit down with dictators and terrorists and join hands, singing Cumbaya and talking of world peace.  But it is not real.    We did not stop Adolf Hitler from taking over the entire continent of Europe by simply talking to him.  We sent our best and brightest, with the strength and determination that this Country is
    known for, and defeated the Nazi regime.  President John F. Kennedy did not stop the Soviet ships from unloading their nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 with mere words. He stopped them with action, and threat of immediate war if the ships did not turn around.  We did not end the Cold War with conferences.  It ended with the strong belief of
    President Ronald Reagan…  PEACE through STRENGTH.

  14. The really frightening thing is that with people like Jason and Shayla out there Bush might LEGITIMATELY win in 2004. I guess America really does have the president it deserves. Maybe after Bush we can elect that sock puppet from the pets.com commercials.

  15. Wow, Shayla doesn’t know that Bush went AWOL? I suggest you go to http://www.awolbush.com, dear, and read the truth.

    Cheney? Never served. Wolfowitz? Never served. Perle? Never served. Colin Powell did, obviously, but I suspect he regrets serving Bush.

    Condi Rice? Ask her why she has an oil tanker named after her.


  17. This all boils down to democrats who are angry that President Bush is in office.  There is no logic or reasoning behind the protestors or their message.  Their message is “PEACE!”, well, guess what protestors, Saddam is not a peaceful man.  So how do we handle Saddam?  We blow his freakin’ brains out!  That’s how we handle him.  As a member of the Marine Reserves, I hope I get a chance to go blow away a few ragheads!  What do you think of that democrats?  Huh?  I think you should stay away from me with your ignorance because I’m not “peaceful” when it comes to this war.

  18. i belive in my heart the dixie chicks are guilty of treason, and should be used as human shields

  19. all good americans who love freedom and this great country listen to me please, it is sad but we are free and the dixie chicks do have free speech, just keep in mind the real truth, the dixie chicks and the liberial press i this country is just another war we must fight, the communist party was trying to build in the 50s but it didnt work so they called themselfs socialist, then finally democracts, please dont kid yourselfs, communist, sociallist , liberials and democrates are all the same thing just under a differnt name to hide who they are, dixie chicks should just come out and say they hate this country and are communists.

  20. the more i think about it, i will be glad to pay your air fare to go become human shields, take charlie and barb and rosie with you, gee even better take the entire state of california with you.just think how great this country could be without you communist.if we ever have a 9-11 agin i hope they fly a plane up the ass of the dixie chicks, but then agin they would like it.they take it all the time.

  21. Wow, this is getting a bit messy, isn’t it?

    And so mature too. I love the bit about the plane flying up the ass of the Dixie Chicks. Oki doki then…

  22. It is so interesting to me that someone could possibly believe the actions of the Dixie Chics took courage.  To go to a foreign land and speak to a group that was obviously anti-Bush, demeaning the same, takes some serious balls, no?  I think the true test of courage would be to stand in Reliant stadium, at the rodeo, in Houston, by GOD, Texas and make the same statements.  Maybe they fail to understand that the friends of the soldier they sing about in their hit “Travelling Soldier” are the same that were spit upon by mindless zombies who had been brainwashed by the same type of anti-American sentiment they now spew.  Consider this, If Bill Clinton had reacted properly to the prior attacks by Osama, would there have been a 911?  Maybe there would be about three thousand more Americans alive on the streets today, if he had “failed at diplomacy” as our current president has.  The thing that all of these people fail to understand is that diplomacy is not always the answer.  There are those people who, for whatever reason, will not stop at anything short of death.  They do not think as you or I, and appeasement only multiplies the problem.  This great nation has become just that because we stood up in times when the rest of the world (including your peace-loving Europe, by the way, thanks for two world wars guys) would rather have stayed in a fetal position, absorbing the blows of those whom America hit back.  And why on Earth should this great nation allow its foreign policy to be dictated by the U.N.?  This is an organization that is controlled in no small part by the leaders of thirld world countries.  I’m sorry, but if they are such excellent leaders, then why are there nations so poor?  Oh, I forgot, stupid me, It is that tyrant, Uncle Sam with his foot on their head, and his hand in their pocket.  GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!  The bottom line is, It’s considered cool to hate the U.S. ion some circles even though we are, hands down, bar none, the most giving nation on the face of the planet.  And just in case y’all were wondering why, if we are right, that France, Germany, and the Russians are so avidly against our invasion of Iraq- watch the news,.  It’s simple, because they too have been violating the accords signed by ALLLLLLLL in 1991.  Wait, who signed them?  The U.S. and Britain, only, right?  Nope, people everyone did, even Iraq.  I’m not sure, but I don’t believe there was any special clause in there for French missiles, Russian GPS jamming devices, or German, mobile, chem labs.  Oh, and they WILL be found.  And when they are, my email is attached, and I’d greatly appreciate a letter of apology from all of you denial ridden terrorist lovers.  I’ll leave you with this.  There are two occasions when the world calls on the U.S.A.  When they need a hero, and when they need a scapegoat.
    Yours truly, The pissed off AMERICAN

  23. Consider this; if the CIA had not funded, armed, and trained Osama and his men back when they were on our side fighting the “evil empire” would there have been a ‘9-11’? That was way back when dear old Grandpa Reagan was running the show, next in line was Daddy Bush (head of the Carlyle group – peddling arms and influence to the world) who was quite cozy with the Bin Laden family, and finally Bill Clinton who you, by some twisted leap of logic, want to blame entirely for the terrorist attacks on September 11th. Your ability to revise history to suit your needs is admirable but even if 70% of Americans believe that crap there are still some of us who pay a little better attention.

    The Dixie Chicks took a stand that is unpopular in our country and that did take guts, especially in a country where just about any gibbering idiot can own a gun and shout such enlightened phrases as “nuke the bastards”. In this violent country it is courageous to stand against the rising tide especially when you have as much to lose as they do. I never cared for country music but I will give the Chicks a chance now.

    Of course diplomacy is not always the answer but it is one answer, and the current administration did not explore that avenue to its fullest. Every time a missile was destroyed it wasn’t enough, when chemicals were incinerated they were too little too late, there was no appeasement possible with Bush hence no diplomacy. Will chem labs be found…maybe. And maybe they will be legitimate Iraqi labs working on WOMD, but I will wait to see what independent sources say about it, this administration needs that kind of vindication so bad I would not put it past them to try to fabricate it. But while you

  24. Hey Les, once posted is there any way we can edit our posts? I did spell check it but somehow a sentence that should say ‘…allowing an embargo to be lifted against biological…’ ended up as ‘…allowing an embargo against biological to be lifted…’.

    It is hard when you spew out all of this anger only to find upon re-reading it that it looks like english is your second language.

  25. OK Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911!DUH!
    There are worse leaders out there and people more wanting of liberation than Iraq.
    Iraq was NEVER a threat to America!
    I have an idea! Lets kill everyone who speaks thier mind. Then we will make Bush emperor
    (because ya’ll think he is all knowing anyway).Then we will illegally take over other nations for our own gain (we have to pay for all the rich people’s tax cuts anyway).        You republican morons actully believe all the crap you are being spoon fed by the government?
    screw your war!

  26. Les, what the hell happened here? Did you show up as a target over on FreeRepublic, or something? Geez. What a bunch of morons who haven’t the faintest idea what America is really about.

    These folks truly remind me of Germans during Hitler’s reign. We’re at the end of the Weimar Republic, if this is the real tone of the country.

    Next step, Der Fuhrer. After that, I’m really worried. Fortunately, most of those folks seem to have disappeared?

  27. Scott I have to admit that I haven’t a clue how I keep attracting these nutcases. The only reasonable explanation I can come up with is that they see the word “Stupid” in the website name and think it’s an invitation to a place for stupid people to spew their ideas.

    At least this allows me to keep an eye on the nutcases without too much effort. In case you missed it I put my reply to Pissed Off American in its own entry because I thought it was important enough to share with everyone. Or at least somewhat amusing.

  28. it seems as if you wou;d be the type to critisize Bush. Oh well. we won the war because of him.
    personally i am ashamed that the dixiechicks are from texas. i never liked them anyway.

  29. We won the war because of Bush? We won the war because the Iraqi military didn’t even qualify as a bad joke let alone a serious threat. Not even Bush is so incompetent that screwing up that war would’ve been possible.

    That said, he seems to be doing a great job screwing up the rebuilding of not only Iraq, but also Afghanistan. Let alone not finding a single WOMD that was the whole basis for us going there in the first place.

  30. Bush didn’t win this war, our soldiers did. I support our troops and just hope for them to come home safe, I have a cousin out there and just wish he could come home. I agree completely with what Natalie Maines said about the president, the Dixie Chicks have my full support!

  31. As far as I can tell Bush didn’t win the election either, he seems to make a habit of self declared victories. I never trust men with beady eyes set too close together…

  32. It isn’t suprising that things aren’t going smoothly in either Iraq or Afghanistan. They are both clear examples of the danger of religous zealotry without a secular constitution and free thinkers to constrain it’s power.

  33. So it’s got nothing to do with having the crap bombed out of their infrastructure then, and a shortage of necessities for living, coupled with inadequate local authorities to enforce any kind of order?

    I personally don’t believe that all the disorder in these countries is down to the general populace being zealots, I think it’s more down to them being generally pissed off that they are now worse off since being liberated.

  34. Infrastructure? That may have existed in Iraq, but it doesn’t explain Afghanistan. I didn’t say the general population were zealots, they aren’t the ones fermenting unrest. They are as apothetic to politics as citizens in most nations. Many were against the Iraq war, but I saw few objections to Afghanistan, and it is a genuinely international operation. The problem there seems to be remnants of the taliban that don’t want to relinquish power, and they are definitely zealots.

    I raq is a more mixed bag, and I shouldn’t have lumped it together with Afghanistan. Whether or not you supported the action there (I supported the removal of Saddam, but not necessarily through an invasion/occupation), I don’t think anyone wants to just leave them to fend for themselves. The rebuilding needs to take place, and even if they are pissed off about not having basic services, I hope they realize terrorism won’t expedite matters.

  35. My point on Afghanistan is mainly due to my understanding that the people were already facing these shortages of necessities prior to the war.

    ..well yes I also agree with removing them, but not at cost of the populace.

    Agreed, the populace should not suffer, but it should be noted that part of that suffering is due to sabotage (such as the water supply incident).


  36. Oh so we actually agree on more points than we disagree on then? :hugs: I feel like I was being nit picky now, sorry. :frown:

    Oh and for the record I am from the UK, where we have so far at least managed to keep religion in it’s place as far as laws are concerned. Of course I am aware how easily that can change, after the BNP managed to get one of it’s pondlife candidates elected in Lancs recently, only to have him step down because of his own violent behaviour. (For those that are unaware BNP is our equivalent of the Klan, despite the fact that they now go around wearing suits and pretending to be respectable.)

  37. I had thought we were making great strides in that area here in the US, but the current administration seems to have re-envigorated the religious zealots, particularly in places like Alabama where the Chief Justice is trying to bend the Constitution to his will, the Attorney General is abiding by the law, but agrees with the Justice (and the President wants him on the very court that the Chief Justice is disobeying), and the Governor is basing his tax policy on what he feels Jesus would want him to do (And if you do not agree with them you are infringing on the religious rights). Hopefully they will be good illustrations of the danger of mixing religion and politics.

  38. Valhalla

    I think the jab at Gov Riley is a little unfair.  His point is that poor people in Alabama are taxed at much higher rates than they should be.  I only live 45 minutes away from Bama and I concur with that.  People there are taxed on income starting at about $4500, sales taxes are quite high (while property taxes are low), and their schools are not that impressive!  When I got laid off from work, I received $275 a week from good old Florida.  A buddy of mine in Bama got about $180 a week.  Of course we Floridians have you

  39. I may have been a little unfair to him, but with the chief justice, and attorney general there it is hard to ignor the religious implications. If you view his comments on their own they aren’t that bad, and they may have nothing to do with the comments of the other two, but it cannot be assumed that he isn’t trying to insert religion into a non-religious issue.

  40. I don’t think I would visit a site named awolbush.com and expect to find truth. grin
    But such is life and why it is great to be an American. I just wish more would hope Iraqis could have a chance and not be looking for justification to dispose of an evil leader like Saddam. I think his deeds were justification enough but I realize we Americans live a blessed life and some get nervous when they fear their own apple cart might get tipped over so can live happily no matter what is going on in the world as long as they aren’t asked anything.
    I thank God our parents and grandparents didn’t have the same attitude when Hitler was on the scene and those two countries so many seem to think qualify as the rest of the world surely are happy and realize they now have freedom thanks to our ‘imperial quest.’

  41. Thom, you need to study your history more before thanking God about what your grandparents did. America took an isolationist approach to the growing threat Hitler posed and the war was well underway before we ever got involved. In fact, the majority opinion at the time was that Hitler was a problem for Europe and didn’t concern us which is exactly the attitude you’re complaining about here.

    It took Pearl Harbor to change enough minds to get us into the war. Had the Japanese never attacked us then Hitler may very well have gone on to overrun most of Europe. I would suggest you make certain you’re more familiar with American history before you try to make further claims like the one above.

  42. I’m tired and i certainly didn’t read ALL of this, so forgive me if someone has already brought this up. FUCK NATALIE MAINES. I hate bush too, and my beef isn’t with maines’s statement, it’s with her apology.
        She said something she felt. She should not be commended for this because that’s the way things are supposed to be. I’m not going to pat anyone on the back for speaking their minds, because voicing an poinion isn’t supposed to be a risk. Les, you say you’re a bit disappointed with her apology. I am ENRAGED. I am DISGUSTED. She’s got the balls to make a comment like that, a comment that’s going to make her look spicy, and feisty, and like she’s politically minded, which might in turn spread the dixie chick’s appeal outside of just country fans (it seemed to have worked on you). And then when she started LOSING money and fans, she apologizes. I’m not saying the initial statement was insincere, (how should i know how she feels about anything?) but it was cheapened to the point where it might as well have been by her cowardly, submissive apology. Now those who want to censor and bully us have one more succesful battle under their belts, and it’s going to be that much more difficult for the next person trying to express an unpopular opinion.  And the worst part is that now that all the flak has died down, she’s still being painted as a martyr, as if she had never apologized at all. Spineless asshole.

  43. No one seems to think about the actual justification of the ‘Chickes comments. I’m a “fundie” Christian, probably moreso than Falwell, Robertson and many others. Yet I think we have no (Biblical) justification for offensive warfare, no matter how “just” the cause may be. Defensive warfare is one thing (where we defend the lands and people who agree to be united to us in law and governance), but offensive warfare is a completely different animal. Many will say that the offense is just pre-emptive defense, but would they really want to carry such an idea to its end? For example, would they really want to jail people who are “more likely” to commit theft, or murder, before there is a corpus delecti and mens rea proving the fact, simply based on speculation?

    But even if the war in the Middle-East is justified, there is another question—namely, is criticism of a national leader kosher? To be consistent, we have to say that it is (or would one want to actually say that the Germans had no right to criticize Hitler, simply because he held political power?). However, as others have mentioned, we have to equally allow criticism of the criticism—those who do not agree with the ‘Chicks have the right (at least in this country, the USA) to voice their opinion and withhold their support of the ‘Chicks. Some want to paint the discontent with the ‘Chicks statements and the consequences associated with it as a form of censorship, but it is really just an example of the free-speech / free-market system. If you agree with them you can voice your opinion and provide monetary support, and if you don’t you can equally voice your opinion and withhold your monetary support. Neither option is repression or censorship. Both are prime examples of the intended function the American social and economic system. smile

  44. I’m generally not a fan of Country music in general..

    I generally don’t use generally, in general, so many times, generally speaking

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.