Reaction a shock to Dixie Chicks

(Mansfield, OH) News Journal ^ | May 22, 2003 | John Benson

[fightinJAG]

It is somewhat ironic that the Dixie Chicks, one of country music's biggest acts over the past five years with nearly 25 million albums sold, decided to call their latest disc "Home," a place they were not welcome earlier this spring.

[gcruse]

when Dixie Chicks singer Natalie Maines
exercised her first amendment right to free speech,

• Maines made her remarks in London.  The Bill of Rights stops at the national boundaries.
• The First Amendment protects speech from government, not consumer reaction .
• So much silliness, so little time.
  

[gcruse]

It is astonishing that the democrats and their Mini-Me
liberal media winged monkeys truly have no idea
what free speech means. Just amazing, is it not?

If I thought the republicans understood what the
Tenth Amendment was about, I'd be quicker to
lambaste the democrats' problems with the First.

[AlGone2001]

What is the point in citing the 1st amendment for an act that they do outside of the US? The UK is not sworn to uphold our constitution.

I agree that they should have the right to tell us what they believe: They should just consider that we have the right to tell them what we think, as well. I think that we are.

[friendly]

What in the freek are you talking about? You make no sense.

[gcruse]

Read the Tenth Amendment. Compare it the FBI keeping agents on the job investigation whorehouses in New Orleans in the weeks after 9/11, or in busting people for possessing marijuana in states where it has been made legal for them to do so, or arresting doctors for assisting suicides in Oregon where it has been made legal. Bashing the democrats for misinterpreting the First Amendment is ludicrous when you look at what republicans are doing to the Tenth.

[Redcloak]

"Just so you know, it's kinda hard singing with Toby Keith's boot in my ass."

[FourPeas]

Maines still just doesn't get it. And this "chick" has the same right to vote as moderately intelligent people. Scary.

Then again, it seems a large percentage of the media doesn't seem to understand that these clueless "artists" right to free speech has not be infringed, nor has the right of the rest of us to not financially support those same "artists".

[75thOVI]

"If I go to a restaurant and am offended by something the waiter says, do I still have to patronize that restaurant because not doing so would be stomping on the waiter's freedom of speech?"


I would have to say no, because the waiter and the restaurant are not part of the "ruling" class. In the last year I started a new job. My first day at orientation we new hires were told that should we say something that another employee found objectionable we were subject to immediate termination. It made no difference if we intended no harm, it was how the other person "perceived" our speech. So much for not losing my livelihood because of what I said. However people like the DC's see themselves as different, bound by different rules.

Another excellent example is our dear conservative friend Bill O'Reilly. I'm sure Bill attends many parties and gatherings during the course of a year. The chances of you or I being invited to attend one of these gatherings can be expressed as a whole number between 1 and 0. For you see, we really aren't his kind of people. This is all well and good. It's called freedom of association. This is one of the basic rights of a free people. Bill enjoys that right, but is very uncomfortable with the "lower" classes pretending that they have such rights. To the point that he takes a public offical to task for not stopping an unauthorized gathering, unless the guest list meets with his approval. It's much the same with the DCs. They have every right to say what ever they want, but.... any indication of the peons feeling that they have similar rights sends them into a tizzy. I find the American public "flexing" a few rights to be a very good thing. I hope it lasts. Don't expect the ruling class to turn a blind eye to it for long. They will try to put us in our proper place. I know where they see our proper place to be. How about you?

[gg188]

I can't believe the network or the show's producers would tolerate a performer wearing a shirt that said "F.U."-anything, much less F.U. followed by the name of one of its popular stars (who has without a shadow of a doubt done NOTHING to deserve such an epitet!)

Ironic----if someone had worn a shirt "F.U.S.H." (Saddam Hussein) or "F.U.O.B.L." or "F.U.Moon-worshipping Mohammaden Women-Hating Cowardly Killers", they would have NEVER been allowed to be on television.

Maines T-Shirt really shows how upside down the world is.

Also, COUNTRY MUSIC---fans and industry---should not TOLERATE anyone wearing a shirt that alludes to the "f"-word! Can anyone imagine Gentleman Jim Reeves or George Straight or or Lynn Anderson or Loretta Lynn or Reba McIntyre or Charlie Pride or Randy Travis wearing a shirt that says "F.U." on it!??? That is OUTRAGEOUS!

[chainsaw]

Does America understand the concept of free speech?

It is obvious the DC's do not. As we, the american public also have the same right to speak our minds and guard our pocketbooks. We may donate freely and we may purchase freely. The right extends to the reverse also.

<sarcasm> The nude magazine cover, and the "F.U.T.K" T-shirt shows the american people and the country music fans in particular, that the DC's, have real class. </sarcasm>

In my opinion they have demonstrated they are nothing more than trash. Hopefully they will spend some of their ill gotten millions to purchase some couth, because they have none at the present time.

[xm177e2]

Does America understand the concept of free speech?

These boycotts are stupid, but they are part of free speech. Free speech does not mean you can say anything you damn please and then expect nobody to get upset and censure you with speech of their own (or with economic sanctions, such as not buying their CDs).

If I walk up and down main street with a big sign that says "Jews are Subhuman, we will finish the job Adolf" and then people on the sidewalk glare at me, that is not a violation of my free speech rights. If I put that sign up over my store, and people choose not to buy from me, that's my problem. People are free to interpret political speech how they want--people are free to be offended by anything they want. This is a free country.

[fightinJAG]

Thank you---I was going to do that after I caught up reading it, but you beat me to it. I also hope he reads it.