Right. Help a brother out.

 

So, where is the backlash or does everyone have short memories and think they really didn't have a problem with the DCs criticizing the President of the United States of America on foreign soil?

 

Lastly, FB, thank you for realizing that my brain does work and I did, indeed, remember the issue.

 

Help me out, how were the comments similar and how were they different? How did they compare to Obama's comments, both as a candidate and as a president, when he was on foreign soil criticizing the Bush adminstration? Did she say she was embarassed by Obama?

Then why not as much backlash against other artists who were also critical of Bush? I know in my case it was the particular words and where she said them that I didn't like.

 

Eddie Vedder has been critical of Bush in pretty much every concert he's had since Bush was in office, even with a potshot or two while Bush was out of office. Never heard much about it.

 

To be fair, Pearl Jam had long since become a niche band, while the Dixie Chicks were pretty much the most popular country act in the world at the time (or at least top five).

 

And it seems like on a regular basis I would see news reports of people leaving concerts griping and moaning about how this act or that act would "just shut up and play." The most hysterical one was a Neil Young documentary I saw a few months back where he had gotten back together with CSN, and people were just incredulous that those guys would say political things during their concert, as though they had somehow been apolitical up until Dubya got into office. :lol:

Then why not as much backlash against other artists who were also critical of Bush? I know in my case it was the particular words and where she said them that I didn't like.

 

Because the overwhelming majority of country music fans are conservative.

I never doubted that your gray matter was functional at a fairly high level... I just find myself puzzled by some of the conclusions/opinions it generates... :lol:

 

Okay, I'll bite. The difference IMO was that the Chicks were clearly attempting to capitalize (read: PROFIT) from an audience of anti-war, possibly anti-American and definitely anti-Bush Europeans by currying their favor thus opening their wallets and increasing the Chicks popularity... resulting in increased album sales and Chicks' income overseas. They made a clear choice to bring politics into their art. Anytime this happens, the artist/celebrity must fully realize he/she/they are effectively narrowing their appeal by alienating a significant portion of their potential audience/fan base.

 

Palin, on the other hand, is already on record opposing Obama in the most recent election. As a politician, it is essentially her job to voice agreements and/or disagreements over policy. Al Gore has done so for years. She has already alienated those who will not vote for her anyway.

 

The bottom line is you can vote for Palin or not based upon her words. You can vote for the Chicks or not based upon their words by whether you buy their music, concert tickets or other paraphernalia.

 

We are blessed to live in a free country. :thumb:

 

Artists have been doing that for decades. Bob Dylan made his whole career doing political songs. Why should the Dixie Chicks not be allowed to?

Artists have been doing that for decades. Bob Dylan made his whole career doing political songs. Why should the Dixie Chicks not be allowed to?

Who said they couldn't?

Who said they couldn't?

 

Maybe the tens of thousands of people who turned against them after they took a swipe at Dubya, as well as the many who sent them death threats? :idunno:

Here is where I am....

 

Politicians ALWAYS bash other politicians. They are peers. They know what it means to be a politiican, they know what it takes to run a city, state, or country.

 

Entertainers have NO clue. They are simply using their celebrity status to spew their opinions about subjects that they have NO clue about. There are too many Americans that think Entertainers are well versed and all knowing as it relates to anything! They are Entertainers, not professors of Education, Finance, Politics, or Economics. The only difference between them and the rest of us is that they have a public forum and we do not.

 

Quite honestly, I don't watch George Clooney movies or buy Dixie Chicks cd's. Is that not my right? So it is OK to burn the American Flag, but don't disagree with a celebrities political views?

 

HUH?

Maybe the tens of thousands of people who turned against them after they took a swipe at Dubya, as well as the many who sent them death threats? :idunno:

 

Part of being in business is understanding your clientèle. They failed to do that and paid the price for it. I think the death threats were taking things to far but people ceasing do buy their music is fine by me if that is the decision they want to make with their money.

 

People make this out like they are martyrs, frankly I look at them as making poor business decisions.

Here is where I am....

 

Politicians ALWAYS bash other politicians. They are peers. They know what it means to be a politiican, they know what it takes to run a city, state, or country.

 

Entertainers have NO clue. They are simply using their celebrity status to spew their opinions about subjects that they have NO clue about. There are too many Americans that think Entertainers are well versed and all knowing as it relates to anything! They are Entertainers, not professors of Education, Finance, Politics, or Economics. The only difference between them and the rest of us is that they have a public forum and we do not.

 

Quite honestly, I don't watch George Clooney movies or buy Dixie Chicks cd's. Is that not my right? So it is OK to burn the American Flag, but don't disagree with a celebrities political views?

 

HUH?

 

i think many of them have seen quite a bit more of the world than I have and may actually have a much better grasp of the suffering going on in places like Darfur. You do realize that our politicians are not professors of education, finance, politics, or economics. Check out the professions of the Kentucky Legislature, Lawyer, Lawyer, teacher, tire salesman, book salesman, building contractor - yet they make policy all of the time regarding education, and insurance, etc. . . I would probably rather have Clooney's resume and world travels making decisions in Kentucky than I would some that we have.

Here is where I am....

 

Politicians ALWAYS bash other politicians. They are peers. They know what it means to be a politiican, they know what it takes to run a city, state, or country.

 

Entertainers have NO clue. They are simply using their celebrity status to spew their opinions about subjects that they have NO clue about. There are too many Americans that think Entertainers are well versed and all knowing as it relates to anything! They are Entertainers, not professors of Education, Finance, Politics, or Economics. The only difference between them and the rest of us is that they have a public forum and we do not.

 

Quite honestly, I don't watch George Clooney movies or buy Dixie Chicks cd's. Is that not my right? So it is OK to burn the American Flag, but don't disagree with a celebrities political views?

 

HUH?

 

I'm trying to figure out the conclusion here that entertainers have no clue.

 

I would say that, at the minimum, they have as much a clue as either you or I do.

 

I've always been befuddled by the assertion that entertainers have no ability to think, and that their opinion is not to be considered because of their profession.

 

In the end, aren't Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Colter, et al the same ilk?

So I'm the only one that remembers them getting bashed for criticizing our president while they were on foreign soil?

So I'm the only one that remembers them getting bashed for criticizing our president while they were on foreign soil?

 

No, I think we all do.

Part of being in business is understanding your clientèle. They failed to do that and paid the price for it. I think the death threats were taking things to far but people ceasing do buy their music is fine by me if that is the decision they want to make with their money.

 

People make this out like they are martyrs, frankly I look at them as making poor business decisions.

I agree with you. They showed that they had very little understanding of their fan base (or didn't care)...

Part of being in business is understanding your clientèle. They failed to do that and paid the price for it. I think the death threats were taking things to far but people ceasing do buy their music is fine by me if that is the decision they want to make with their money.

 

People make this out like they are martyrs, frankly I look at them as making poor business decisions.

 

I see what you mean, but they haven't been hurt that bad. In the wake of pop-country radio abandoning them, a whole new audience was opened up. They get lots of airplay on adult-contemporary and public radio stations now. They may not sell as many albums, but they've got a lot more control over their material and image now, which they might see as a win.

Artists have been doing that for decades. Bob Dylan made his whole career doing political songs. Why should the Dixie Chicks not be allowed to?

Where have I ever suggested that the Chicks shouldn't be allowed to say whatever they want to say?

 

I merely assert that there are certain justifiable consequences that may occur as a result of their statements... kinda like I feel anytime I post in P&R... :lol: