i would expect nothing less from a segment of the music industry that has allowed its soul to be drained by consultants.

hey, wait! that describes the whole industry!!

FUTK, that's my motto.

They certainly make better music than Toby Keith.

And while I tend to agree with their politics more than his, the music really ought to be the bottom line for a show such as this. Or perhaps more realistically, the music and the bottom line ought to be the bottom line for a show such as this. Either way, the Chicks belong.

Side note: anyone notice how the people who make such a point of ridiculing the Chicks let Willie Nelson's similarly anti-Bush statements slide? Maybe they're more threatening because of their massive sales and/or their female-ness, or maybe it's just because Willie's such a nice old man, sort of the crazy uncle to Nashville?

It's because they're extremely popular with young people, and because they're women. Prowar men like to push women around. It's part of what makes them feel good about themselves.

To contend that Natalie Maines comment is political speech is ludicrous. She gave no alternatives and made no cogent points. Most people, including the country music audience, will accept a reasoned, thought out argument. But like most liberals, when she was faced with a situation she was mentally unqualified to grasp, she resorted to a personal insult on a man who, right or wrong, is doing what he thinks necessary to protect our country. And those people who are rightly censuring her for her outrageous comment are merely exercising their rights.
Thank you,
John Allen

Wow...what can you say. I use to love Toby Keith. Blue Moon, Upstairs Downtown, just to name a couple. I hate that my parents, family and all those other close-minded rednecks believe we should fight for a freedom that we should not be allowed to exercise. They are the Benedict Arnolds. I hate Toby Keith now but plenty of people love him. If ignorance sells then Toby will sell, but he can rot in hell. People fought a war many years ago to come to a country where they were free to believe, as they wanted without persecution, I suppose that was for all people but Country Stars. FUTK. GO DIXIE CHICKS!!!!

"Most people, including the country music audience, will accept a reasoned, thought out argument."

Hilarious. Are you writing a parody?

I BELIEVE THE DIXIE CHICKS WEREN'T INVITED, NOT BECAUSE OF WHAT NATALIE MAINES SAID ABOUT BUSH, BUT BECAUSE THEY SAID THEY ARE NO LONGER COUNTY, THEY ARE GOING TO BE ROCK N ROLL. SO THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING THERE.

THERE IS FREEDOM OF SPEECH, SHE SPOKE AND WE DISAGREED, SO IT IS OUR FREEDOM TO KICK THEM TO THE CURB.

It's not the trailer park, honey; you don't have to shout.

Mike wrote: "It's not the trailer park, honey; you don't have to shout."

that's the same thing as making a ghetto joke in a rap thread. stop the hate!

that said, i wonder how far johnny cash would get if he were starting today. pop country is the worst.

I would expect nothing else from a bunch of redneck, cow turd-eating, fools who believe that censorship is patriotic. Better read the 1st Amendment (it'll probably be the first time you have). Your are free to express your own opinions, just as the Dixie Chicks have a right to express their opinions. Don't like it, go to China. As for punishing people for speaking out against an illegal and immoral war, you'll need a larger place than Guantanamo Bay to jail us. Bush no mo in 2004...and the Chicks were right on the money, no matter what you say.

Just what I would expect from a bunch of turd-eating rednecks who know nothing of the First Amendment. It's an obligation in this country to protest injustice and that's what the Chicks did. Anyone who believes that censorship is patriotic ought to move to China. The Dixie Chicks are just about the only palatable country music out there right now. And if Toby Keith and Hank Williams, Jr. think the war is so great, why aren't they over there fighting? That goes for the hack who wrote this column as well. To write such trash shows he has no brains, maybe he's got balls. Hopefully, they'll get shot off.

Pete has confused me, I thought I was more or less defending the Chicks. Hmm.

I will give the very short version of my position on all this. What Natalie said was pretty stupid and I don't agree with her anti-war position. I am pro-war for reasons stated at repulsive length throughout these pages.

BUT, people overreacted grotesquely. Once she more or less apologized for disrespecting the president and moved on, I think the great majority of people were willing to let it go, but people like Keith, Charlie Daniels, CLear Channel and other radio empires egged on the populace and roused anti-Chick sentiment for their own ignoble ends. THAT is what I primarily object to. And now they have been essentially hounded out of the Big Tent that still includes such renegades as Willie Nelson and a lot of others who are more quietly - for the sake of their careers - anti-war or anti-administration.

I have no problem with the expression of views, even kind of stupid views, and I have no problem with people responding to those views, but I do have a problem with demagogues turning those expressions into their own nefarious warclubs.

The country music establishment has no business setting up a political litmus test for inclusion in what is supposed to be a musical family, not a rubber stamp for the current administration.

The people spoke, about the chicks., and the article is a lie they are NOT THE BIGGEST STARS IN COUNTRY MUSIC. IF THEY WERE THE WOULD STILL BE THERE AND TOBY WOULD BE GONE.
THEY CAN GO PERFORM IN FRANCE, GERMAN, AND FOR THE CLINTON, AND PETER JENNINGS.,

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN AND THEY ARE DISMISSED......THEY CAN SING ON MTV OR VH1 IF THEY ARE SO GREAT. THE BIT THE HAND THAT FED THEM!!! AND MADE THEM FAMOUS.

The author of the article says, "But in a country built on the notion of free speech, isn't there room for a woman to express her political opinion without being cast from the shrinking Big Tent?"

I say she HAS freedom of speech. She spoke and she can STILL speak! She hasn't been jailed for her speech. But she is not free from the consequences of what she said. People these days want all the freedom but none of the consquences. Freedom of speech doesn't mean other people don't have the freedom not to like what I say.

ONE LAST THING IT IS SIMPLE:

WATCH AND SEE WHO'S CAREER GOES AND WHO'S DON'T ,

START BY WATCHING THE SALES OF TOBY'S CD -VS- THE CHICKS.

THE BOYS WHO FIGHT FOR THIS COUNTRY IN UNIFORM STAND BY TOBY NOT THE CHICKS THAT SAYS IT ALL!!!!!! DON'T FORGET THAT.!!!!!

Wow. A small minority's political views repressed by the entertainment machine.

Oh, wait. That's Hollywood, not Nashville. And conservatives, not leftists.

In Nashville, it was the Chicks who declared they were no longer part of country music after a best-selling, award-nominated album.

Pardon me if I find your concern for "chilled free speech" misplaced, if not hypocritical.

"I would expect nothing else from a bunch of ... who believe that censorship is patriotic. Better read the 1st Amendment (it'll probably be the first time you have)."

Anyone else but me find this the unintentionally funniest thing they've read today?

Criticism of speech *is* free speech. Try reading that Constitution you're talking about, bud.

If you were so in touch with country music then you and the millions of fans would probably be in agreement .... but you're not. There is a genre that you can switch to an find kindred souls though - - led by such politically inclusive and correct stars as Barbra Streisand. Oops - - my bad, I'm guessing that she wouldn't invite Darryl Worley or Hank Williams, Jr to the stage either would she?

Find a crowd you're comfortable in and rub elbows with them. But don't assume so arrogantly that because they agree with you that you have joined the "one and only" acceptable group.

Thank God that we have differences of opinion - - that way I don't have to agree with your narrow-minded liberal (whining) view.

She should have keep her big mouth shut!!

She shouldn't have spoken about our leader in that way. U.S.A all the way!!!!!!!!! Support Our Country!!

I agree with the poster that said she DOES have the freedom of speech, just not the freedom from consequences.

Country music WAS willing to let it go; it hadn't been news for weeks, but then two months later they were on Barbara Walters whining about all the bad things said about them and posing on the cover of EW naked except for graffiti, which stirred it all up again. They started the controversy, then they rolled in the stink they stirred up.

Eric, Eric, Eric. Ms. Manes had every right to say what she said. Furthermore, it is the most important kind of speech, the kind the First Amendment was invented to protect -- political. Whoever said it wasn't is utterly clueless. If discussing a disagreement with the president isn't political speech, nothing is.

I believe the Chicks should buy tickets to the event and attend as audience members. That would really show the CMA for the hypocrites they are.

The Dixie Chicks have every right not to like President Bush, but they have no right to pander to the anti-American crowd on foreign soil. Anti-war protests are legitimate, but anti-U.S. protests that portray our president and our military leaders as the villains are not. Yes, the Chicks apologized (or back-pedaled) only when they realized that not all of their fans were as out of touch with reality as they are.
According to Webster, an entertainer is someone to amuse or divert; to give hospitality -- period. They are not to exploit their access to the media to rant about their liberal political views or abuse our president, our country and our troops defending our freedom and the freedoms of other oppressed nations.

What irritated me about the Dixie Chicks comments was that they were said in a disrespectful manner. I also don't think it was the time or place for it. What they did was give comfort to the enemy. Another time and in a more reasoned approach would have been more acceptable.

Isn't the Left supposed to be on the side of the oppressed? Are they not the merciful in a sea of Republican indifference? Then why is there so much hate and prejudice coming from their posts?

Freedom of speech does not unchain one from the freedom of responsibility or in the case of Ms. Maines, the freedom of stupidity.

Superstars like Ms. Maines seem to forget the repurcussions such comments can bring especially at a time of patriotic fervor.

Yes, she can say what she wants to say, when she wants to say it. But please don't come crying later when the fans that supported, believed and cared for her music feel betrayed by her actions.

Interestingly, had she said this at a metal or rap show that I attend, we may have never been the wiser.

Internationalist tact?

What's so tactful about needing to go overseas to rant?

You, compadre, are an idiot.

How's that for internationalist tact?

Freedom of speech does not unchain one from the freedom of responsibility...

nobody ever said that there should not have been 'repercussions'.

the most sickening point in all of this was the sentiment that, basically, if they didn't like bush and his policies they could just leave the country...and that they had no right to say what they did. especially during a time of war.

sorry, but that is purely unamerican.

i would bring up the roosevelt quote again but it'd be a waste of time since everybody conveniently ignored it the first time around.

As some have said here, by refusing to buy DC's music and refusing to go to DC's concerts, I am practicing Free Speech. That is not censorship. As is typical with the liberal media, they have redefined a word by using it over and over again in a context in which it does not belong. Censorship would only be applicable if George Bush ordered the DC's jailed for treason or some such. The CMA is an organization with rights, just as individuals have rights. If they are of the opinion that the DC's are not worthy to appear on their award show, then they have that right. Also, they are a business. They obviously have the foresight to realize that if they let the DC's on stage in any manner other than getting an award, two things might happen: 1) many of us "rednecks" might not even tune to the program; and 2)maines might attempt to spew some more uneducated, liberal, Hollywood-ized rhetoric, thus causing even more of us "rednecks" to tune out. That's not good business.

Eric,
I just wanted to say I thought your article was pretty one-sided. A few examples would be "But the antagonism between blustery ex-truck driver Keith" and your omission of several facts that would have added balance to the story. What does ex-truck driver add to your article? Seems like you're trying to conjure up some negative stereotypes (and, if not, why exactly did you add it again?). A parallel (which I think would also have been unfair, but the other way) is referring to Natalie Maines as "the Texas Tech dropout Maines". And, truthfully, referring to her in that way at least has relevance, as she dropped out to join the Chicks. Again, I think saying it that way would be an unfair slur, but that's the same feel I got with "blustery ex-truck driver Keith".
For things you omitted, how about the "FU TK" on Natalie Maines' shirt when she appeared (by video) on a recent awards show (I forget the details of when and where).
And their big "omission" from the country music scene--didn't they say that they were the ones leaving? For the "great big family or rock n' roll" is, I believe, the way she said it. Why are you crying for them? You yourself said they have a "record-shattering 'top of the world' tour just behind them". They're still making a living (and quite a good one from all indications). They are still able to make whatever comments they want to. How exactly have they been harmed? Yeah, there were people who went over-the-top in their criticisms of the Chicks. But who's to say what's really 'over the top'? You wouldn't want to 'censor' those who would be critical of the Chicks, would you?
Now, I don't know the particulars of this awards show, and if they *really* have been "black-listed" or made personas-non-grata, or whatever. So, if they wanted to be there, and were willing to perform and everything else, then your larger point would (IMHO) be valid, even with omissions and everything.
Anyway, I'm sorry I went on so long. I just wanted to say that I thought you started with a premise for your article, and then slanted everything to fit that premise. And, in doing so, you left out important information and gave an impression that fits one particular view of "reality". And I thought that was a shame, because you are capable of better than that.

Ok we know it is her right to say whatever it is she wants to say. Now, why can't we have the same right to not buy her music and not believe the same as her. It seems this is a one sided coin, she can say whatever it is she wants, and if we as fellow americans don't agree we are the outcasts. Do we not have the same right to say we don't like her. Everybody can talk till they are blue in the face and the fact still remains that as an american we all have the same right as her. I for one will be saving money thanks to her.
I guess because of her statement the dixie chicks all have to pay for her right to speech and i am sure they as a group, appreciate the fact that she talked, when she should have thought first.

If you have the means to speak to millions of people be prepared for millions of people to speak back. To Mr. Olsen I ask if it's all "about the music" then why did Maines make political statements? Everyone has the right to speak out and everyone has the right to respond back to those speaking out in whatever form they wish. Be it by voice or choosing not to buy records and go to concerts. These celebrities and musicians defend their speech by saying "I'm just exercising my right to free speech" but then cry like babies and back peddle and say "oh, but what I really meant was..." when they get backlash for making controversial statements. If they don't want to get involved in public debate then don't start a public debate.

I am certain regular readers who know my positions find this particular line of reasoning amusing.

Those attacking me as supporting the Chicks' position are making several mistakes: mistaking reporting for opinion, mistaking presenting the opinions of others as my own, not reading the story very carefully.

And regarding my general opinion on the matter, please read comment #13 before confusing me with the anti-war "liberal media."

Wonders never cease.

Mr. Olsen,

You say, "The country music establishment has no business setting up a political litmus test for inclusion in what is supposed to be a musical family, not a rubber stamp for the current administration." I disagree with your statement on two levels.

One, the country music establishment has every right to do whatever they want to do. If they disagree with a position, they have every right to reject that position in whatever way they see fit (other than physical harm, obviously). Also, as I stated in post #29, a business has to look out for its interests. If the "establishment" views the DC's to be a threat to revenue, they must take action to prevent it.

Two, I do not believe it was rubber stamping of the administration at all. As stated above, they are protecting their interests.

I am new to this site, so I have not read your articles before now. If you are referring to my comment on the liberal media, I did not mean to equate you with them. I simply was commenting on the misuse of the term "censorship".

Mr. Vet, Thanks you for serving your country - you have my appreciation and respect. Nowhere in the MSNBC article does the word "censorship" appear.

If rejecting the Chicks is the consensus then why do they continue to be as popular as they are? Why were their shows sold out with a tiny percentage of no-shows and minimal protest even after all the hoopla? Because people still like their music. That is my point. Surely the CMA can't imagine that an appearance by the Chicks would hurt viewership? Making a grand gesture of reconcilation with the prodigal Chicks would have been a marketing coup and brought in a larger audience than the core that would have watched anyway. People still love their music.

I understand the why's and wherefore's of the original reaction to Maines's comments - I made them myself. I don't understand or approve of the organized vilification, the equating with Saddam, the ban by Clear Channel and other chains despite mixed reactions from their listeners, the ostracism from the CMA other than in terms of self-serving agenda-pimping.

I'm curious about what Right Wing blog picked this entry up. The comments are so slanted to the Right that at least one with a significant following must have.

So, for the moderate viewpoint. (Mark tried to state it, but here goes again.) Ms. Manes had a right to express her opinion anywhere she wanted to. There is absolutely nothing wrong with criticizing those in power. In fact, they are the ones we need to watch most closely. The CMA is kowtowing to 'the rednecks' as someone said, the same way Southern pols kowtow to the neo-Confederates. They know they are wrong but are afraid to make the hoi polloi angry.

Is there a legal issue here? No. The CMA is not the government. However, I believe they used poor judgment, partly because of the reason Eric stated above. The CMA has made kissing the butts of the far Right more important than what it is supposed to be about -- music. I also believe they've set a bad precedent. They may become known as a music and political organization, which is not to their advantage. Furthermore, such behavior could justify the incorporation of a rival group that really is about the music.

"Wow. A small minority's political views repressed by the entertainment machine."

CBS. RNC. "The Reagans."

Fans of real country music aren't paying any attention to the CMAs anyway. Shania Twain? That country boy band that dresses like 'N Sync? Puh-leeze.

The Chicks are better off not being there.

And ClearChannel sucks.

Toby Keith? I won't use that notorious abbreviation against him, but musically, I find him worthless. And given the things he said about the Chicks, he looks stupid whining about the (admittedly childish) "FUTK."

Natalie Maines has been allowed to exercise her right to free speech the same as any other american. Now the other americans are exercising their right to boycott and spend their hard earned dollars on someone else's CD's. As a country music artist and business person you must realize that just like other business owners you must cater to the customer or loose their business. Seems like Natalie isn't a very good business person. I hope she reads this!

gees, i actually watched the awards. is it just me or are there a lot of completely interchangeable groups with guys as lead singers? boring.

patty lovelace was good though. so was allison kraus.

Suddenly, it got hard to tell the comedians from the trolls. Weird thread.

In general, country music makes my teeth hurt. But I kind of like the music of the Dixie Chicks, whatever their political leanings. I think it's a shame that people get so worked up over verbal diarrhea spouted by performers. The way people reacted to Maines' comments, you'd think she'd flown off to Baghdad and consorted with the Iraqi troops the way Jane Fonda did in Vietnam.

I fail to understand what bearing politics has on music.

what our intrepid (if not cowardly, since there is no email address readily available to send responses) blogger left out of his puff piece on the dixie chicks is that that poor, put upon, mega-talented waif natalie maines wore a t-shirt to an awards show that read FUTK.

now, i realize that she's so delicate, kind to old people and humanitarian that it probably meant "fluffy underoos to kids".

But now they've left country music for the "family of rock". That's a good thing, because Fleetwood Mac has another 20 years of music they can swipe. And I'm an expert at ignoring Fleetwood Mac remakes.

We have all had foot in mouth disease.
When you are in the public eye and make statements be prepared for opposing views from colleagues, fans, etc. As far as the show went I thought it was awful. Johnny Cash is a legend but one award would have been sufficient. Three??? Come on. Not deserving at all. And what was the deal with bringing Alabama up on stage so the one winner could give their award away?? You could tell they were very put out about the whole thing and embarrassed by the situation. Lastly - get a new host. Stick a fork in Vince he is done.

Very weird, but very interesting indeed. Those attacking the article from the position of assuming I am defending the Chicks' original statements seemed to have missed a fairly significant section of the story:

In London to accept an award just as tension was peaking before the launch of American-led military action in Iraq, Maines announced from the stage, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas." Pressed later for an explanation, she said "There is nothing more frightening than the notion of going to war with Iraq."

As the reports crossed the Atlantic, there was an explosion of protest against Maines' statements on talk and country radio, viewed by many nervous Americans as blatantly unpatriotic, not to mention as ill-timed grandstanding for the benefit of a generally anti-war English audience.

Pressure mounted daily and Maines offered a semi-apology that Friday

blatantly unpatriotic, not to mention as ill-timed grandstanding for the benefit of a generally anti-war English audience.

Pressure mounted daily and Maines offered a semi-apology

I am embarrassed that the Dixie Chicks are from the state of my birth, Texas.

Maines had her freedom of expression and speech, now I've had mine.

Censorship would be the government removing Dixie Chicks music from the shelfs, and arresting them if they made public appearances. What the CMI (Country Music Industry) is doing is called a boycott.

Censorship is the liberal left telling Americans that they can't practice free speech by 1) Disagreeing with the D.C. 2)Boycotting their products 3) Discouraging their presence.

In fact in trying to force D.C. propaganda on unwilling Americans these people practicing a type of indoctrination.

Desert Storm Vet

again the word "censorship" has been conjured from thin air - it is not used in the article.

Maines went on record saying that they were done with the country music industry and joining the rock family since they embraced her and her views...maybe the awards is more of the CMA telling her that they can have her.

Let me see if I can clear up something that makes Eric's issue with the CMAs a non-issue:

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_821707.html?menu=

>>The Dixie Chicks say they don't want to be a country music band any more.

Violinist Martie Maguire told Spiegel magazine: "We don't feel part of the country scene any longer, it can't be our home any more."

...

"So we now consider ourselves part of the big Rock 'n' Roll family."<<

"Maines went on record saying that they were done with the country music industry."

Johnny Cash made similar, disparaging views about country music--including his infamous FU ad in Billboard--and was extremely liberal in his views. Funny he didn't get the same treatment from the CMA.

Mr. Olsen,

Thank you for your comments.

I am not making myself clear. I know you did not use the term censorship. But earlier replies in this thread tried to do so. I was replying to them. I am merely stating that this is not the correct term to use. The left-wing media often tries to use this term when their loyalists are attacked for opening their mouths. When Susan Saranon and Tim Robbins opened their collective big mouth, they cried censorship when people reacted negatively against them. That is not censorship. It is free speech, just as their spewing was free speech.

"Blandly unpatriotic?" Being against the White House squatter does not make someone against the US, necessarily. Quite the contrary, for many people. And "aid and comfort to the enemy?" Perhaps Natalie Maines, like me, has no enemies.

If I see a human in need, I'm helping them, whatever the government fucks have to say about it.

Mr Vet, okay, thanks for your clarification.

JeffB, I addressed that issue as well in comment #44: don't we all head in the direction of where we are accepted, especially fter being rejected by "home"?

Trying to shift the thread back to music business:

The Country Music establishment, even more than the Rock establishment and the Hip-Hop establishment, really seems to go out of its way to alienate many of its greatest talents. You could go years listening to most country radio without hearing Merle Haggard, Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, Emmylou Harris, and many other greats, not to mention old-timey bluegrass or mountain music. The Dixie Chicks made that point with their single, and I wonder if the Nashville reaction to their political comments is also partly a response to their challenge to the establishment's current view of country music.

I'm also led to understand that the typical country music contract is even more oppressive than the typical rock contract (more akin to many R&B contracts) and I wonder to what extent the Nashville establishment uses playlists and award shows etc. to freeze out stars that get big enough to control their own fates.

(Somewhere in the afterlife, Johnny Cash must be shaking his head at the support he got from the industry this week. "Sure, now that I'm dead.")

Any thoughts?

it really does seem like the country business is very much like the rest of the industry. very, very consultant driven.

my comment earlier about the sameness of some of those groups is a case in point. i swear i musta heard five or six songs from different groups and all i can remember from the experience was that most of the lead singers had long-ish hair and a big hat (plus the required strummed acoustic guitar that does appear to be plugged in (or turned up loud enough to hear))

BJ, very interesting observations and important points. I haven't seen any contracts but my guess is that they are about the same, especially these days. All artists use the same lawyers.

I agree the "establishment" likes to keep a tight rein on things and there may be an element of keeping artists from getting too big for their britches, especially women. I think it depends where your power base is also: the Chicks, though originally from Texas, are Nashville all the way, so they were susceptible.

Willie Nelson, who owns Texas and has a large non-country following, doesn't need Nashville and can do what the hell he wants. Nashville didn't make him, it can't break him so it doesn't try.

Nashville can't do much to the fringes of bluegrass, Americana, Texas-Southwestern, and the like so it doesn't bother. But it layed the smackdown on its own, the Chicks, and said, "Bitches, get into the kitchen and make me a sammich." And the Chicks said, "Kiss our white Texas asses, limp-hat." It's a Mexican standoff about now.

Should the kosher store be required to sell Nazi paraphernalia? Maybe Isotoner should be required to use O.J. as a spokesman. Better yet, the ACLU could force Trojan to be promoted by Kobe Bryant. If the customer doesn't want it, I don't have to sell it. This is an industry. It sells a product called image. It is governed exclusively by the dollar.
Does Natalie Maines have the freedom to say what she wants? Sure. But the way the industry has handled the Dixie Chicks has nothing to do with free speech. No one is censoring Maines or her group, but rather choosing not to buy or promote her product because of the image she has attached to it. As to the "Big Tent" metaphor, well, see the first few lines of the post.

yes, but when Hank said it, it wasn't really true - he's always been in the family

Let's not forget the important role played by the Republican National Committee. According to Dave Marsh of Rock and Rap Confidential, among other sources, the RNC, probably with Rove on back up, "suggested" to Clear Channel and others that they attack the DC's. The fact that Clear Channel had important business before the Administration probably helped it to go along. Welcome to crony capitalism.

it appears to be true this time around

Then the appropriate abbreviations are:

FUCC

FURNC

FUCMA

and, for good measure,

FUCBS.

the pacifist spirit lives!

FUCA

What's California got to do with it?

mike, your insult is as moronic as your satire was. i mean, your satire was bad.

Eric, you are never gonna get the people you are talking to to understand. They are not just conservatives, they are hard Right. Leave it up to that sort and Ms. Maines would be tarred and feathered. You're trying too hard. (New Daddy nerves perhaps?)

Regarding the Dixie Chicks and your last comment; it was about the music
until Natalie changed it to politics.

Eric missed one very important point. The Dixie Chicks recently stated that they felt more at home with the rock and roll industry than with country. Of course it was the country industry and country fans who made them millions, right? Now lets say a neighbor, whom you have helped out, tells everyone that they really dislike you and much prefer your sister, who has never helped that neighbor out. Are you going to invite them over for Christmas dinner? I think not, the CMA just told the Dixie Chicks to spend the holidays with those they like.

Just curious: why should the Blixie Chicks be "made to feel at home" in country music? Seriously, why?

Maines did something anyone rational would agree was stupid at best. She compounded the situation by not apologizing for even the inappropriateness of her actions and remained defiant and insulting knowing most country fans and a lot of the artists didn't have her views. If she didn't get support, the appropriate answer to her whining is "Well, duh."

If you go out of your way to offend people, don't whine about them not being as nice to you as you'd like after you get them angry. If you can't face the consequences of what you do, don't do it. Pretty simple.

All this hoopla over an obviously not-that-bright bleach blonde with bad taste in fashion and judgment. Egad.

MD, you're right, I am trying too hard. (cue Animals) "Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."

No one 'has' to do anything. I have simply been suggesting what I think would be best for all, country music establishment, fans and the Chicks alike. It would make the CMA look magnanimous to welcome the prodigals back, fans should be able to listen to music they like without worrying about the politics. There are a shitload of performers I enjoy in the various arts and entertainment fields whom I don't agree with politically, etc. There are probably more I DON'T agree with than ones I do. I guess I'm able to separate these things out. Too bad so many people aren't.

For the last time: I don't agree with what Natalie Maines said, I think the venue she chose was cowardly and ill-advised. I think she just spouts off whatever pops into her head at any given moment.

But what does that have to do with music? No one has answered that, no one will be able to answer that because there is no answer to that. If you don't get it you won't get it and we'll just have to leave it at that. Have fun hating Saddam, I mean Natalie.

"the pacifist spirit lives!"

nothing in the rulebook says i have to be magnanimous to organizations, esp. corrupt ones. in none of those abbreviations did i aim anything at a human being.

vent, baby vent

Eric, great article. The kind of attitude you're encountering is just typical. Many people cannot differentiate between the performance attributes and the perceived personalities of celebrities. Maines said something that was disagreeable to part of her fanbase, and suddenly they're not fans anymore. So, did the fans decide to make millionaires out of the DCs because they liked their looks and their personal philosophies? Unfortunately, yes, in part. Just as Bowie, for example, became a superstar, in part, for being so outrageous, which is a distinctly non-musical attribute. So my complaint is that many, if not most, pop music acts are judged by their image and not strictly by their music. And I agree with you --- the music should be the only thing. But it works both ways. Image can build up a celebrity, and it can knock them down. Senseless.

"the pacifist spirit effectively retorts!"

It's a shame that ppl were unable to understand what most of the anger was about concerning comments made by the Dixie Chicks. I find that celebritys that choose to go somewhere outside of the USA and make statements concerning the USA President, USA politics, etc., do so because they are looking for publicity. They were very aware that their comments would not receive as much airtime if made in this country, but by making their comments in the UK, Canada, Australia, countries which usually jump on any type of anti-american comments, they were guaranteed a lot of print. I have no problem with the comments made by the Dixie Chicks but wish they had had the guts to make their comments in any state in the USA. As for their not being on the CMA show, hey, the Dixie Chicks were the ones that said they no longer wished to be associated with country music.

i heart you, chris arabia.

thanks Duane, appreciate it, and you are right about image cutting both ways, and it sure cut back this time!

Diane, I believe the source of the anger is well understood by one and all - I don't think they were "looking for publicity," she was playing to the crowd and doubtless expressing her own opinion. It was not wise, but isn't it time to move on.

They "rejected" the country establishment after the country establishment rejected them: "you can't fire me, I quit." So what?

If you think about the CMA's as a business it is very simple.

It has been a long time ago I herd a DC song played on the radio. If they are not getting the air time as the other perfomers why should the go to, or appear on a award show that deals with country stars I hear on the radio every day.

The real reason the Dixie Chicks didn't appear tonight at the CMA's is because they knew as soon as any of them showed their faces on screen or on stage they would've been boo'd and/or heckled off the screen and/or stage. Period.

That's ridiculous, how long will this go on for? I am for Bush, but even I realize they were stating how they feel , whether done appropriately or not, enough already.

Goodness people. As a human being, I am ashamed of the whole world. We ALL have a right to feel however we want to and to say whatever we want to, DC's included. If it is okay with you that you get absolutely no say in what this President and government does, that's your problem. I am not happy about it, and I will keep screaming about it, we, as a whole population are being told we have no right to voice our opinions and it will soon encompass something in your own lives you feel strongly about. So, our troops are sent to fight for rights that we are being told we don't have, how sad and ironic is that?!

B-O-O H-O-O Chicks.

I can go stand in the middle of the intersection and yell "All you black people are thugs and I hate you living in my town!!!" My right to freedom of speech. But, guess what, you gotta be ready to deal with consequences. I would probably be getting death threats if I said that in public. The DC sure have an understanding of "freedom of speeech" Maybe someone needs to school them on consequences when people don't like what you say! I don't like what she said so it is my right not to buy music from them!! haha! Call the waa-mbulance. Country music is doing just fine without them!! And with their new song they just stuck their feet in their mouths again. Oh well, stupid is as stupid does! What a pity...........

Their new song is one of the best I have ever heard. I at least respect people for being able to have their own opinions. I don't respect country music or any other genre for having to slam people so publicly. Reba doesn't get played on the radio around here and neither does Toby Kieth, so, they need to just worry about their own careers. Shall we start dredging up Rebas past, if she can be so rude, she needs to reap the benifits of her own mouth. DC's are doing great and will continue to long after all the crap has settled.

Lets see, the little troll doll slammed the President of the United States in front of an audience in a foreign country and some of you don't understand why they were not invited? natalie needs to go back to singing that liberal crap she used to sing, they'll love her trash.

As I am a singer/songwriter myself, I must say that the Dixie Chics' are wonderful mucisians and very good entertainers. I believe that political attacks or comments should be limited to a special forum. When they put on a show I say "Put on a SHOW!" And they were at thier best when they did. As an artist they should had known better, this was not part of thier job to down our president. Thier job was to entertain and represent our country in a good manner. I realize other artists and movie stars say things that are overlooked, but Dixie Chic's were at the top of thier game and now look. I only have one more onliner to say "THERE IS ... POWER IN WORDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Sorry Chics'