<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics Comments on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005-2006 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 8 Nov 2006 20:37:55 EST</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Comment by Pamela Joy on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-475383</link>
<description>As I am a singer/songwriter myself, I must say that the Dixie Chics&#039; 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 &quot;Put on a SHOW!&quot; 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&#039;s were at the top of thier game and now look. I only have one more onliner to say &quot;THERE IS ... POWER IN WORDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!&quot; Sorry Chics&#039;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">475383@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Nov 2006 20:37:55 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Draganof on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-474309</link>
<description>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&#039;t understand why they were not invited? natalie needs to go back to singing that liberal crap she used to sing, they&#039;ll love her trash.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">474309@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 6 Nov 2006 20:57:42 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by nwokpeach on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-377318</link>
<description>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&#039;t respect country music or any other genre for having to slam people so publicly. Reba doesn&#039;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&#039;s are doing great and will continue to long after all the crap has settled.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">377318@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 27 May 2006 22:31:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by cyndi on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-375801</link>
<description>B-O-O   H-O-O   Chicks. 

I can go stand in the middle of the intersection and yell &quot;All you black people are thugs and I hate you living in my town!!!&quot; 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  &quot;freedom of speeech&quot; Maybe someone needs to school them on consequences when people don&#039;t like what you say! I don&#039;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...........</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">375801@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2006 14:20:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by nwokpeach on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-375289</link>
<description>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&#039;s included. If it is okay with you that you get absolutely no say in what this President and government does, that&#039;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&#039;t have, how sad and ironic is that?!</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">375289@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2006 04:17:42 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Diane on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-374274</link>
<description>That&#039;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. </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">374274@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2006 15:57:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by SNelson on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-154446</link>
<description>The real reason the Dixie Chicks didn&#039;t appear tonight at the CMA&#039;s is because they knew as soon as any of them showed their faces on screen or on stage they would&#039;ve been boo&#039;d and/or heckled off the screen and/or stage.  Period.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">154446@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2005 00:33:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by paul on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-97730</link>
<description>If you think about the CMA&#039;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.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">97730@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:57:45 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Eric Olsen on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27457</link>
<description>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&#039;t think they were &quot;looking for publicity,&quot; she was playing to the crowd and doubtless expressing her own opinion. It was not wise, but isn&#039;t it time to move on.

They &quot;rejected&quot; the country establishment after the country establishment rejected them: &quot;you can&#039;t fire me, I quit.&quot; So what?</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27457@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 7 Nov 2003 08:52:42 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Natalie Davis on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27453</link>
<description>i heart you, chris arabia.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27453@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 7 Nov 2003 08:43:20 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by diane bateson on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27448</link>
<description>It&#039;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.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27448@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 7 Nov 2003 08:29:31 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Chris Arabia on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27412</link>
<description>&quot;the pacifist spirit effectively retorts!&quot;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27412@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 23:25:04 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by duane on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27411</link>
<description>Eric, great article. The kind of attitude you&#039;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&#039;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.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27411@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 23:09:01 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Eric Olsen on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27406</link>
<description>vent, baby vent</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27406@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:42:48 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Natalie Davis on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27403</link>
<description>&quot;the pacifist spirit lives!&quot;

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.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27403@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:02:12 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Eric Olsen on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27396</link>
<description>MD, you&#039;re right, I am trying too hard. (cue Animals) &quot;Oh Lord, please don&#039;t let me be misunderstood.&quot;

No one &#039;has&#039; 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&#039;t agree with politically, etc. There are probably more I DON&#039;T agree with than ones I do. I guess I&#039;m able to separate these things out. Too bad so many people aren&#039;t.

For the last time: I don&#039;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&#039;t get it you won&#039;t get it and we&#039;ll just have to leave it at that. Have fun hating Saddam, I mean Natalie.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27396@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:38:11 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by JeffB on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27390</link>
<description>Just curious: why should the Blixie Chicks be &quot;made to feel at home&quot; 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&#039;t have her views.  If she didn&#039;t get support, the appropriate answer to her whining is &quot;Well, duh.&quot;

If you go out of your way to offend people, don&#039;t whine about them not being as nice to you as you&#039;d like after you get them angry.  If you can&#039;t face the consequences of what you do, don&#039;t do it.  Pretty simple.

All this hoopla over an obviously not-that-bright bleach blonde with bad taste in fashion and judgment.  Egad.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27390@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:20:51 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Ann G on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27349</link>
<description>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.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27349@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 18:04:50 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by John Russell on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27338</link>
<description>Regarding the Dixie Chicks and your last comment; it was about the music
until Natalie changed it to politics.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27338@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:38:02 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Mac Diva on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27333</link>
<description>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&#039;re trying too hard.  (New Daddy nerves perhaps?)   </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27333@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:17:47 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Chris Arabia on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27330</link>
<description>mike, your insult is as moronic as your satire was.  i mean, your satire was bad.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27330@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:07:23 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Joe on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27328</link>
<description> What&#039;s California got to do with it?</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27328@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:03:38 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by mike on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27324</link>
<description>FUCA</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27324@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:58:28 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Chris Arabia on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27323</link>
<description>the pacifist spirit lives!</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27323@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:56:57 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Natalie Davis on No Chicks at the CMA&#039;s</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/155438.php#comment-27315</link>
<description>Then the appropriate abbreviations are:

FUCC

FURNC

FUCMA

and, for good measure,

FUCBS.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">27315@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:18:46 EST</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>