My question is usually: where does patriotism end and nationalism begin? Many Americans--particularly those in favor of aggressive foreign policy--not only love their country, but love it to the exclusion of others. It's one thing to love and protect one's country from enemies, but another to believe it's better than any other. We often confuse the two.

JP - how about those of us that love and protect our country because we know it's better than any other on the planet?

How come no one ever brings up the fact that these women spewed their shit in a foreign country? Ms. Maines didn't have the guts to spew her shit to an American audience...she had to spew it overseas...wonder what might have happened had she opened her mouth at a concert in TX instead of Britain...

I LOVE Country Music. It is really the only kind of music I can listen to all day, every day. However I also do not 'get' patriotism. Personally I have no preference for this country over any other, I would be quite happy in New Zealand or Canada for example, though not the States. Go Dixie Chicks!!!! Kick some sheepy-USA ass!!!!

Somehow I get the feeling that Ms. Maines has the propensity to be a mouthy bitch.

So, given that observation, it's well within her character to mouth off. She probably always has, and is never happy, or maybe just cynically so.

That would be such an unfilling way to spend your life... fame, fortune, and unhappiness.

I hope she finds happiness at some point. She's not spreading the love and that's a good indication of her turmoil.

Andy, don't want to fall out with you but people who seriously believe what you wrote in #2 are either zealots, loons or egomaniacs.

There's no such place as the perfect country and to get caught up in juvenile jingoism about one country or the other being the best is, well, simply juvenile and ignores all the major serious issues facing the 8 billion people living on this hot little cinder we call Earth.

Please don't take this as being anti-American as it's totally not meant that way, just trying to put the dialogue on a more interesting level than the petty minded and divisive drivel the above kind of writing and "thinking" generates...

Does GOP know how to do anything????

We know they are corrupt, can't manage the nations economy, protect manufacturing jobs, take care of the poor, protect the borders, prevent attacks on our homeland, manage disasters, secure social security, medicaid and medicare, strengthen our international reputation, manage the space program, take care of national parks, fight crime, catch terrorists, stop leaks, discourage corporate misconduct, build roads and bridges where they are needed, teach our children competently, protect our privacy, secure a workable energy policy, take care of veterans, fight inflation by controlling spending, provide affordable housing, stabilize financial markets, count votes correctly, tell the truth, provide clean water and air or win wars.

What is Karl Rove going to do except lie? As if the nation didn't know that already.

Andy;

I'm just glad she didn't spew her spew...

Andy, I don't argue that what Maines said was out of line, and she obviously chose her audience on purpose -- or that country fans don't have the right to boycott her music, however much I may disagree with their choice.

As for your comment about protecting your country "because we know it's better than any other on the planet," that's exactly the nationalism I'm not comfortable with. It's very similar, in my opinion, to the "my religion is the only one with the truth--convert!" mentality that's led to so much bloodshed over the millenia. Why is "just as good as anyone else" and equally entitled to soverignty not good enough?

I do not share the anti-Europe mentality of many Americans, I think there are some things done better over there. Some are better here, of course. Who's to say which nation is "better" than any other nation?

A lot of people seem to be missing the fact that it is not so much what they said about the President, but what they said about country music and country music fans. When you distance yourself from them and make fun of them, their not going to want to go to your concerts. Also dumb move on their parts talking Reba and her fans when she is still huge in the country world. If they want to be more pop and not country, then let pop fans go to their concerts.

JP,

In comment #9 you asked: "Who's to say which nation is 'better' than any other nation?"

I'll say it. The United States is better than any other nation. And here's some of the very simple criteria by which that can be determined.

1.) More people from around the world want to get into the U.S. than any other country.

2.) No country is more free, dynamic, prosperous, innovative and filled with opportunity than the U.S.

3.) Without the U.S. the entire world would likely have been lost to one or more of the evil powers and/or ideologies (Nazism, communism, Imperial Japan) that ran amok in the 20th century and slaughtered countless tens of millions.

Yes, there are plenty of "nice" or "pleasant" countries like New Zealand or the Netherlands or Switzerland, but none of those countries possess the greatness of America and all of those countries have America to thank for their freedom and prosperity.

The United States obviously doesn't have the power to make every country in the world a good place, but it is the one indispensable country if there is to be any decency at all in the world.

Greg, please go read #6 over and over until you LEARN something, anything about the rest of the world before spouting.

Your final two paragraphs are just empty headed bragging with nothing but egomania to justify them.

The world got along fine before the USA was created and it could get along just fine if it ceased existing at all.

Christopher Rose,

Rather than me reading comment #6 "over and over," suppose you give a logical refutation of my comment #11.

You said "The world got along fine before the USA was created and it could get along just fine if it ceased existing at all."

Are you serious? Before the USA came along, the entire world was basically lorded over by tyrants with few exceptions. Is that what you call "getting along just fine?"

As for getting along just fine if the US ceased existing at all, who would stand up against radical Islamic terror or whatever totalitarian force might come along next? The few countries that have shown such a propensity have only done so because of the leadership of the United States.

A good friend of mine who happens to be very liberal gets absolutely livid every time I point such things out. I'd love to be able to understand the psychopathology behind that kind of attitude. Maybe you can provide a clue . . . ?

Greg, I think you'll find your friend gets livid because your logic is so weak but your ego so strong that there's no talking with you...

Christopher,

Well, I didn't think I'd get a logical refutation of my comment #11. And if it's not too unbecomingly egomaniacal of me to say, it looks like I was right.

Don't worry about it, Greg, it's just another of the symptoms to insist your delusion is right. There's no point in trying to reason with a rigid mind, as your friend has already realised, it's simply pointless time-wasting to try.

Gregg, your comments in #11 are right on. These nuts can't stand admitting they have it better here than any place on earth. Laura in #4 spews the typical crap from someone who has no idea how fortunate he is. Unfortunately, our freedoms for which many fought and died are the very same freedoms they use to brush off the United States as inconsequential. So be it.

Howard

Greg, who do you think you are, writing about the Dixie Chicks. They're MY beat. You want I should fight you for Natalie's honor? Tire irons at 10 paces. Yee haw!

Christopher and JP - I've been pretty much all over the world...am I supposed to deny what I've seen around the globe? I've had a great time in just about all of them except maybe Djibouti...what a shit hole that was! I've met great people everywhere I went, but I still believe I live in the best place on Earth.

I never said the U.S.A. was perfect...I said it was better than any place else.

So, just for you two I'll quantify my statement. Of the 30 some countries on 5 continents I've visited the U.S.A. is the best place on the planet...

Not sure if that makes me a zealot, a loon or an egomaniac....but I kinda prefer egomaniac if I get to chose.

So tell me Christopher...am I one or all of the nice names you used to describe my comment #2..let's see we have zealot, loon, egomaniac, juvenile and petty minded! I'm so disappointed! Thesaurus dot com has so many more words you could use.

I'd use a bunch of names to describe your comments, but you know how that comment editor can be!!!

Andy, I'm not saying you, or anybody else for that matter, shouldn't be proud of their country but to go round making the kind of remark you did, well, it might be okay for talking about sports or something, but in serious grown up political discussion, not that much of that actually happens on this site, it is a whole other issue.

I've been to the USA many times and love many things about it but if you seriously believe it's perfect or anything even close to that, you are totally tripping out.

The serious point I'm trying to make is that all countries, including the USA, have major challenges and problems to deal with and this kind of divisive jingoism does nobody any good. Personally, I couldn't stand living in the USA because the country's mindset is completely out of line with reality- just like any other juvenile's.

By the way, I do use a thesaurus several times a year but have never needed to on this site - and don't really expect to either...

Finally, by all means attack my remarks as much as you want to, but don't attack me personally, then the Comments Editor won't have to take an interest! He's a git anyway, lol!!

Like I said...no where in my comments do I or have I ever said America was perfect...but I probably have said and will say again...it is the best fucking place on the planet! At least compared to every other place I've ever been...but that's just my opinion.

yeah, my country has it's problems...plenty of them...but there really is no other place on the planet I'd rather live...especially knowing how fucked up the rest of the world thinks we are and I think they are!

And what the hell is a git?

This is one of the "divisive jingoists" checking in. Still waiting for the logical refutation of comment #11 . . .

Andy, no prizes for guessing which usage I meant

from Google:- Definitions of git on the Web:

* Goods In Transit

* The passage along which food passes for digestion, also known as the alimentary canal.

* a person who has been deemed academically qualified for registration as a geoscientist and has been enrolled as a GIT with APEGM, in order to fulfill the Pre-Registration requirements for registration as a professional geoscientist. (GIT enrollment is a mandatory pre-requisite to first-time registration.)

* A prepaid tour of specified size, components, features, and value.

* Gain-to-noise-Temperature ratio of receiving system; its sensitivity or "figure of merit". The higher the GIT better the reception capability of earth station.

* Group travel in which individuals purchase a group package in which they will travel with others along a pre-set itinerary.

* rotter: a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible; "only a rotter would do that"; "kill the rat"; "throw the bum out"; "you cowardly little pukes!"; "the British call a contemptible person a `git'"

* GIT may stand for: *Georgia Institute of Technology, commonly known as Georgia Tech GNU interactive tools*git, revision control system started by Linus Torvalds after BitMover Inc. stopped providing BitKeeper for OSDL* Group-Inclusive Tour, an abberviation used by airlines.

* In computing, Git is a revision control filesystem project started by Linus Torvalds to manage the Linux kernel. It is open source and free software released under the GNU General Public License version 2.

Greg, personally I'm still waiting for any indication that anything from comments 12, 14 or 16 has even registered on your mind rather than been merely ignored - but way to go with the persistent if monotonous riffing.

Christopher! You're a scientist??? I had no idea!

LOL.

Actually, as I was practically raised on classic era science fiction, I'd have to admit to having faith in the scientific process above most other systems, whether secular or otherwise.

Over time, the kind of thinking that makes people rigidly adhere to political, nationalistic or dogmatic thinking has become increasingly incomprehensible to me.

oh, and as for git, it is almost invariably proceeded by the word fucking, as in "you fuckin' git!" and can be anything from an insult to matey admiration.

So, if I call you a git it could be bad or good? Guess that means you have to leave that word alone comments editor! Now I see why you got the job...knowing derogatory terms from multiple countries can come in handy!

I don't care what you bloody gits want to call one another, just stay away from Natalie. She's mine.

Did you ever want to see Natalie Maines make out with Ann Coulter?

While Hillary watched...

Al - think pay-per-view baby!

"I don't care what you bloody gits want to call one another, just stay away from Natalie. She's mine."
- Brother Al

Come on, Brother Al, she's young enough to be your grand-daughter...

I've got a little less than 12 years on Natalie. Theoretically perhaps old enough to have been my daughter if I were extremely precocious.

Natalie Maines is a full-grown 30+ year old woman- she just TALKS like a dumbass teenager.

My guess is that now that since Natalie has pretty much destroyed all the that the orginals Chicks had worked for. I think the sisters are hoping that Natalie will stay in England with Madonna and they can try to sign their old lead singer back on.

actually i cant blame them for saying what they did say in the beginning

I agree with the Dixie Chicks! What's the point of showing "love" for a country. You can like to live in a country, but can you really "love" the country? What bothered me though was the line "who sympathize with terrorists and actually hope America will be defeated in Iraq" I personally being a anti- Bush and anti- war along with all my friends and half my family, I just want to say WE DO NOT SYMPATHIZE WITH TERRORISTS! We don't want America to lose and thousands to die we just believe that the War should be over. We've helped start a new government, we've done what needs to be done. We shouldn't be their anymore. I also want to comment on something someone else wrote, "As for your comment about protecting your country "because we know it's better than any other on the planet," that's exactly the nationalism I'm not comfortable with. It's very similar, in my opinion, to the "my religion is the only one with the truth--convert!" mentality that's led to so much bloodshed over the millenia. Why is "just as good as anyone else" and equally entitled to soverignty not good enough?" I completely agree with him. We are one of the only nations that MAKES you pledge allegience to the country IN SCHOOL. Why do we have to shut up in school when it comes to God and the bible, but for the sake of "nationalism" you have to pledge and respect this piece of cloth whether you agree with what it stands for and what the country is doing or not? If you want to plegde your allegience to a STUPID flag, that's your business. But count me out.

Should we have supported Nixon, in his paranoid, and criminal behavior, simply because he was the President?
Our Founders wouldn't think so...they sacrificed all, so the Dixie Chick or any other American could speak their mind.

Somebody is eating poop and it doesn't seem to be the Dixie Chicks. Congrats gals, you showed great courage, right or wrong.

I guess what really bothers me with the whole Dixie Chicks comment/treatment is, there are several entertainers, etc.... who have made negative comments about the Pres. and I do think that many of them were ones that turned against the Dixie Chicks when they first made the comment.

Sometimes Americans can be so hipcritical and try to nitpick certain people or issues.

I've been cruising around looking for comments on the Dixie Chicks big win on the Grammy Awards tonight, and have yet to find any mention of Natalie Maines' "Nyah-Nyah" remark. At the microphone, to accept an award -- the second or third -- she said something like "As the Simpsons say: Nyah-nyah" with a little self-congratulatory grin. She seemed to be unaware that the "nyah-nyah" she gifted us with is the calling card of the school bully on the Simpsons...

And then there are the wins. I'm not saying the music is good, bad, or indifferent: I've never heard it. However, I am curious about how many Grammy awards they've won in the past; why a big sweep now? why this year, the first music they've released since the big controversy, or so I understand.

It occurs to me that there are a lot of "liberal" minds in the Hollywood music industry, just as there are many "liberal" minds in the Hollywood movie industry. Everyone knows how political the Oscars are... Might not it be a possiblility that the Hollywood types were also giving a good, solid "nyah-nyah" to the country folks? If I were the Dixie Chicks, I'd always be in doubt about the true source of the wins: it's like affirmative action: how can you ever know you really won?

Finally, I heartily agree with people who have pointed out that spouting off -- politically or otherwise -- was a poor business decision. I can take in only so much personal information about performers before becoming too distracted by it to fully appreciate their performances. I used to really like Tom Cruise, thought he was a decent actor and enjoyed the movies he chose to make. Now all I see when I look at him is his ranting and raving on various talk shows. I used to enjoy Mel Gibson's movies and James Cavieziel's performances, but since they made "The Passion", whenever I look at them all I can think of is the descriptions of the torture scenes in the movie -- and I didn't even see it. I read so much about what all-consuming catholics they are, though, and when I look at them now, that is what I see. It makes it totally useless for me to try to watch a movie they're in. The same goes for Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Alec Baldwin, Sean Penn, Charleton Heston, and almost, but not quite, Clint Eastwood.

I'm not saying these people don't have a right to their opinions, or to express them. I am saying that they are trying to sell a product and their habit of using their celebrity to push their agendas taints that product for me. I repeat: I am saying it's that way for me.

It is my right to spend my entertainment dollars where I choose -- just as it was the right of the people who stopped buying Dixie Chicks CDs and concert tickets. The choosing of how to spend one's entertainment dollar is another form of free speech, and as I recall it, that form and action was roundly criticized when it was exercised in the Dixie Chicks' case. The admonition was that they had the right to speak freely about their politics, but no one else had the right to disagree with them or to become disenchanted with their product, that such action was stomping on their rights.

Those are the things I wanted to say. I've got to go to sleep -- crummy ol' work tomorrow.

Some of you folks are fabulous writers; it's been a pleasure.

Cheers.

kayo,

so are you thinking that the dixie chicks are bullies now?

i'm not too serious, but i am reminded of a right wing radio talk guy i heard once at three in the morning (somebody gallager). he had his panties all in a wad about that time linda ronstadt made a comment in las vegas about michael moore being a great american or something (this, after his oscar speech about our current illegal war).

this gallager guy was completely outraged about ronstadt's comment and supportive of the folks who walked out of the concert because linda ronstadt was a ... a... "BULLY!"

geez, the right wing can dish out a lot of crap - ala the dixie chick bashing - but you give them back one little tittie twister and they run screaming like a little girl.

kinda reminds me of ... a schoolyard bully.

the truth is, performers are people. american performers are citizens. and citizens have the right to speak their mind -- and speak truth to power. no one is to be silenced because of their job description. if masses choose to listen to them (or not) because of their celebrity, then that's the way it goes -- especially in america where celebrity is grossly overvalued.

most americans pay more attention to celebrities than they do to policies and politics that can make or break their lives. the percentage of regular folks who actually call or write their reps or work for a better society is slim. and it's probably that same slim percentage of celebs that do the same. if it bugs you, don't listen. but don't try to shut anyone up. that's truly unamerican.

and, by the way, the simpsons bully says "ha ha," not "nyah nyah."

Hey Kayo, this is not the first time the dixie chicks have won a grammy...

2005: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Top Of The World"
2003: Best Country Album - Home
2003: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Long Time Gone"
2003: Best Country Instrumental Performance - "Lil' Jack Slade"
2003: Best Recording Package - Home
2000: Best Country Album - Fly
2000: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Ready to Run"
1999: Best Country Album - Wide Open Spaces
1999: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "There's Your Trouble"

Hi cassandra complex,

I'd like to address some of your points.

You said "geez, the right wing can dish out a lot of crap - ala the dixie chick bashing - but you give them back one little tittie twister and they run screaming like a little girl.

kinda reminds me of ... a schoolyard bully." -- gracious sakes, are you calling me a bully? That's not very nice.

You said "so are you thinking that the dixie chicks are bullies now?" -- No, I'm pointing out that Natalie Maines' real message, 'Nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah', which is a child's way of bleating "I win, you lose" to an opponent, was delivered using the "Simpson's" bully's 'ha-ha' [how right you are about the spelling/pronunciation, BTW]. My point was this: if you're going to invoke a cultural reference on national [or is it international?] television, you should be sure that the message you're sending is the one you're intending. She equated herself with bullies by using a bully's line. I thought it made her look small and petty, not unlike the boneheads who said she should shut up, by the way. I thought her bandmates displayed infinitely more maturity and dignity. And class.

You said "the truth is, performers are people. american performers are citizens. and citizens have the right to speak their mind...no one is to be silenced because of their job description. if masses choose to listen to them (or not) because of their celebrity, then that's the way it goes...if it bugs you, don't listen." -- I agree with this completely; that's why I wrote it too. It appears to me that you said the same thing I did. We used different words, but the substance was the same. Here is my version again for your convenience: "I'm not saying these people don't have a right to their opinions, or to express them. I am saying that they are trying to sell a product and their habit of using their celebrity to push their agendas taints that product for me. I repeat: I am saying it's that way for me." BTW, I repeated that last line in an attempt to avoid misunderstanding. Apparently it didn't work.

You said "but don't try to shut anyone up. that's truly unamerican." Once again, I agree with you completely. Once again, I said the same thing, essentially. Here is my version, again: "I'm not saying these people don't have a right to their opinions, or to express them." I never said a word about trying to shut them up. I said being exposed to performers' politics, relationship troubles, medical concerns, diets, dress sizes, plastic surgery, substance abuse issues, ad nauseum -- in other words, the particulars of their personal lives -- makes me disinclined to find them entertaining...which I thought was my right. And is what I said. Please don't misrepresent me.

A point I made, which you did not address, is this one: "The choosing of how to spend one's entertainment dollar is another form of free speech, and as I recall it, that form and action was roundly criticized when it was exercised in the Dixie Chicks' case. The admonition was that they had the right to speak freely about their politics, but no one else had the right to disagree with them or to become disenchanted with their product, that such action was stomping on their rights." Allow me to expand on that observation: When people who did not, shall we say...agree? with Natalie Maines' remark, and chose to bark their opinions, loud and clear [like she did, BTW], and chose to stop supporting the Dixie Chicks financially [voting with their dollars, right?] there was a whole lot of anger and castigation: how dare people object to an American speaking her mind? How dare they say to her that her remarks offend? They're trying to deny her freedom of speech. Well, it seems to me that all those people have the right of free speech just as Natalie Maines has. What you and the other people who displayed outrage that anyone would oppose Natalie Maines' remarks seem to be advocating is that the opposers should not be allowed to oppose. How unamerican of you. Here, once again, is how I phrased it: "...they [Dixie Chicks] had the right to speak freely about their politics, but no one else had the right to disagree with them or to become disenchanted with their product, that such action was stomping on their [Dixie Chicks] rights." How can you disagee with that? Oh, wait a minute; I believe I'm mitaken. You did address this point with this remark: "geez, the right wing can dish out a lot of crap - ala the dixie chick bashing". Apparently only the bashing you believe in [aka "the truth"] is to be sanctioned.

I just had another thought: how can you completely dismiss the possibility that the awards had a political basis? I mean, really, isn't Hollywood one of the most politically driven cultures in this country? A place where so much activity and so many decisions are very carefully calculated for maximum effect, which effect depends upon the aim of the decision-maker: usually money or power.

And then there are these two comments, interesting when paired: "geez, the right wing can dish out a lot of crap - ala the dixie chick bashing" and "american performers are citizens. and citizens have the right to speak their mind -- and speak truth to power" So, what you're saying here is, what the Dixie Chicks said was untouchable truth, and any objection to it is nothing but crap? Once again, it looks like there are levels of citizenship and the right to free speech: those who "speak truth to power" -- some people's version of it, that is -- are at the top of the heap and duly deserving of full rights and privileges, and then the dolts who disagree with them are at the bottom of the heap, said dolts being subject to silencing for their own and Society's good. Let freedom ring.

I do stand up and cheer with a loud "hear, hear" this comment of yours: "especially in america where celebrity is grossly overvalued." Talk about truth: you spoke a mouthful.

And finally, not to let this pass: "...they run screaming like a little girl." What have you got against little girls??? Sexist. [teehee]

Take care, cc, and sweet dreams.

Tiyo, ian,

Thank you for the history lesson -- I don't keep up on these things. I am not at all surprised the Dixie Chicks have won many awards. My comment about so many awards for this particular album, the first released after their...troubles, was based on my suspicion of so many of the awards coming out of Hollywood. I'm sure some of them are the real deal, but some of them seem rather calculated -- and I'm thinking of oscars here, more than anything. Considering Hollywood's reputation, I thought such a sweep was at least a little coincidental, that's all.

Cheers.

It is now obvious that the Grammy's can be bought. If that were not the case, the Dixie Chicks would not have won anything. Let's face it. They have had little or no substantial radio play. Their CD and Concert sales have slumped. They are loathed by nearly all of the Country Music Fans and almost half of the public. We have been in the music business for a long time and don't know of anyone that voted for them. Their only hope for continuing sales was to have the group win some grammys (which the record company felt worthy of investing in (probably heavily). The truth is that when an artist decides to become political, the public has the right to "vote" for or against them. The public voted. The Grammys, however, were a paid political announcement.

"It is now obvious that the Grammy's can be bought."

It's now obvious you don't know what you are talking about. Grammy winners don't have to have radio airplay or great sales. The music is submitted and the nominating committee takes it from there.

"The truth is that when an artist decides to become political, the public has the right to "vote" for or against them."

The truth is so do Grammy voters, and what a shock that a community of artists would rally behind a group who was ostracized for using free speech.

Not bad a bad daily double, you illustrated you know very little about music or politics in one comment. Can't wait for your next piece of "brilliance".

All Bloggers congratulating themselves about the US being the best country in the world should look at the latest UNICEF report on the worst countries for kids. The US ranked second last in the top 21 countries of the Developed World.

J.J. Hunsecker, what you say sounds like you support a double standard: "a group who was ostracized for using free speech"

Why is it that Natalie Maines gets to use free speech and anyone who disagrees with her is automatically guilty of abridging her rights? You already implied that you agree that "The truth is that when an artist decides to become political, the public has the right to "vote" for or against them."; why do you then complain about the Dixie Chicks being "ostracized"? The whole reason for establishing freedom of speech was to enable people to criticize the government without fear of accusation of treason. It does not guarantee that everyone who hears your opinion will agree with you and pay you big bucks to keep voicing it.

Also, about your whole sentence "The truth is so do Grammy voters (have the right to "vote" for or against them), and what a shock that a community of artists would rally behind a group who was ostracized for using free speech." What that says to me is that you consider the awards were political. If "a community of artists would rally behind a group who was ostracized for using free speech" by giving them five choice awards, it is implied the awards were not given based on the quality of their music, but on their politics and the situation the artists found themselves in.

Kayo, what on earth are you talking about? Obviously, you didn't comprehend much of what I typed, so I'm not sure there's much point in going over this, but here goes.

"Why is it that Natalie Maines gets to use free speech and anyone who disagrees with her is automatically guilty of abridging her rights?"

Never said anyone was guilty of anything and your next point confirmed that. It doesn't help your argument when you contradict yourself.

"You already implied that you agree that 'The truth is that when an artist decides to become political, the public has the right to "vote" for or against them.'; why do you then complain about the Dixie Chicks being "ostracized"?"

I wasn't complaining, just stating a fact. Are you telling me they weren't ostracized from country radio after her statements?

"What that says to me is that you consider the awards were political."

I never said they weren't, so that's what was said to everyone, but thanks for pointing out the obvious. This isn't the first time an awards show was political. Million Dollar Baby was a political win for Best Picture

What was being discussed if you had read the comment I was responding to was that the Grammys were bought, so spare the knee jerk political reactions because your lack of comprehension to the matter at hand makes you look foolish.