Today on Blogcritics
Home » The Dixie Chicks’ deep political thought

The Dixie Chicks’ deep political thought

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

On stage in London on Monday [03-10-03], Dixie Chick Natalie Maines told her audience “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas.”

Pressed for an explanation, she later said “There is nothing more frightening than the notion of going to war with Iraq.” Well, yeah, if a proposed action elicits the subjective personal emotional reaction of fear from a Dixie Chick, then we shouldn’t do it. Indeed, we should be ashamed that we have a president who would frighten a poor defenseless little Dixie Chick.

What a dumb, whim worshipping fool. Why don’t you just hide your ignorant bitch ass under the bed and let the guys take care of defending the country. Or perhaps instead we should just wait here like sitting ducks for some Arab fanatics to come kill the rest of us at their leisure, since military action gives this girl the heebie jeebies.

Powered by

About Gadfly

  • David

    It was very nice of Natalie to express her thoughts while oversees in a crowd full of people who hate the U.S. anyway. I hope her english fans can keep their record sales up. Maybe she should just move to England like Madonna to be near her new fans who love her remarks. I take great pleasure in realizing that ol’ Natalie probably couldn’t find Iraq on a map. Ever watch these shows like “Who wants to be a millionaire” or “Weakest Link”, the dumbest contestants are usually the ones shown during celebrity segments.

    While I respect Natalie’s right to express her opinion I also respect the rights of her fans to not buy her music and boycott stations that play her songs. Too bad the other two Chicks have to suffer with her remarks. Also it is very interesting to see that Miss Natalie is so proud to voice her opinion that now that she is catching hell for her remarks and fans across the country are beginning to boycott their music, she now apologizes and says that you should respect whoever is in the office of president, funny how losing potentially millions of dollars for a stupid remark causes you to ask for foregiveness.

  • http://www.foliage.com/~marks Mark Saleski

    funny how it was ok, during the 8 years of Clinton, to call him every name in the book.

    …but for some reason our current president is beyond reproach. and negative commentary is not tolerated.

    ok, it’s not funny.

  • The Theory

    but it is interesting.

    and I shall uphold the standard by NOT making fun of Clinton.

    mwahaha.

    peace.

  • Sgt

    I support her right to make whatever comments she chooses, that is why I and thousands more like me go to work everyday in the US military. However, how can you claim to be a proud American and bad-mouth the country and its ELECTED leaders in another nation? One question to Ms Natalie….did you vote? If the answer is no, please shut the hell up! Another thing if you are not going to support your troops, how dare you try to make money in singing about a Vietnam vet because I’m sure anyone who has served this wonderful country would much rather have someone like Charlie Daniels sing about us! You should thank your lucky stars you are an American because if you pulled this shit in poor little defenseless Iraq, you would be killed….still support them?

  • http://podbaydoor.com randy

    It is fascinating to watch Americans’ reaction from outside the USA to Natalie Maines’ comment. Perhaps she timed it poorly. But the scarier part of what she did is mentioned earlier: it was ok to lambaste Clinton for 8 years, but say something bad about Dubya, and the right-wing dominated US media are all over you. It’s a dangerous time in the USA – differing views are not tolerated like they once were. The consequences of this could be horrific if the USA isn’t careful. Bush’s mantra, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us”, is illogical at the best of time. Is he right to go into Iraq in a few hours, and destroy lives? Well, it’s kinda moot, isn’t it, ’cause there he goes…

  • Gwuen

    The difference is that there was not a pending war with another nation during the Clinton administration. During a time like this you are suppose to rally together and stand as one, not poke fun at your leader. I am not a huge Bush fan, nor was I a huge Clinton fan either, but regardless I would not be making negative statements about my country’s President (no matter if it was peace or war time) while in another part of the world. It is not very patriotic.

  • cindy

    why didn’t she make that comment in the U.S. in
    the South ? WHY did she wait till she was in
    LONDON?

  • samantha

    I just bought another Dixie Chick CD!

  • Kitten

    It’s funny to see that you yell and scream about someone say anything bad about your president. When if there wasn’t a threat you would all be complaining about how he is putting your economy into a downward spiral.

  • Mark

    It is OK to make fun of Clinton! Just a couple of reminders: Didn’t inhale, wife made 100K overnight just like everyone else, BJ’s in the Oval office, and what is “is.” He is the most duplicitous guy we have had fun with in a century! And yes, the DIxie Chicks, and the rest of the over-privleged Hollywood/music crowd can shut up, a lot of people with a lot less are doing a lot more for this country.

  • HellSpawn

    Well, I’m not a Dixie Chicks fan, but I think I just became one.

    It’s ok to lampoon Clinton for his creative use of cigar..(hey..is there a grammy for that? If so..he deserves one)

    It’s ok to lampoon bush for his idiotic and bigoted “you’re either with us or against us” stance, and *gasp* run all you right wingers..run “they [Hussein’s regime] don’t believe in god. Not as we do.” While that may be true, that’s no reason to start a war. Ever heard of crusades? Or holy Jihads?

    And our good president didn’t have nuthin’ to do with Enron, nosiree bob. Crush saddam, crush saddam. He’s the axis of evil. Nevermind the economy. Crush saddam. War’s good for the economy. Crush saddam.

    Oh, yeah, and while you’re at it,arrest anyone who’s of Arab descent. Arrest people for readind deviant literature. Institute secret courts to issue secret warrants, so suspected terrorists and other deviants can be held indefinately. Crush saddam. Excuse me, boy, go get my hood and sheet pressed like a good lil sambo. Crush saddam.

    Defending Americans isn’t just about having bigger bombs to play who-has-the-bigger-phallus. It’s about defending OUR Freedom to express our views, even when they disagree with the administration.

    Now go cruise around in your pickup, swill some beer, lynch a nigger, shoot some roadsigns, beat your wife, and get to the yeehawin’

  • Steve L

    Well, she certainly put her money where her mouth is. Sorry…. You Lose. I’ll spend my dollars on some other artist. Too bad you have blemished your two partners.

  • Rusty

    George W Bush wasnt even elected , his brother stole it for him in Florida.
    If I was from Texas, I would be ashamed too. Bush is a total dumbass

  • Darla

    Natalie—I’m a BIG C & W fan, but of Dixie Chicks no more. I stand behind the right of free speech, but don’t shoot off your mouth in another counrty! We have the right of free speech because we live in the USA, our soldiers have fought for us to give us that right. Whether you like the president of our country we elected or not, he does represent the United States of America and should be treated with respect. We all have opinions, but let’s keep those opinions to ourselves. Small minds. And…as far as Clinton goes, he got caught. Whatever…..! Since 9-11, I’ve seen and heard alot of people right here in the USA piss on their own country—what’s the matter with you all!!! If you don’t like the way the country is ran—-try living someplace else, like Iraq for instance!

  • Sareena

    So we should respect Bush because he’s a draft dodging, coke-snorting alcoholic with deep ties to Enron but it’s okay to make comments about Clinton because he got head? At least my stock portfolio looked fine and I wasn’t laid off during the Clinton years. Now my phones are probably tapped thanks to PATRIOT ACT II….Thanks for the “freedom”

  • Rebekah P

    I hope you all will read your comments as to just how ignorant they sound. Who went overseas when Clinton was president and blasted him publicly? I rest my case.

    The Dixie Chicks showed total disregard for our government and an absolute lack of class. It is fine for them to exercise their freedom of speech, but when you are a visitor in a foreign country, you are first and foremost, a representative of the United States of America, and should act accordingly, regardless of your freedoms. I know I am not the only one who took Citizenship classes in grade school, am I? They are entitled to their opinions, as we all are, but to blurt out a bashing statement in the middle of a concert on foreign soil is absolutely uncalled for. America bashing has no place hiding behind FREEDOM OF SPEECH. And the apology? Too little, too late, in my opinion.

    Bye, bye, Birdies.

  • Wolfgang

    It does not matter if war was on or not. typical liberal personal attacks must not stand. An appology that was dictated by their/her public relations firm, after a poor first attemt, does not do it. Let us all sacrifies for our country and let’s not support such behavior anylonger. If they think they can piss on our pariotisum, and call it free speech, than we have every right not to buy and have to listen to their musik, boycot any station and not perchas any goods from advertisers that do in any way support musik or film artists that rub the nation the wrong way. The silent mojority must express the economic power we have and fight back where it hurts the people the most: their pocket book and their social exceptance. Let’s take action and put our anger where our mouth is and keep listening to and watch patriots who represent and have our values. Let’s not forget, we are the 2/3 of the base and should get our way!!!

  • Ken

    I think I’m going to go out and buy the Dixie Chicks’ new album just to show my support for Natalie Maines. If you can’t support this lady’s right to free speech then maybe you should immigrate to Iraq where there is no free speech.

    And for the record:
    -I support our men and women in the US armed forces.
    -I didn’t want war without UN support but I hope we win and Saddam dies.
    -I don’t like country music except for Jonnie Cash.

  • Ashley

    You’re so right… Even if you’re ashamed that your President is killing innocent people on your behalf you should really just keep it quiet in the name of patriotism. Look what happened to Sergei Duvanov in Kazakhstan.

  • Freedom’s Voice

    “Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns–the state and federal officials only our agents. We who have the final word can speak softly or angirly. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.” –Hon. William O. Douglas, 1972

  • Stef

    I thought America was land of the free? Since when is saying your opinion a crime? Oh, and since when did George Bush become king of the world and decided to “liberate” Iraq. Where was the US to intervene in the genocide that Milosovich was doing. Oh wait, Milosovich didn’t have oil, my bad. It’s amazing to see the US only goes to war when it has something to gain. I never really liked the Dixie Chicks, but Natalie Maines said what was on her mind, and don’t crap on her head for it, isn’t the US based on freedom of speech.

  • steve

    what are they going to do with guy on the oscar’s that really let Bush have it!i think i would like Bush better if he was the one on the frontline over there.

  • Susan Skrabanek

    “ignorant bitch ass”…..wow, that’s really clever. While you were thinking of pathetic insults like that one (probably took you all night), it might have escaped your notice that having this war will in fact INCREASE the number of “Arab fanatics to come kill the rest of us at their leisure”. War will have no impact on that reality other than to make it worse. If we really wanted to stop terrorism, we’d go for the pocketbooks and hard. Killing people just tends to really piss off their family and friends, and makes retribution all that much sweeter. We ought to know that by now…..

  • Michael

    Thanks for all the comments, folks. Very enlightening. I never owned a Dixie Chick album. Now I have a complete set. As an American, I not only support someone’s right to have an opinion, I’ll support them with my wallet while all the anti-democracy herd-followers berate them in the name of “patriotism” just because they stepped out of line.

    Everybody I know will get a Dixie Chicks CD for their birthday this year.

  • vivid

    1. I think it is ironic that the three people at the healm of the country are Dick, Bush, and Colon. Therefore everything that happens to the US under their leadership is no better than the products of these bodily organs.
    2. I would say the same thing as Natalie, in London, in China, in the middle of the US capitol and on stage in a backwater bar in the middle of any uneducated Texas redneckville.
    3. President Bush wasn’t elected by the people of the united states, he had his family play the electoral college system to his favor and even then only won by the skin of his teeth. Therefore he deserves no respect, and no consideration.
    4. My ancestors signed the constitution and provided lodging to George Washington himself, and this is no longer the country they worked and died for. Bush and the Anti-terrorism act have completely bastardized any genuine freedom we had left.
    5. Under the leadership of W, we have gone through the worst economic slump in total GDP (that means gross domestic product for the ignorant rednecks) since the great depression, a terrorist attack that destroyed a national landmark, and a center for global peace, killed 3000+ people on our soil, and all evidence pionts to the administration allowing it to happen, and now we are loosing sons and daughters, 50 so far as of the 4th day of the war, to fight for oil, when we produce more oil than any other nation in the world.
    6. Investigations into misconduct by the administration regarding forged documents submitted to the UN are currently underway. The CIA is pointing the finger at the Bush administration and the Administrations dirty finger is pointing back at them.
    7. Anyone with the ability to view the world as the large scale organization that it really is can see that Bush’s “I’m Gonna do everything the way Clinton wouldn’t” policies, refering to foregin affairs, would know that by not communicating and colaborating with the leaders of foreign government, we are biting the hands that feed us.
    8. Durring the first Gulf war, the reason we pulled out was because Sadam was on a plane ready to leave, which would have left us to run Iraq, and that wasnt’ the point then.
    9. Bush Sr never planned on not being re-elected and this is just a continuation of what he would have done had that happened, thus the dirty deeds to get JR elected.
    And finally
    10. We are the worlds largest economy, we use over 50% of the worlds resources, and we are approximately 4% of their population. Without a positive leader, who is respected by the leaders of the rest of the world, our entire way of life can not support itself, and will be destroyed.
    Now, do you still think Natalie Mains is stupid for saying she is ashamed of the president?

  • vivid

    1. I think it is ironic that the three people at the healm of the country are Dick, Bush, and Colon. Therefore everything that happens to the US under their leadership is no better than the products of these bodily organs.
    2. I would say the same thing as Natalie, in London, in China, in the middle of the US capitol and on stage in a backwater bar in the middle of any uneducated Texas redneckville.
    3. President Bush wasn’t elected by the people of the united states, he had his family play the electoral college system to his favor and even then only won by the skin of his teeth. Therefore he deserves no respect, and no consideration.
    4. My ancestors signed the constitution and provided lodging to George Washington himself, and this is no longer the country they worked and died for. Bush and the Anti-terrorism act have completely bastardized any genuine freedom we had left.
    5. Under the leadership of W, we have gone through the worst economic slump in total GDP (that means gross domestic product for the ignorant rednecks) since the great depression, a terrorist attack that destroyed a national landmark, and a center for global peace, killed 3000+ people on our soil, and all evidence pionts to the administration allowing it to happen, and now we are loosing sons and daughters, 50 so far as of the 4th day of the war, to fight for oil, when we produce more oil than any other nation in the world.
    6. Investigations into misconduct by the administration regarding forged documents submitted to the UN are currently underway. The CIA is pointing the finger at the Bush administration and the Administrations dirty finger is pointing back at them.
    7. Anyone with the ability to view the world as the large scale organization that it really is can see that Bush’s “I’m Gonna do everything the way Clinton wouldn’t” policies, refering to foregin affairs, would know that by not communicating and colaborating with the leaders of foreign government, we are biting the hands that feed us.
    8. Durring the first Gulf war, the reason we pulled out was because Sadam was on a plane ready to leave, which would have left us to run Iraq, and that wasnt’ the point then.
    9. Bush Sr never planned on not being re-elected and this is just a continuation of what he would have done had that happened, thus the dirty deeds to get JR elected.
    And finally
    10. We are the worlds largest economy, we use over 50% of the worlds resources, and we are approximately 4% of their population. Without a positive leader, who is respected by the leaders of the rest of the world, our entire way of life can not support itself, and will be destroyed.
    Now, do you still think Natalie Mains is stupid for saying she is ashamed of the president?

  • chris

    Geroge Bush is OUT THERE trying to make sure we don’t get 9-11 ed again. Clinton on the other hand was spending his time getting blow jobs in the oval office. Wake up people…….

  • Ray

    Dear vivid, if you took a few minutes and informed yourself using expert sources and not Bush administration propaganda-blabber, you’d relize that it is highly unlikely that Iraq has anything to do with 9-11. A dictator like Saddam who is a control freak to the point of paranoia does not take the risk of working with a terrorist like Bin Laden, who is ultimately beyond Saddam’s control. Bush would like you to believe that he’s preventing more 9-11’s. In my opinion it’s a very low thing to do, utilizing the fear of the American people to further one’s aims.

    Another thing I noticed in these posts here: What is the big significance of Natalie having made her statements in another country? Where’s the difference? Opinions are opinions, no matter where they are expressed. Most people in Britain have nothing against Americans so you can’t accuse her of taking the “easy way”. What a load of bullshit.

    I get sick of the way the word “patriotism” is being abused over and over again. Bush is NOT America. He’s an individual who’s attained the office of President through dubious means. So to criticize him is NOT un-patriotic. Anyway, if patriotism is more important than common human decency these days, we might want to think it over.

    Unfortunately, most Americans have been brought up to avoid any serious debate and objective criticism when it comes to their own nation.

  • Ray

    – Sorry, did not mean vivid but chris of course. —

    Also forgot to add that the U.S.A. has enjoyed the longest period of peace under one president when Clinton was in office, plus the best economic situation and occupancy rate for a long time. Focusing on his little sex scandal is a pretty childish way of detracting from his achievements. His foreign policy made him the most popular and respected US president with the rest of the world since Kennedy. He did not ignore the legal framework of the United Nations and he did not stage a one-man war show, ultimately risking the life of not only his military but of anyone in any Western country.

  • destiny

    WOW,how long ago was this comment made?? Isn’t this what our country is about? Freedom to speak the things we believe,hats off to Natalie for speaking her opinon,thumbs down in the manner in which she did it,but come on,we have men dying at this very moment and we are still stuck on one womans comment that made her even more famous?? Cry a river buld a bridge and get over it!! I for one have no side to choose but this,Bring our men home!!As a wife of a US Marine,can you please put put energy and prayers into a much better cause? God Bless,and Semper Fi

  • destiny

    WOW,how long ago was this comment made?? Isn’t this what our country is about? Freedom to speak the things we believe,hats off to Natalie for speaking her opinon,thumbs down in the manner in which she did it,but come on,we have men dying at this very moment and we are still stuck on one womans comment that made her even more famous?? Cry a river buld a bridge and get over it!! I for one have no side to choose but this,Bring our men home!!As a wife of a US Marine,can you please put put energy and prayers into a much better cause? God Bless,and Semper Fi

  • Angelo

    Take a moment, my children and listen to some wise words.

    “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it.”
    Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire

    “The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism.”
    Wole Soyinka
    Nigerian playwright, poet, novelist, and political activist (1934-)

    Don’t hate on people just because what they say differs from what you believe. Or you just don’t agree with how they say it. Without criticism, the ability to open your mouth and let your thoughts on something known, than how would we ever know what was good or bad or what we believed in? Should we sit on our hands and ‘go with the flow’ of what everyone else is doing and saying?

    I’m not saying that this Dixie Chick… chick is right or wrong. I don’t listen to that sort of music, I don’t particularly care, but whatever she has to say let her thoughts be known. By giving her hell for a statement of what is on her mind you are as unpatriotic as you could possibly be, for attempting to muffle the first amendment right we hold so dear. Doesn’t America prize itself from being the land of the free and the home of the brave? What sort of home is this to live in if you’re not free to move about it?

    Angelo

  • David

    This is to comment about the fact that we stand behind Bush and not Clinton. Clinton had a way of sticking his own foot in his mouth. Not to mention, the only thing Clinton did while he was in office for 8 yrs was to force me to teach my daughter about infedelity at a very young age.

    Bush on the other hand vowed to fight and track down terrorists and the people that supported them. Now that he is backing up his words, people have a problem with it. It seems that most of the people that have a problem with this war were the ones that said, “Lets just drop a bomb on them!” on September 11th. Bush and his administration have taken the time and patience to track dow terrorists and their supporters. Now that he is taking a stand on them, people think he is a “warmonger”. Not to mention, Saddam has been a persistant problem for the world for at least the last 12 years. Our last two presidents have had the opportunity to take him out and chose not to. Maybe people aught to get the facts before shooting off their mouths. I am neither Democrat or Republican, but I do understand what our government is doing and I fully support it. Us as Americans should stand behind our country as protesting will not do any good now.

    Lets all stand behind our country and troops! This does not mean you have to stand behind Bush, it means that you should support the direction that the country is going. Not to mention, you should support the people that are over there fighting so that you have the right to say what you want. I stand behind what Charlie Daniels has written:

    http://www.charliedaniels.com/soapbox/03/242.html

    And some of his other comments on the war and protesters. This one in particular is a great one aimed at Hollywood.

  • Jane

    Some well thought out replies, impressive. I’m a Dixie Chicks fan before, and remain so. Love their newest CD, don’t care about their political gawfa. But I notice my favorite local country station has stopped playing “Travelin’Soldier” every hour, how sad. Shame on Kansas City’s 94.1 FM.

  • Terry

    David,

    Don’t blame Clinton for having to teach your daughter about infidelity…blame your republican friends for putting his private life on TV in an effort to embarass him because they couldn’t find any reason to indict him for whitewater. I also find your observation concerning the linkage between Iraq and 9/11 a little lacking in fact. What is it that you know about this that the rest of us don’t? Maybe you ought to get to the facts before you start shooting off your mouth. Why don’t you start setting the example for your daughter by being informed before attacking others that obviously spend a little more time on the facts than you do.

  • David

    Terry,

    Are you saying that Saddam is not a terrorist? Maybe you are the one who should get the fact straight. I didn’t say that Saddam was linked to 9/11, what I did say is that Bush had vowed to eliminate terrorists and all who harbor them. Saddam has been a terrorist for many years; in fact the last two presidents should have done something about him when they had the chance. And yes, my liberal friend, I do blame George Bush Sr. as well as Clinton.

    Personally, I do not like the fact of a war. But I will stand behind my Government and the troops over there trying to liberate Iraq. I am not going to debate this any further with you.

    As far as the Dixie Chicks, I think that being in the public eye as they are, they should watch what they say. I myself will continue to listen to the Dixie Chicks, as they are very talented. And yes Natalie did have the right to say what she said. I just think that people in the spotlight should use some sort of filter on their mouths if they do not want what the people might dish out.

    God Bless all Americans and may God take care of our troops fighting for our freedoms as well as the freedoms of the Iraqi people.

  • Terry

    David,

    I do not disagree that Saddam is a terrorist. I am also of the same opinion that he should not be in a position of power. However, I feel that there are many leaders of different countries that could be considered terrorists. Where I disagree with Mr. Bush is that the US does not have the right to unilaterally take action against any of these terrorists UNLESS they attack us first. Please explain to me where Iraq has attacked the US (aside from the no-fly zones, which they have always not recognized). The difference between your and my views are in the details and the sequence of events. I believe that even though we are far more powerful both militarily and economically than other countries, it does not give us the right to act against those countries, unless of course we are attacked first. I viewed your comments about 9/11 and Iraq and a fuzzy way to link the two. Furthermore, just because you and I can disagree in a fairly easy going dialog, doesn’t mean that those that are more passionate about their beliefs to the point that they will march in a protest should be viewed as being unpatriotic. If everyone were to agree it would be a very bland and dangerous America and our rights as we know them would slowly vanish. Furthermore, those that belittle and attack the folks who disagree with their views are themselves unpatriotic in that they are advocating exactly this kind of environment. Have a great day…Terry

  • Ash Plissken

    I respected Clinton and his administration for their accomplishments. Whatever he may have done in his “off-time”, he also effectively did the job we were paying him to do.

    I also respect the Bush administration for going ahead with this war, although not for the face that they have so ineptly put upon it. Bush projects the image of an unsettlingly ignorant man, and does not inspire confidence with his theocratic leanings.

    It’s absolutely right that we are free to question and to criticize, and blessed be all who do so with their country’s (or the world’s) best interests at heart. But when their criticism happens to be painfully uninformed, I will go ahead and point this out to them, and yell at them for it. Have whatever opinion you want, but if you’re wrong, I’m still going to tell you so. I’m damn well not going to shield you from the consequences of your opinion.

    Remember, just because you are afforded the freedom to do stupid or ignorant things, doesn’t make it a good idea to do so.

  • Doug

    “It’s ok to lampoon bush for his idiotic and bigoted “you’re either with us or against us” stance, and *gasp* run all you right wingers..run “they [Hussein’s regime] don’t believe in god. Not as we do.” While that may be true, that’s no reason to start a war. Ever heard of crusades? Or holy Jihads?”
    Well, as the Baath regime of Sadam is quite secular and Hussein is an atheist then I think it’s not much of a strech to say he doesn’t believe in God. Saddam may very well not be linked with Al-Qaeda. But to say he won’t is very simplistic, remember he does activily support with other radical Islamist organizations like Ansar-al-Islam and Hamas.
    Finally folks remember that the same freedom of speech which lets the Chicks say they hate the President guarantees others can say bad things about them too.
    PS- As Jihad translates to Holy Struggle, then the phrase Holy Jihad is redundant.

  • Angelo

    We better not be crusading.

    Back in the days on knights and all somewhere along the line people thought it would be funny if they went over and conqured the Muslims. They got their behinds handed to them.

    These folks are very strong willed and that’s commendable. I mean if someone were to attack your captial city and then be like, “Oh we’re doing this to releave you of your dicatator” yada yada, you’d be pissed the **** off too… I think people here are less hyped for war because they just don’t have such an immediate reason to go into it. There’s nothing that they see in it but people loseing their brothers to go to a place they’ve only seen in the paper…

    But saying that you don’t agree with it isn’t bad, it doesn’t mean that you’re less patriotic or American, it’s just that you think there would be another way to do go about this without bullets… and if there is one you’re outraged we didn’t take it. I’m one of those people, I wish we could have figured this out without having to gun down and be gunned down.

    During 9-11 I didn’t want us to drop bombs on anyone, I didn’t want a bunch of people shot or maimed or for their cities to fall… All I really wanted was peace and for it to stop. And for one to say this is a war of peace or religion… it’s a lie.

    No war campain that has been fought for peace has ended that way. Napolean, Hitler, Alexander the Great all went out for some endevour they thought was nobel enough, and right now we think we’re helping the world by strapping on fatigues instead of suits and hopping into tanks instead of SUVs but I just feel like it’s wrong… Like we’re doing something that’s not our business, and mostly like we did it the wrong way. With support from more countries this might feel more comfortable, like it’s what people want, but to be waltzing around in Bhagdad while North Korea has a nuclear missle pointed at America’s crotch and left temple… well… it just seems like something that’s pointless.

    So while America is a giant superpower, whatever whatever, I’ll just go with Jimi Hendrix, “When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.” I think our opperative here should be peace, and by waging war I don’t think we’ll ever have it.

    (This is not directly connected to the Dixie Chicks, I do appologize)

  • Brenda from Texas

    I have always liked the Dixie Chicks’. I think
    that they are a very talented group. I have purchased
    many of their CDs, but have purchased my last one.
    They are a true embarrassment! I will never
    purchase another CD of theirs, watch another
    performance of theirs on my TV or listen to
    another song of theirs on the radio. UNAMERICAN
    behavior is not acceptable and that’s exactly what
    they have displayed.They are in the same boat,
    in my book, as all of the other UNAMERICAN
    performers that call themselves proud Americans.
    Frankly, I am very ashamed that THEY are from Texas!

  • Angelo

    ‘UNAMERICAN’

    Define that? Someone who speaks their mind? Someone that has an opinion? Someone who expresses him or herself? Someone who is fallible?

    Sounds pretty American to me.

    I might be mistaken but one of the biggest things that makes a person American is their unadultered freedom of expression and speech. To repress that or to critize the act of having the right to speak and by saying that one person is more American than the other is basically sheer foolishness. No one can be more American than anyone else, you live in America and you’re legalized you’re an American. What makes us different as people unites us as a nation.

    So to say someone is ‘unamerican’ (whatever that ‘word’ means) for merely for using their natural birthright to speak their minds right, wrong, and indifferent, is sheer ignorance to what being American truly is.

  • Ray

    Thank you Angelo, and others who formulate clear and rational thoughts and do not make me think they’re leftovers from the Middle Ages. I’m sorry to have to use drastic words, but the sort of “patriotism” that denies people their freedom, especially a freedom as granted by the 1st Amendment, will lead to the sort of society that is not much better than a dictatorship.
    In case some of you haven’t noticed, the US does not enjoy a lot of respect in the rest of the world at the moment. And for a good reason: Nothing is more dangerous than a powerful country run (and partly inhabited) by people who think their way is the only right one and who do not find it neccessary to respect the wishes of others in the world community. What a shame, America used to be a promising concept once.

  • billy-a

    How does Bill Clinton get in to this discussion? It’s not only him qw don’t like…it’s Hillary too.

  • Tammy

    I think this letter posted by this soldier sums it up.
    An open letter to the Dixie Chicks (from A Navy Lt.)

    Received this from a friend and thought I would share it.

    Name: LT. Layne McDowell

    Date: 03/15/0

    Time: 01:54:49 PM

    Comment

    An open letter to the Dixie Chicks:

    Earlier this week, while performing in London, you stated that you were ashamed that our President is from your home state. I wonder if you realized how many Americans would be listening. This American was listening. This Texan is ashamed that you come from my state. I serve my country as an officer in the United States Navy. Specifically, I fly F-14 Tomcats off carriers around the world, executing the missions that preserve the very freedom you claim to exercise. I have proudly fought for my country in the skies over Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan without regret. Though I may disagree wholeheartedly with your comments, I will defend to the death your right to say them, in America. But for you to travel to a foreign land and publicly criticize our Commander in Chief is cowardice behavior. Would you have so willingly made those comments while performing for a patriotic, flag-waving crowd of Texans in Lubbock. I would imagine not. How dare you pocket profits off songs about soldiers, their deaths and patriotism while criticizing their Commander in Chief abroad, even while they prepare to give their lives to ensure your own freedom of speech. Please ask yourself, what have you done to deserve that sacrifice? Do not try to justify your comments by claiming that you made them only because you care about innocent lives. Never once in our history have we committed troops to war for the purpose of taking innocent lives. We do it to protect innocent lives, even yours.

    If the world leaders of the late 1930s had the vision and courage of our present Commander in Chief, perhaps the evil men who caused the death of millions in WWII would have never had the opportunity to harm a soul. The potential loss of millions of lives in the future at the hands of today’s evil men necessitate action. In a separate correspondence, I am returning to you each and every Dixie Chicks CD and cassette that I have ever purchased. Never again will I allow my funds to support your behavior. All you have done is to add your name to a growing list of American “Celebrities” who have failed to realize that they have obtained their successes on the backs of the American blue-collar workers such as our servicemen and women. To Natalie Maines: This Texan and this American will continue to risk his life to guarantee your freedoms. What will you do to deserve it?

    Pete Rowland

    Systems Administrator

    Assistant Operations Manager

    904.256.0104

  • DavieG

    Tammy,

    Thank you for that wonderful letter. I think it describes perfectly why most of us feel that we should boycot the Dixie Chicks. It doesn’t have to do with the fact that she said this about our Commander and Cheif, it has to do with how she said it and where she said it. The question is:

    Would she have said this in a a concert to full of Texans in Lubbock? Thank you for sharing this with us. It really gets to the point of how most people feel.

  • http://none Bobnik

    I am a Bush fan, and I do not oppose the war, but I completely respect the Dixie Chix freedom to say what they will…but, what she said showed her true colors. Its now clear that her comments were meant only to bolster sales of there records in Europe. As soon as she relized that her comments made it back to America, where she had the potential to lose millions of dollares – it was retracted. What a hipocrit. Had she stuck with the first comments I, probably like a lot of Americans, wouldnt have lost ALL respect for her. Its impossible to take any comment she makes from here on out seriously.

  • Don

    I do not support the unelected, lying, draft doger, who deserted our armed forces and engaged in insider trading. (I think that puts him ahead of Clinton). I do not support the direction that this country is going, as that direction is determined by an unelected, draft dodging, lying, deserter and corporate criminal. I support what this country stands for (in the absence of the “leadership” of an unelected, draft doging, lying, deserter and corporate criminal). I am a veteran and a patriot. Conservatives do not own the flag. Republicans don’t have the right to define “patriotism”.

    “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
    Theodore Roosevelt, 1918 (During WWI)

    Go Natalie (I always thought that she was hot, but now I see that she’s smart, too!)

  • TerryW

    Let me comment on the “concept” of free speech and Maines comments about Bush, and Navy Lt. McDowell’s comments.I find it difficult to believe that Lt. McDowell, and some of the folks in this forum, feel a person has a right to free speech and opinions, but only in America. Does this mean that Lt. McDowell is implying that even though he’ll give his life to guarantee our freedom of speech and way of life, and in this instance liberate the Iraqi people as well that we Americans shouldn’t practice free speech in this newly liberated country or any other country where free speech is allowed? How freaking convoluted is that? It’s the concept of freedoms, not the individual act of freedom or where it takes place. Remember, our constitution gives all of us the right to say what we want without fear of retribution from our government, just like it gives those that are offended by those opinions the right to protes themselves either economically as in Maines case or verbally as in my case. In my humble opinion, anyone who tries to shame another into not voicing their opinion, no matter how screwed up it may be, is the one who hasn’t latched on to the American idea.

    TAW

  • TerryW

    One more thing….the true coward is the one who tries to intimidate and put conditions on a persons right to free speech instead of standing up and defending their position. Kind of small minded if you ask me.
    TAW

  • Meghan

    I take great offense to the comments made by natalie. Our current president is sending brave and honorable men and women to defend the right to freedom for ignorant people like her. He is protecting our country from potential ruination and he should be applauded for it. The only people this country has to be ashamed of are those terrorist groups and the countries that harbor them. I fully support the actions of the commander in chief of our country and applaud the men and women fighting for him and your freedom. My boyfriend, cousin and many good friends are overseas and I am proud to say I know them and know that they are fighting for all of you even if you dont agree with the reason why. You have been given a lifestyle and freely take advantage of that. The president is trying to uphold that for all of you and you spit in his face. if you ask me you should be ashamed. God bless our troops, our president, and our freedom!

  • Robert

    Yeah, what’s-her-name has the right to say whatever she wants. And music fans have the right to buy (or NOT buy) whatever CDs they want. Why is the left wing crowd so quick to sqawk about freedom of speech, but unwilling to accept music fans’ freedom also?

    I still can’t understand this love affair some people have with Bill Clinton… “His foreign policy made him the most popular and respected US president with the rest of the world since Kennedy.” as a previous poster said. Man…talk about a serious case of denial. Some people are just so eaten up with it, there’s no reasoning with them. Bill Clinton’s legacy will not be Monica or a skyrocketing stockmarket. Bill Clinton’s legacy is 3000 dead on 9/11. First we had WTC #1. Then Khobar Towers. Then the Africa Embassy bombings. Then the USS Cole bombing. What did Clinton do…aside from firing off afew missles and pounding a few caves? Nothing. Not one damn thing. If Clinton goes into Afghanistan after the Embassy bombings, the Towers are stiil standing today. Even Vladimir Putin said that he asked Clinton why he didn’t do something about bin Laden. Clinton’s response: “Well, the Talliban have him, and they won’t give him up, so there’s nothing we can do about it.” Putin was astounded. Clinton’s approach to bin Laden was just to hope he could get through his presidency without a really big attack happening.

    Then we could get into the foolish Clinton-Carter nuclear deal with NKorea…another debacle.

  • Amy

    I just wanted to say 2 things:

    1) Angelo is a very smart person

    2) In reference to the communication between Terry and David, in regards to who is to blame for you (David) having to “teach my daughter about infedelity at a very young age.” – you are both wrong. David, you are the only one to blame for having to teach your daughter about Clinton’s infidelity. There are appropriate ways to talk to children about things (assuming you would actually want to talk to her about Clinton’s infidelity for some reason) without giving away information you would rather they not have. Don’t take the easy road and blame someone else – education starts at home.

    I also apologize for not connecting my comments to the Dixie Chicks, but like they say….six degrees of separation..

  • DavieG

    I agree with most of the comments about “whatever her name is”. People have the rights to say whatever they want too That is why we have the freedom of speech. This even includes a Dixie Chick in another country providing that country allows it.

    What some of you fail to agree with is that some of us are choosing to use our freedom of choice. Some of us choose to not buy or listen to any more of their music based on the decisions that they made in using their freedom of speech. This is our rights as citizens of the Good old USA. Just as “What’s her name” has the freedom of speech and her freedom to use whatever tactics that she chooses to for her economic development. If you choose to listen to them or buy their music, then you activate your freedom to choose.

    If me activating my freedom of choice affects her economic situation, then maybe she should have thought about what she said before I activated my right to choose based on what she said. Just as I choose everyday not to tell my boss how much I dislike them. Then he/she would have the right to determine whether I have a job working for them or not. I choose not to pay the Dixie Chicks for their music anymore, nor do I choose to waste my time listening to their music. This is my right not to spend my hard earned money on someone I no longer choose to support.

    Those of you telling us that she has the right to the freedom of speach, are right. Those of you who are telling us that we do not have the freedom to boycott the Dixie Chick music are are very “freaking convoluted” yourself.

    Yes, she does have the freedom of speech.

    Yes, we have the freedom of choice.

    Choose what you want.

  • DavieG

    I guess we will all see at their first concert on May 1st, I believe it is in South Carolina. We will see how the Dixie Chicks have fared with this. I honestly believe that there will be a bunch of people booing instead of listening to them.

    Good Luck to the Dixie Chicks, they will need it.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Well, some of us WON’T see because we won’t be bothered to watch.

    However, I would hope that there is no booing. Showing up at a concert to boo and heckle is LAME. At that point, even I’d be telling people to get a life.

    The best strategy is to ignore them, which co-incidentally was my strategy even before Maines stuck her hoof in mouth. Politics aside, why would anyone listen to the Dixie Chicks when they’re still printing Loretta Lynn and Dolly Parton CDs? The only thing lamer than their politics is their music.

  • Don

    There are brave men and women serving in the persion gulf. I have friends there. I am a veteran, and there are people that I trained serving there.

    I’d rather they be here where they would actually be protecting us. The CIA says that this war will increase the probability of terrorist attacks. This war does not make us safer. This war is killing innocent children.

    I hate Bush. I despise him. He is destroying our future. We used to be respected. We used to have allies. We used to have some influence among the Arab states. None of these things are true, and you think it’s a good thing?

    don

  • scheek

    Natalie Maines will never be able to gain the support back that she lost….Never! Someone will always be at her concerts to remind her of her disloyalty to her country! Welcome to the world of “Hanoi Jane”!

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Whoa there, Scheek! Hold on a second cowboy. Now Ms. Maines was running her mouth in a foolish manner, and deserved to catch some grief. Granted.

    However, she was behaving in an obnoxious perhaps, but certainly NOT treasonous manner. Her relatively minor sin in no way runs equal to the purposeful treachery of Jane Fonda.

  • InMarin

    Wow – this is so overblown! Her comments amount to a thimble in a vast ocean of rhetoric. Why is this such a big deal?

    If you can’t stand dissent, get out of the US!

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    So then InMarin, what you’re saying is “America, love it or leave it”?

  • InMarin

    So then Al, what you’re saying is that you don’t understand sarcasm?

  • InMarin

    Oxblog has been documenting the orchestrated, organized, constant abuse and intimidation tactics of the pro-war crowd:

    I AM SHOCKED, APPALLED, AND DISGUSTED BY THIS. I received the following email from a friend at Yale:

    Last week here at Yale, several male students, armed with a 2×4 in the middle of the night, broke into the suite of another female student and activist, because she had an American flag hanging upside-down (a symbol of distress, dissent with the government) out the window of her room. Fortunately, they were unsuccessful in breaking down the door to her bedroom, but they left a violent and intimidating note including such inspiring quotes as “as [sic] muslims must die.”

    Doesn’t this sort of extremist behavior seem a little more worthy of mention than the comments by the Dixie Chicks or DeGenova at Columbia…neither of whom didn’t beat or threaten anyone?

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    InMarin, please be serious. You dig up one apocryphal story of a pro-military person getting stupid and engaging in criminal behavior that no one supports. This reflects not on anyone else’s position. Supporting the aggressive defense of our country does not mean condoning stupid self-indulgent criminal behavior. Indeed, that is just what we’re in Iraq to stop.

    The Dixie Chicks thing really has been overplayed at this point, though- it was a minor stupidity, not pre-meditated treachery. People are seriously needing to give that a rest. Let the girls do a little USO tour in penance, and be done.

    De Genova does fall into this category of pre-meditated treachery, though. To me, his call for people to make themselves heros by killing American soldiers by the millions seems pretty goddam egregious.

    Seems like he might indeed be legally actionable, though I probably wouldn’t go that far. He’s pushing it, though. He needn’t expect to be spoken of or treated like a good neighbor. I might have to tolerate him, but his name is mud with me. If terrorists want to come in and kill some infidels, they can HAVE his house as far as I’m concerned.

    Yes, this is more important than an unsuccessful B&E.

  • Don

    All you patriotic ditto heads just keep on talking about how you’re not buying Dixie Chicks CD’s and how bad it is that her band mates have to suffer with Natalie. Well, just keep pushing a boycott. It’s one sure way to INCREASE sales. This is from Michael Moore’s website:

    I’m sure you’ve all heard by now that, because their lead singer mentioned how she was ashamed that Bush was from her home state of Texas, their record sales have “plummeted” and country stations are boycotting their music. The truth is that their sales are NOT down. This week, after all the attacks, their album is still at #1 on the Billboard country charts and, according to Entertainment Weekly, on the pop charts during all the brouhaha, they ROSE from #6 to #4. In the New York Times, Frank Rich reports that he tried to find a ticket to ANY of the Dixie Chicks’ upcoming concerts but he couldn’t because they were all sold out.

    Yep, they are suffering terrribly while you drink your beer, scratch your ass, and bad mouth people who actually understand freedom.

    Don

  • Don

    Since I served 7 years as an infantry soldier, I must be a hero, too, right? I mean, if every one of our soldiers in Iraq is a hero, did they become one because they were deployed there, or because they are soldiers?

    Anyway, since I’ve decided that I’m a hero (I also spent 5 years fighting forest fires), my opinion is terrribly important (just like that Navy Lieutenant’s). Here it is:
    Natalie is right. Bush is an idiot. (did you get that – an IDIOT). We have a great military of honorable soldiers who were sent to fight in an illegal, immoral, and unconstitutional war. You can all slap me if I’m wrong, but I’ll bet you that we find no WMD’s. Won’t you look like silly bastards then?

    don

  • DavieG

    Don,

    Let me start by saying. I want thank you for putting your life on the line and serving our country, I really appreciate that and respect you for it. You are right. If you think Bush is an idiot, you are right. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I happen to think that Clinton is an idiot. I also do not think very highly of Bush’s father. I think “W” is twice the leader his father was. But again, that is my opinion. I think the problem with Natalie is not that she said what she said, but that she said it on another country’s soil.

    The true question is: “Would she have said her comments in front of a croud in Austin, Dallas and ect.?” I do not believe so, but I could be wrong. Her comment would be like me stating that I am ashamed that you served in our armed forces. I am not by the way! I respect anyone who has served our county and placed their life on the line. Anyone who has served, war or not (It doesn’t matter if they served in a war or not), has placed their life on the line for all of us. And I thank you!

    What it sounds like to me is that Natalie said what she said to make herself look good to the people in that country. It is flat out wrong to build your success on putting others down. She could have said something else that would not have been quite as offensive. She could have said that she doesn’t agree with our president either. But to state that you are ashamed to have another human from your home state is, in my opinion, wrong.

    I really appreciate your comments and I am proud of you, you are a true hero. Thank you again for serving our country and keeping the freedoms we all enjoy and that most of us take for granted.

    Thank you!

  • Don

    Thank you, Davie, for your comments. I was being facetious – I’m no more a hero than all the other people I served with.

    I admit that Clinton was an idiot when it came to sex. It would take a wacko to say otherwise. But leadership from Bush II? He alienated virtually the entire world. The few countries that did support us, did so against the wishes of their citizens. Bush I got Arab countries to ally themselves with western countries against another arab country. This is probably not the forum for this debate, so I’ll include something on point.

    “Home” is still #1 on the country charts.

    don

  • Diana

    The beauty of living here and believing in patriotism is that people can say what they feel and have every right to do so. So to put others down or even hate another person for their beliefs would be unpatriotic, even if you’re putting them down for what you think is unpatriotic behaviour. Simply respect a persons right to believe what they feel is right and agree to disagree.

  • David Garhart

    The only two cents I have left to say for this is, even if you do not believe in what is or has been done:

    Pray for our troops!
    Pray for the people in Iraq!
    Pray for our leaders to get the guidence that they might be looking for!

    Be safe, Be Free!

  • David Garhart

    Oops! That is Pray! Sorry, now I feel stupid!

  • Jackie

    I am tired of reading about Bush vs Clinton, Republican vs Democrats. I am one of the silent majority that never speak out….until now. I agree that everyone can speak their minds like the Chicks. I agree that those who don’t like what they hear from them may also choose to not purchase any of their cd’s or concert tickets or listen to their music. And if the Chicks loose their fame and fortune then those are the reprocusions she should have known before speaking. I support the ones who were willing to go out on a limb, against world criticism, and liberate Iraq. And above all, I support the men and women of the USA who made that happen. As much as I was scared and did not want to go to war, it was the right thing to do as human beings.

  • Edgar

    The Dixie chicks (chick) comments concerning President Bush’s actions are out of place in the music world. Statements like that are simply called TREASON in this country and in the past individuals have been shot for less.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Yo, Edgar, get a grip on yourself. Saying you are ashamed of the president does not even vaguely constitute treason. Yeah, her comments were stupid, and she deserved a good cussin’, but Jebus Criminy, calm yoself down. She’s not Hanoi Jane here, or anything close.

  • http://td2k.com lee

    Do not forget that Clinton earned the remarks directed towards his behavior while in office. It is rather difficult to not be criticised when you are recieving oral sex from an intern in the oval office. You reap what you sow.

  • Don

    What country do you live in, Edgar? The one I live in has a bill of rights. Natalie is to be commended for exercising her rights. After all, soldiers didn’t die to prevent us from speeking freely.

    “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong,” Roosevelt said, “is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
    Theodore Roosevelt, 1918

  • Don

    And another, Edgar:
    Congressman Lincoln voted to censure the president in 1848–while the war against Mexico still raged. He contended that the president’s justification for war was “from beginning to end the sheerest deception.”

    Too bad Abraham Lincoln wasn’t shot for treason, eh?

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Lincoln shot for treason? I could see that.

  • mike

    I do not understand how people can still be against the war with Iraq. Have you not been paying attention to the news? Have you not seen the 12 year old and younger kids being freed from prison because they wouldn’t join Saddams army. Have you not seen the torture chambers that have been found. Have you not heard the true accounts of torture inflicted upon olympic athletes and people who chose to speak out against Saddam. We may not have found conclusive evidence of weapons of mass destruction YET, but we have found other attrocities that are reminiscent of Hitlers iron fisted reign. The fact that certain celebrities continue to speak against the war, in the face of all the horrible things that are being uncovered in Iraq, shows how out of touch they are with reality. I wonder if they are just concerened with their pocket books. During a war people would be less likely to spend their money frivolously on entertainment than they would in a time of no war. Celebrities can bitch and moan all they want about how unamerican it is for their “art” to be boycotted for expressing their right of free speech, but I say we have the equal right to express our right to choose not to line their bank accounts because of our disagreement with their view. The right of free speech and free expression goes both ways. Certain celebrities just seem to think that their opinions are more just and important than the common person.
    – A proud American using his right of free speech

  • mike

    I read even more of the comments posted here and am continually amazed at the lack of common sense. Yes Natalie Maines expressed her right of free speech, I support that. No one said what she did was a crime. What is occuring is a large segment of the population is choosing to express their right of free speech and free expression by disagreeing with her. The boycotted sales and album play are one of the few ways your “regular joe” can be assured the Dixie Chicks hear our opinion. We don’t have the luxury of holding a microphone in front of thousands of people to express our opinions. We don’t have the luxury of having TV interviewers at our beck and call. If she is willing to run off at the mouth, in a foreign country, than she should expect others to disagree with her and express their right of free speech in the only way she will hear. Boycotting the Dixie Chicks, and other celebrities (ie Martin Shean, George Clooney, Julia Roberts etc., etc.) is not unamerican, it is our American right to free speech and free expression.
    -A proud American expressing his right of free speech…again.

  • Don

    Sure, terrible things happened in Iraq. Try doing an internet search on Myanmar (formerly Burma). It’s far worse there. But not only are we not invading, we don’t care. Millions of Africans dying from AIDS and we deny them American drugs. Yes, I am against the war. This could have been dealt with without a war. Over 2000 Iragi civilians died in the invasion. Somehow, I don’t think that their families are celebrating.

    I’ve not heard Natalie or any other celebrity complain about boycotts. Death threats to them and thier parents (and even grandparents) is another story. And besides, conservative boycotts are the best sales device in this country. “Home” is still the number one country album. 59 of 64 concerts are sold out. What these celebrities complain about are gutless executives who knuckle under to conservative threats, despite the demonstrable ineffectiveness of these so-called “boycotts”.

  • mike

    First let me say that the problems in Myanmar are horrendous, but this country can do only so much for the entire world. If we don’t invade and take certain leaders (ie Milosovich, or the leadership in Myanmar) we are said to be turning our backs, or that we don’t care. We invaded Iraq to take Saddam and his cronies and we are called brutes, murderers and any other bull shit term you can think of. Yes their are other countries that could use our help in ridding their brutal leaders but we need to focus first on direct threats to our country, meaning Iraq. I am absolutely pissed off at most of the worl community. 99% of this planet never hesitates to put us down and call for death to all Americans, but the instant they need something suddenly we are their best firend.
    2000 iraqi civilians deaths are without a doubt a terrrible thing. What about the several million Iraqi murders perpetrated by Saddam and his cohorts? I have a feeling almost any Iraqi in their right mind would say in a few years that 2000 lives compared to several million lives was worth it. Don’t get me wrong I wish their could have been no civilian casualities, but that is what happens in war. I believe this country did everything immaginable to prevent the deaths of the innocent. Unfortunately innocent people did die. Innocenet people also died on September 11 and this country needs to do everything in its power to prevent that from happening again. I wish someone could me a reasonable idea of how we could have dealt with Saddam in a way other than war. What do you people think has been going on the past 12-13 years? We have tried working with the UN to handle the Iraqi situation and you see where that got us. NOWHERE. Several outspoken countries against this war are turning out to have been “in bed” with Saddam for their own financial reasons. No wonder diplomacy didn’t get anywhere.
    Yes celebrities are bitching about boycotts of their “art”. They calling these boycotts anti-American because they feel we are hindering their right of free speech. They can say anything they want, but they should realize that there may be repercussions from those who don’t agree with them. It is our own right to respond to their opinions by choosing not to support them.

  • don

    You almost had a point – unitil you mentioned sep 11th. Any mention of 9/11 in reference to Iraq means that you bought bush’s bridge. It’s a lie. There is no connection.

    A reasonable way to deal with Hussein? France had a proposal which the administration dismissed, rudely. Hundreds more inspectors (By 1998, U.N. inspectors had eliminated 90-95 percent of Iraq’s ability to produce or use chemical and biological weapons. Inspectors estroyed 100 percent of the factories that produced these weapons and 100 percent of the equipment needed to make them. They eliminated nearly all existing weapons and the long-range missiles designed to carry them. In 1998, the International Atomic Energy Agency certified that Iraq no longer had a viable nuclear weapons program.) These inspectors would gave be escorted by UN soldiers. The Iraqi people would have seen the UN troops. The regime would’ve had to adapt – their control would’ve slipped away. And if it didn’t work, war was still an option. The war proved that Iraq wasn’t a threat to any of it’s neighbors. And as they didn’t use WMD against us, even knowing that they faced certain defeat, and as we still haven’t found any of these alleged (and they are merely alleged) WMD, saying that Iraq was an imminent threat to the US is, to say the least, a less than convincing assertion.

    Remember, we went there to eliminate an imminent threat. The liberation of the Iraqi people makes good press, and is undoubtedly a good thing, but we have committed war crimes in achieving this liberation. (4 large bombs knowingly aimed at a residention neighborhood. Cluster bombs used in civilian areas. Infrastucted targeted and destroyed. Iraqi TV targeted and destroyed).

    Having said that, I want you to know that I am a veteran. I support our troops. I have a friend over there and a nephew who just enlisted.

  • Julia

    As Americans we have the right to free speech. You can shout for the whole world to hear. However, when you use a very public forum to express your personal views you open your self up to a public response. Miss Natalie was playing to the crowd with her remarks in the UK. She did not factor in that her sentiments might not be appreciated in her home country. Rest assured that her handlers are working around the clock to turn this uproar into sales. She is not a hero or a victim. She is a commodity. Unfortunately for her, her shelf life may have expired. She was never the best singer in country music or the best performer. However, she had charisma and was fun to watch. People thought she was kind of cute and they liked her. Now the public knows her a little better and fairly large portion of it doesn’t like her so much. Don’t cry a river for Natalie. She just needs to realize that the sun doesn’t rise and set on her cute little chunky behind. So long as you were entertaining Natalie we watched, listened and purchased. Now you are whiny and boring. Go away and give the next “big thing” a chance.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Yo, Don back up in comment #83: “You almost had a point – unitil you mentioned sep 11th. Any mention of 9/11 in reference to Iraq means that you bought bush’s bridge. It’s a lie. There is no connection.”

    You may wish to CHECK THIS OUT and then re-consider. If actual evidence on the ground means anything to you- if you have any intellectual integrity, you will then change your opinion.

  • Mike

    Anyone who doesn’t think there is an Iraq – Al Qaeda link is blind, and cynical simply because they don’t like President Bush. You personally may not have seen the evidence of this connection, but I am more inclined to believe our President than Saddam or any al-qaeda leader. I mentioned Sept. 11, not trying to make a connection between that fateful day and Iraq, but simply to say that something worse is, at some point, going to happen. With Saddams said hatred of this country and everything it stands for we could not afford to go another 5-10 years of “peaceful resolution talks” with him and his leadership. You say that we should have tried more diplomacy or Frances’ “solution” and later on possibley used the war solution makes me wonder. What if we would have given those options a try for say 1-3 years or more. When would we have actually waited long enough. Lets also say that nothing positive with actual substance came out of more diplomacy. Would you then have supported the war. I have a hard time thinking you would or anyone else who thinks we invaded too soon. 12-13 years seems like a little too long of a wait, not too soon. Saddam knew what was to happen if he did not comply with the UN resolutions set forth after the Gulf War. He had more than enough time to comply and show that he was willing to work with the UN (side bar – what use were the UN resolutions if he was able to comply/not comply whenever he wanted?). He did not comply so we went in to make him comply. How can you fight “legally” when you are fighting against something so evil that they PURPOSLEY kill innocent people to make their so called point. You can’t! As I said earlier…we did cause civilian casualties, but I would bet my life that they were completely unintentional. When war is your last option, and this was the last option, innocent people will die. That is a given unless the war is fought out in a uninhabited desert. I will be listening extremely hard to all you nay-sayers who are so convinced that we will not find any weapons of mass destruction when we find them. Saddam has had about 10 years to hide them so of course we’re not going to find them in a mere several weeks. I want to see the 180 everyone pulls when we start finding them. Of course the anti-Bush people could always say that Saddam wasn’t really going to use them on us, they wouldn’t really cause that much damage, the chemicals wouldn’t physically affect me because it would happen to someone else and so on and so on. No matter how much good comes out of this war and no matter how much safer we as a country and member of a world community are you nay-sayers will always say we shouldn’t have done it. 5-10 years from now, if not sooner, the world will see the service that our brave men and women have done for them in ensuring helping ensure their safety.

  • dude

    sorry I still don’t see the link between Iraq – Al Qaeda. I do remember the link between the U.S. and Iraq and the U.S. and Al-Qaeda … Hey look at that, we are all to blame. Go figure.

  • mike

    The connection between the US and Iraq and Al-Qaeda is a moot point. The difference being that they support/are terrorists. They purposely kill innocent people. We do not. Don’t say we do because our military did everything they could to avoid civilian deaths. You just can’t have a war without some regrettable, or unavoidable actions.

  • chris

    we supplied the weapons Iraq used against their own people and us…
    funny how someone earlier talked about how Bush is an ELECTED official…hah.
    I for one am glad everything turned out as well as it has in Iraq, regardless of the outcome the attack was still illegal under intl. law and sets a scary precedent

  • chris

    we supplied the weapons Iraq used against their own people and us…
    funny how someone earlier talked about how Bush is an ELECTED official…hah.
    I for one am glad everything turned out as well as it has in Iraq, regardless of the outcome the attack was still illegal under intl. law and sets a scary precedent

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    illegal under international law

    What international law was this? When did the US agree to give up their sovereignty? Who died and left Kofi Anon boss?

    Dubya was elected fair and square. Whining liberal babies can hold their breath until their faces turn blue, but that won’t change the fact that Dubya ended up with a few hundred more votes in Florida than Gore did. The Supreme Court case was an arguable decision either way, but it did not change anything.

    If you want to bitch about people who are not legitimately elected, head for your beloved United Nations. Do you even vaguely have the mistaken impression that the UN somehow represents democratic values? Puh-leese.

  • Lacey

    First of all, EVERYONE including Natalie is entitled to there own opinion. I’m not a big fan of Bush. I’m not happy we are at war. If America is so “free” then why is it sOoOoOoOoOoOoOo anti-american that she unleashed her voice? That was her opinion. I understand that if you are discraminating against her, thats your way. But think about how stupid all of this is. And for who-ever says that it’s wrong not to believe in God, get over it. People get really annoyed when others try to tell them who to be. I dont believe in Christianity. I belive in God somewhat but not to the point of a conformed religion.
    ~*Farewell Lonesome Doves~*
    *Lacey*

  • Don

    Ineternational law isn’t dependant on Kofi Anon. We attacked a sovereign country that hadn’t attacted us. We violated the UN charter (which we signed) by attacking another UN member without UN approval. And we violated the UN resolutions regarding Iraq in order (supposedly) to enforce those same resolutions. Specifically, UN security council resolutions include the phrase “we remain seized of this matter”, which means that the security council reserves the right to interpret and enforce the resolutions. By acting on our own, we violated the resolution we claim to be enforcing.

    Elected? By whom? 173,000 registered voters in Florida had their names permanently removed from the voter rolls. Why? Because their names, or addresses, or social security numbers resembled thos e of convicted felons. And absentee votes that didn’t meet Florida law were counted. And, most importantly, the man who would bring demacracy in Iraq, fought and blocked a LEGAL vote recount. Why wouldn’t he allow the recount? Certainly not because he had won the vote.

    The al-quaida link with Iraq may or may not exist. What’s definite is that we supported al-quaida, and supported Hussein when he gassed his own people. Rumsfeld shook his hand and offered our undying support while his troops were gassing Iraqis. How come nobody asks Rumsfeld about this?

  • DavieG

    “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong,” Roosevelt said, “is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
    Theodore Roosevelt, 1918

    Theodore Roseevelt was a well known Republican.

    I do not agree with what Natalie said, and I am one that refuses to listen to or purchase her music based on how I choose to react to what she said. I do think she was using her American God given right to the freedom of speech! I however am using my freedom to choose. I agree with Al on many issues, but differ on our opinions of our commander and chief!

    I personally believe that the interview with the Dixie Chicks that was on televised was a rediculous hope at trying to make Natalie’s comment right. I know some of their music is number one, that doesn’t matter to me. In her comments she considers herself a role model for young ladies, but poses nude for the cover of Entertainment Weekly. Is this the kind of role model we want for our young ladies? My opinion: Absolutely Not! Have a great day!

  • DavieG

    Oops: I agree with Al, I agree with most of Don’s comments except for his comments about our commander and chief! Ain’t America Great!

  • Eric Olsen

    I believe that comments to this post should continue forever.

  • Moe L. Curly

    Really, why is everyone upset? Some stupid cunt opens her mouth and people wonder that something dumb comes out? Having a nice singing voice doesn’t mean you have a brain, after all. Look at that cunt Mariah Carey. Perfect example.

  • Don

    Hmmm… Where’d that Al’Quaida link go? And where are those pesky WMD’s?

    don

  • Don

    Still no Al Quaida link, still no WMD’s.
    Natalie didn’t go far enough. I’m embarassed that GW is am American.

  • don

    Abu Zubaydah, a Qaeda planner and recruiter until his capture in March 2002, told his questioners last year that the idea of working with Mr. Hussein’s government had been discussed among Qaeda leaders, but that Osama bin Laden had rejected such proposals, according to an official who has read the Central Intelligence Agency’s classified report on the interrogation.

    Separately, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Qaeda chief of operations until his capture on March 1 in Pakistan, has also told interrogators that the group did not work with Mr. Hussein, officials said.

    Both from the NY Times.

    But god forbid that anyone criticize the the lying fraud in chief. Natalie was not only within her rights, but was spot on!

  • Don

    n remarks to Polish television released on Friday, President Bush stated that the U.S. has found much more than these labs. “We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories”

    Did I mention that he is a liar? That’s LIAR! Go ahead, refute me.

    We should all be embarassed – over Natalie’s treatment, and the idiot in chief.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Don shows much more concern with getting something on Bush than he does with reality, the safety of the American public, or the suffering of the Iraqi people.

    There’s no real question that Hussein had some nasty WMDs (even France and the wussies at the UN said so), although they’re not the only reasons for knocking him out. He used the stuff on the Iranians and his own people.

    Admittedly, it does look bad that we haven’t found ANY of the stuff so far, but that doesn’t mean we won’t. If the cops called months in advance to tell a perp that we were coming in to look for bad things, it’s a fair bet that he’d have the crap pretty well hid. It might take awhile, but we’ll likely find some.

    Not that this will change the minds of the likes of Don.

  • Don

    It won’t change my mind because you’re using a ludicrous analogy. As Robin Cook put it: Newsweek: Isn’t it possible that Saddam Hussein ordered their destruction, as U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has suggested?
    Cook: No. I don’t think it’s even remotely possible. I just cannot follow the Rumsfeld logic; that watching CNN and seeing the American build-up Saddam said to his generals, “It’s obvious that the U.S. is going to invade; we had better destroy our biggest weapons, so that when I am toppled there might be some very difficult questions for Donald Rumsfeld to answer.”

    To suggest that he hid or destroyed them on the eve of an invasion – an invasion that could only end with him being ousted, is… well… what color is the sky in your world? (Please explain the rational for him doing either of those things. Really. Try. I do listen to logic. It’s awfully hard to find, though.

    The adminstration said that they knew what Hussein had and where it was. They said that chemical weapons had been deployed and Iraqi troops had the authority to use them. So why can’t they find them?

    And any argument about the welfare of the Iraqi people is simply an attempt to change the subject. If it was the welfare of a population that was at issue, there’s the millions dying of aids in Afica that we could have focused on. How about the Congo? How about Myanmar (Burma)? The war was sold on Iraq being an imminent threat to the US. This is obviously untrue.

    Is the world a safer place? Are there fewer incidents of terrorism? The answer to both these questions is a resounding no. We are not safer. We are hated by more people. A large part of the world (including western Europe) sees us as a bigger threat to world peace than Hussein was.

    Clinton was impeached for lying about a blow job. Hundreds of american soldiers and thousands of Iragi civilians have been killed because of Bush’s lies. But you’re willing to ignore those, right?

    How come you don’t address the lies that Bush has knowingly told? The nuclear threat – the white house knew that the documents were forgeries, yet he still cited the nuclear threat. The senior Al’Quaida operatives in custody say that cooperation with Hussein was discussed, but Bin Lauden ruled it out. Bush still claims that there is a link. And, as I pointed out before, Bush lied to the Polish press about having discovered WMD. Explain why these are not lies.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Is the world a safer place? Are there fewer incidents of terrorism? The answer to both these questions is a resounding no. We are not safer. We are hated by more people. A large part of the world (including western Europe) sees us as a bigger threat to world peace than Hussein was.

    Let me address just this part. Is the world a safer place, with fewer incidents of terrorism? Well, yes it is, at least for the US. There have been no further Arab fanatics making terrorist attacks in the US. There’s also one major less place for them to get support for such a project in the future.

    A large part of the world sees us as a bigger threat to peace that Hussein was? Good- if it’s true. They’ll know better than to screw with us.

    They hate us? Well if they do, then they did before we liberated Iraq. They can hate us all they want. It won’t hurt my feelings. Just so they know that we may well put a boot in their ass if they even make us think they’re a threat.

  • Don

    “Is the world a safer place, with fewer incidents of terrorism? Well, yes it is, at least for the US. There have been no further Arab fanatics making terrorist attacks in the US. There’s also one major less place for them to get support for such a project in the future.”

    First – there has only been one significant terrorist attack (from outside sources) on US soil. That fact that there hasn’t been a second is NOT an indication that we are safer. We are as “safe” as we were on Sep. 10th. (As I pointed out – logic is hard to find)

    Second – Terrorist have a lot more support in Irag now. It may not be the government, but they have a hell of a lot more support among the population of Iraq. And the way things are going, any moderate, pro-US government we install will last until we remove our troops. I certainly hope thats not how it plays out, but we certainly don’t have a track record of doing any better. BTW: Afghanistan has reclaimed it’s title as the largest producer of opium in the world.

  • Don

    The administration wasn’t matching its deeds to its words in the war on terrorism. They’re making us less secure, not more secure,” said Beers, who until now has remained largely silent about leaving his National Security Council job as special assistant to the president for combating terrorism. “As an insider, I saw the things that weren’t being done. And the longer I sat and watched, the more concerned I became, until I got up and walked out.”

    We’re safer, huh? Natalie was right. He’s an embarrassement.

  • Don

    Oh, yes – According to Al: They hate us? Well if they do, then they did before we liberated Iraq.

    I’m sure that the canadians, the belgians, the french, the germans, the british, the french, and those damn danes all hated us before the usurper started an unjustified war based entirely on lies.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Someone rang? Let me make this perfectly clear: I ultimately do not give a rat’s ass who hates us, I will support defending the country. I care about unnecessarily giving people a good reason to hate us, but the mere arbitrary emotional states of other people weigh very low in my concern compared to defense of the realm.

    You can call Bush names all you want, but we took out a particularly nasty mass murderer who has had and used WMDs and had strong ties to various Muslim terrorists. The world is a better place, and America is a little safer. Jackasses are starting to get a clue that we’re not a paper tiger. The smart ones will fear US. If they hate us as well, tough titty for them.

  • Don

    Terrorists don’t have countries to attack, so why should they fear our willingness to attack governments?

    And speaking of Jackasses: Bush LIED. And LIED. And LIED. There are no WMD’s. Any ties to terrorists are at least ten years old. Hussein used WMD’s on his own people with our support – Rumsfeld was shaking his hand and offering our undying support while he was doing it. Oh, yes… We provided him with the means to do it.

    Crowing about the removal of Saddam is admitting that he wasn’t a threat – as you won’t address that issue.

    Clinton was impeached over a blow job that hurt no one except his family. Bush ‘s lies resulted in the deaths of neary 200 American soldiers – and nearly one more every day (but you evidently dont give a “rat’s ass” about them, either). The war also killed a minimum of 5,000 Iraqi civilians. Too bad, eh? At least they got killed by american soldiers instead of Saddaams henchmen. I’m sure that they, and their families, are proud.

    Does the word “Vietnam” ring a bell? An american soldier is dying nearly every day. But at least you’re safer, right?

    By the way, Bush is also a deserter. Is stating facts the same as calling names?

  • Don

    OK, now that we’ve got that out of the way, point me to the evidence that shows we’re safer. I don’t mean assertions, as in terrorist links and WMD’s, but actually evidence that either of these actually existed before the war started and were threats to us. We can only be “safer” if a threat has been removed.

  • Laurie

    I love the MUSIC of the Dixie Chicks and really had no idea what the heck she said until I looked it up oline today because I was curious. Well, now I know but you know what? They are a band and I love their music! I leave it at that. And another thing– I don’t care about a goddamn thing other than— my husband has a nine incher, so what the heck are all these posts about again?

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Laurie: Congratulations on your husband’s large penis. Perhaps you’d like to share some pictures.

    As to the Dixie Chicks, I’m just puzzled over why so many people like their mediocre music. Do you own any Dolly Parton or Loretta Lynn records?

  • Eric Olsen

    Al, They aren’t in the same universe as the classic ladies of country, they are a pop-rock bluegrass band and are fine at what they do as far as it goes – it just doesn’t go all that far. They are the female Firefall.

  • http://gratefuldread.net/fando/ Natalie

    Heh. Firefall with violins and twangin’…

    They’re no Alison Krauss or Ralph Stanley, but I’ll buy Chicks albums whenever they release ‘em as my way of saying thanks.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Natalie- Buying crappy Dixie Chicks albums is an outstanding idea for you to continue your anti-US protest. This way, your money goes to record company retards to put up their noses, rather than anything actually working against our national defense.

    Indeed, I recommend cashing out your life savings, and investing it in a bunch of Dixie Chicks albums to give out to all your anti-American friends and neighbors.

  • http://gratefuldread.net/fando/ Natalie

    Thanks for the tip, mate!

  • Doctor Slack

    On the other hand, every Toby Keith album you purchase sends a full $20 to the Department of Homeland Security so it can keep on doing… whatever the hell it’s doing. Plus, it will reassure the Administration and its self-appointed lapdog chorus that you’re a Patriotic American and not a commie Saddam-loving idiotarian liberal Muslim-hugging pacifist flower-child feminist atheist pagan heathenistic milquetoast limp-wristed retarded surrender-monkey-loving French-fry-eating defeatist pro-terrorist anti-American swine, which you obviously must be if you dared use that First Amendment right thingamajig to oppose the war.

    Hell, I’ll bet Al buys a TK album once a day. Maybe even twice a day!

  • http://gratefuldread.net/fando/ Natalie

    Mmmm… French fries.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Mmmm… swine

    The “Angry American” song is pretty good. Not good enough for me to actually spend money on, but listenable. I find it politically palatable, and I particularly appreciate how badly it cheeses off the anti-American crowd. I wouldn’t actually spend money on any record just to say I was pissing people off, though.

  • Don

    Is there anyone who is not embarassed about the lies this administration has told?

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Don apparently thinks that if he just throws the word “lies” at the administration enough, it will make it so. However, I haven’t seen even ONE clear cut lie from the Bush White House.

    Sure, keep a close eye. Keep them honest. They’re politicians, and are expected to do some spinning and stretching, but they aren’t just making stuff up as the Clintons absolutely did.

    Just automatically and constantly hollering “liar, liar” will not, however, have any impact on the reputation of the Bush administration. It only makes you look like an idiot.

    You have NO plan to actually protect the country and do the job, but exist only to spite and frustrate the ones really having to do the job.

    Jebus Criminy, it’s enough to make me want to crank on some classic Merle Haggard “Fighting Side of Me.”

  • Doctor Slack

    “However, I haven’t seen even ONE clear cut lie from the Bush White House.”

    Ahem.

    Ahem.

    Ahem.

    Ahem.

    Ahem.

    I mean really, you have to be living in a cave at this point.

  • Don

    Thanks, Doc! I just assumed that when even O’Reilly admits it, pretty much everyone would.

    Here’s another one:

    Bush told the Polish media that we had found the WMD. (He just forgot to tell us.)

    And another: Bush said that he had not enaged in insider stock trading while on the board of Harken Energy, as he didn’t know that a restatement of earnings was pending. (He was only an auditor for the Board of Directors – why would he know?) Late last year, he released a memo from corporate coucil warning board members that if they sold stock while the restatement was pending, they could trigger an insider trading investigation. The memo should have been turned over to the SEC 12 years earlier.

    I have to go to work, but I could go on all day.

  • Don

    I’m back!

    How about Bush’s claim (during the campaign) that he had never been arrested? When documents showing that he’d been arrested for drunken driving were released, his excuse was that he was trying to protect his family. Evidently lying about your past is a republican family value.

  • Don

    As for throwing the word “lies” and making it stick, maybe I’ll try it. It sure worked for WMD’s. And if they had “absolute proof” of their existance and they “know where they are”, how come they can’t find any? Could it be because they lied?

    How about Rumsfelds claim they hadn’t relied any any new intelligence to make their case? They cited ongoing weapons programs. They said they knew where production facilities were. Rumsfeld said that they believed that the Iraqi’s had reconstituted nuclear weapons.

    Now there’s a lie in there somewhere. Current information has to be based on current intelligence. But they didn’t rely on any current intelligence. So where’d the current information come from?

  • Don

    Um… Al? Are you out of your cave?

    Here’s another. Seems young Lt. Bush failed to get a flight physical. Failed for some time, actually. This resulted in getting him grounded. (He claims that tax revenue is really “our money”. I’d like a refund of the million plus that taxpayers spent on training the young slacker.) Now, he has given several stories about why he didn’t get one. Initially, he said that he couldn’t get from Alabama to Texas to see his personal physician. This is a lie. A flight physical must be administered by a military doctor. When this was pointed out, he said that he didn’t have access to a qualified military physician. Now let’s see… He was a pilot. He was in an aviation unit. All pilots must get annual flight physicals. Now how would one get this physical (assuming you believe that an aviation unit didn’t have it’s own flight surgeon.) Hmm… they are pilots. They have jet airplanes. No one in the unit could fly if they couldn’t get physicals. Are you getting my drift? This also was a lie.

    Well, Al? Is it sticking? ‘Cause that WMD shit isn’t. He is a serial liar. He is a pathological liar. And an embarassment.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Seriously. President Bush has the actual serious responsibility of protecting us from evil bastards trying to kill us. Yet you are so pathologically devoted to cheap hatred that you have nothing better to focus on than some half-assed argument over some physical he supposedly didn’t take 30 years ago, or him being loathe to admit to that very marginal DUI.

    You’d overlook all Clinton’s real felonies, but condemn Bush over a little of nothing.

    Take some of this nonsense up with your shrink, but you can leave me out of it.

  • Don

    Clinton who? Aren’t we talking about Bush?

    What happened to: However, I haven’t seen even ONE clear cut lie from the Bush White House.

    You still haven’t addressed the lies. We’re not talking about Clinton. We’re talking about Bush. Remember? He hasn’t told any lies? How come you won’t adress that? How come you won’t tell me which threats he has protected us from?

    Oh, yes… Remember 9/11? The outgoing Clinton administration turned over an intelligence report that Bin Lauden was seeking to use passenger planes as weapons. That’s something that we weren’t protected from.

    Attacking Clinton doesn’t excuse Bush. Are you a fan of moral relativism? When you told your mom “he did it first!”, did it work for you?

  • Don

    oh, yeah. The DUI thing? He lied in ’99, not 30 years ago. And he lied about his military career in ’99, too. I was pointing out the lies, not the acts. You know, the lies that he hasn’t told? You know, the lies that you won’t address? The fact that you tried to dismiss that actions rather than address the lies suggests that you’re having a problem refuting them. (Suposedly didn’t take? It’s a matter of public record, Al. Military documents and everything.) You’ll have to do a lot better than that.

    As for Clinton? The issue here is Bush. Focus! Bush.

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org Joe

    Don –
    In case you hadn’t noticed, people have been dogging Bush for 2+ years with little effect. Until you’re willing to provide some useful alternatives or information, spewing about Bush is, at best, merely ad hominem attack(not broadly considered the highest form of discourse), at worst, reminiscent of a nutjob muttering to himself in the street.

  • http://gratefuldread.net/fando/ Natalie

    Perhaps he keeps going on ad nauseum because he has proven that Shrub lies and some people would rather insult him than admit the truth: Yes, Dubya has lied. Democrats (I am not one, but know plenty of them) certainly admit that Slick Willie lied. Just admit it, and perhaps Don will have no more need to, as you put it, spew.

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org Joe

    I’m sorry, I wasn’t trying to be insulting. I’m trying to invoke Clinton without invoking Clinton, ok? It’s like the people that demonized Clinton, at a certain point, passed the threshold of having a healthy dislike into a rabid hatred. You tend to lose credibility once you reach that point, which, it seems to me, is where Don is at. I was merely stating my opinion, not fact. I’ve noticed some folks have difficulty discerning between the two.

  • Don

    I appreciate that. I know that I sometimes cross the line as I am passionate about politics and government.

    But what do you mean “alternatives or information”? An alternative is anybody but Bush. McCain would have been a good choice and we wouldn’t have had the Florida debacle. I believe that he would’ve won outright.

    Information? Sorry, thought that’s what I was providing. Once I figure out how to put hyperlinks in here, I’d be happy to direct you to evidence on which I’ve based my assertions. But since no one has actually challenged any of them (not one of the identified lies in my “ad nauseum” posts), I figure that they pretty much know that the assertions have been proven.

    As for “Ad hominim” attacks, I’ve certainly tried to stick with assertions that are factually based – the opposite of an “ad hominim” argument. Al’s most recent post was completely ad hominim. He dismissed my assertions and attacked me instead. I’ll admit (as above) I’ve made some comments that were less than gracious, but the focus of my posts has been Bush’s lies, not personal attacks on other posters. I contend that I believe everything that I’ve said about Bush is true and there is evidence to support (or prove) my assertions. Again, not “ad hominum”.

    Thanks Natalie! You are right. Clinton lied. He also did other incredibly stupid things.

    However, I have trouble understanding how lying about a blow job is a horrible crime, while lying us into a war is “a little of nothing”.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Natalie, back up in #131 you suggest admitting that Bush has lied. Well, sometime in life, yes. We’re all liars. I’ve lied, I’d bet you’ve lied- for all have sinned and fell short of the glory of God.

    However, that’s not really the point. There’s a HUGE difference between Bush not being forthcoming about that stupid DUI versus Clinton lying under oath in front of a federal grand jury, much less the totally baseless charges that Bush was “lying us into a war.”

    As politicians go, Bush appears to be an exceptionally honest and sincere guy. This is very much unlike Bill Clinton, to whom the name “pathological liar” might reasonably fit- as it would with Richard Nixon, certainly.

    Again, I did not vote for Bush, and don’t intend to next year. Nonetheless, I’ll give him points for trying to stay pretty close to the straight and narrow. He’s probably the most honest president of my lifetime.

    Maybe you can give me some insight into what is wrong with these other people who have such ridiculous pathological hatred of the president. Why can’t they say that Dubya is a good and well-intentioned person sincerely trying to protect the country- even if they think he’s wrongheaded in how he’s approaching the problem?

  • http://gratefuldread.net/fando/ Natalie

    I don’t understand that either. Clinton’s blowjob lie was disgusting. Shrub’s lie/mistake/crack-fueled delusion (it’s a joke, GOPers!) is infinitely worse.

  • Don

    Once again, Al, you refuse to adress the issue. I used the DUI and Flight physical as examples of a long history of lies. You have picked one that you can dismiss as unimportant and pretend that that’s the end of the discussion.

    You are absolutely right about lies and moral behavior. We’ve all done things of which we are less than proud. I’m not aware of any politician who hasn’t proven to have skeletons in his/her closet. The point remains, though, that Bush is not trustworthy. He is demonstrably fast and loose with the truth and refuses to accept any responsibility for his actions.

  • Don

    Once again, Al, you refuse to adress the issue. I used the DUI and Flight physical as examples of a long history of lies. You have picked one that you can dismiss as unimportant and pretend that that’s the end of the discussion.

    You are absolutely right about lies and moral behavior. We’ve all done things of which we are less than proud. I’m not aware of any politician who hasn’t proven to have skeletons in his/her closet. The point remains, though, that Bush is not trustworthy. He is demonstrably fast and loose with the truth and refuses to accept any responsibility for his actions.

  • Don

    Speaking of pathological, why do you keep bringing up Clinton? He’s not the issue, and pretending that him being bad makes Bush good is a less than a convincing argument.

  • Don

    “totally baseless charge that Bush lied us into a war”?

    This would have been the appropriate text for the state of the union:
    “Saddam Hussein has no nuclear-weapons program. He has destroyed most of his weapons of mass destruction. He has no ties with al-Qaida, nor, insofar as we can determine, with any other major terrorist group, and even the CIA can’t pin anything on him for at least a decade. He’s a bad guy, to be sure, but one of many in the world, and we’ve used his badness when we thought it convenient. Hell, Don Rumsfeld even paid him a visit as Ronald Reagan’s private emissary and didn’t find time to mention it. ”

    Now, if he didn’t lie, how come not one, and I do mean NOT ONE, of his prewar assertions is true? Is he just a mouthpiece for someone else?

  • don

    Sorry, the text came from Eric Alterman at Altercation on MSNBC.com
    00000000000000000000000000000000000

    And that came from my cat.

  • Don

    read
    this

  • Don

    Another lie: Bush just tried to explain the deficit projections by saying that he was spending enough to win the war. Where’s the lie? The projections do not include the cost of the war. Lie after lie after lie from the “trustworthy” usurper.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    You good Democrat commies are really fixated on trying to tag that word “liar” on Dubya, when it really doesn’t fit him well. Do you think that somehow this will excuse the real felony lies of the previous POTUS?

    This deficit thing makes a good example of where you lose out. That’s not particularly LYING, but just spinning away as politicians do. When you start on that he’s “lying” about the deficit, you lose me.

    Whereas if you came at it as simply saying that he’s running through money like it was water, you’d have a perfectly legitimate point. Jebus H Criminy, but Dubya and these Republicans are so anxious to prove their “compassion” that they’re spending money faster than Clinton and the Democrats in congress ever did.

    You get so anxious to personally villify Bush with your politics of personal destruction that you lose out on being able to make perfectly legitimate political criticism.

  • Don

    You still have not challenged any of the lies I’ve pointed out, and keep trying to pretend that Clinton being bad automatically makes Bush good. It was a lie and he knew it was a lie. Call it “spin” if you want, but it’s still a lie.

    If “liar” doesn’t fit him well, how come you don’t dispute his long history of lying?

    Clinton is irrelevant. He’s no longer in office and barred from running again. So stick with the present.

  • Don

    ”[Iraq] could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year.” – George Bush, 10/8/02
    “This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year.”- George Bush, 9/28/02
    “Today Saddam Hussein has the scientists and infrastructure for a nuclear weapons program and has illicitly sought to purchase the equipment needed to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should his regime acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year.” – George Bush, National Radio Address, 9/14/02
    “Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year.” – George Bush, speech to U.N., 9/12/02
    “The intelligence community also had high confidence in the judgment that, and I quote, ‘Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material,’ end quote.” – Vice President Dick Cheney, 7/23/03

    Umm… comments, anyone? (I got dibs on “Where did they get the drugs?”)

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org Joe

    Have you considered getting a blog?

  • CH

    I don’t have time to read all these comments, but wow are there alot of them. Many opposing and some for Miss Dixie. Many people say “why are people so pissed about someone dissing Mr. W Bush? and everyone got away with dissing Mr. Clinton?’ Because Mr. Clinton got a little too carried away in office, he couldn’t wait to get out of his chair to get a little wang tang at home.. so he got some in office.. he made the white house look like a porn house. That’s why. Mr. Bush is trying to save and protect this Country.. I’m proud to have voted for him and not had our country gone down hill with kerry. The reason people were so uproared about this comment is because in her intentions to be opposed to war she bashed one person who leads this country. One person that holds what I consider to have the most responsibilities and stress.. I think he’s done what was right. I have many friends that are still in Iraq and I talk to them sometimes. I’ve had friends who died in this war. So don’t try to come up with a comment saying that I don’t know whats going on.