<p>“I must say that she did not resort to name-calling as readily as you seem to.”</p>
<p>That’s because he quickly runs out of sensible responses to the question posed.</p>
<p>Hanna, could that be because you REALLY do not get to listen to Maines … too often, and don’t know very much about the Dixie Chicks?</p>
<p>Opie, I do not recall you ever posing a question worth answering.</p>
<p>“don’t know very much about the Dixie Chicks?”</p>
<p>Well, I have all their albums, and I have been a fan of their music, especially the albums Fly and Home, since long before this controversy occurred, if that’s what you mean. I don’t ordinarily boycott musicians, or authors, or actors unless I have reason to believe that my ticket money will be used to finance some kind of damaging activity. (Tom Cruise->Scientologists, for example.)</p>
<p>As it happens, even if the Dixie Chicks were financing the anti-war movement via album sales, I agree with them 100% that the president is an embarrassment and the Iraq war a mistake. The mine canaries were right about this one. “Pluzzhe!”</p>
<p>To be fair, the best song they ever had was a schmaltzy ersatz cover of a song that itself was on the edge of mediocrity way back when it was “cool.” Needless to say, it was not a country or bluegrass song, but fence straddling MOR.</p>
<p>Having stepped in it in London, it took about 10 minutes for the “little (sic) one with the big mouth’s” actual cause to express itself (no doubt after a few corporate handlers got involved). Her/their corporate cause: The Dixie Chicks Inc, and their martyrdom in the time-honored rush for self-promotion and cold cash.</p>
<p>Seen here:
<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ewdixiechicks.jpg[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ewdixiechicks.jpg</a></p>
![http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ewdixiechicks.jpg[/url]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ewdixiechicks.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
<p>Nice to see everyone taking a stand for corporate freedom.</p>
<p>Hanna, I was not talking about knowing their records, but knowing their record on public statements, especially the declarations of Natalie Maines. </p>
<p>Yesterday was December 7th, and I am wondering what the proud veterans who marched outside in the cold might be thinking about the recent stance of the lady who proudly wears a FUTK tee-shirt on … patriotism, and her flip-flop on respecting the Office of the President. </p>
<p>One can enjoy the Dixie Chicks as entertainers, but nonetheless recognize the cynical grandstanding and stupidity of one of them, when she utters words such as these:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Opie, I do not recall you ever posing a question worth answering”</p>
<p>I am truly hurt and damaged by your remarks xiggi…
I will go crawl off with my tail between my legs as YOU certainly put me in my place with that snappy retort. Ow. my feelings. I don’t know if I can go on…</p>
<p>“I am wondering what the proud veterans who marched outside in the cold might be thinking about the recent stance of the lady who proudly wears a FUTK tee-shirt on … patriotism”</p>
<p>I hope, and I believe, that they have much better things to think about. I’m surprised that you don’t. If she’s just an idiot whose opinions don’t matter, why were you even paying attention to her statements, much less harping about them on the internet years after the fact?</p>
<p>"Yesterday was December 7th, and I am wondering what the proud veterans who marched outside in the cold might be thinking about the recent stance of the lady who proudly wears a FUTK tee-shirt on … patriotism, and her flip-flop on respecting the Office of the President. "</p>
<p>They’d be thinking thank god we live in a country where someone can have a different opinion and has the right to express it. It’s called freedom. </p>
<p>Besides xiggi there’s patriotism and there’s BLIND patriotism. I practice the former and I suspect you probably do the latter. </p>
<p>Is it patriotic to back a president who clearly is in over his head and has been from day one? Following the title rather than the man? Can one be patriotic and support what’s best for the country and STILL rally against the president? Can a patriot call for peace? Can a patriot call for the end of an occupation? Can a patriot call for accountibility for administrative actions?
Or can a patriot ONLY wage war? Is it possible for a patriot to WAGE PEACE? </p>
<p>And since “Opie, I do not recall you ever posing a question worth answering”</p>
<p>I won’t expect you to attempt an answer as you feel I am beneath your wisedom. cheers.</p>
<p>
Actually, the DCs are the ones who are still harping about “it”–“the incident” as they call it–and I think it’s the basis for their new album, parodied in the skit xiggi linked. But, they do seem to be doing great these days, so more power to them. This, from a German show a few months ago.
<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITmPC3fPmnw&mode=related&search=[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITmPC3fPmnw&mode=related&search=</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds like you need the Chicks management team and pr firm: theyll flip that ole woobegotten nobody loves me feeling into a whole new audience of serious blue state complainers. </p>
<p>Youll sleep better at night and go out n face the world in the morning with a whole new dour-n-pouty image (caution: may involve posing nude–in an artsy way–for major industry publication and upscale graffiti artists).
Cha ching!</p>
<p>“Actually, the DCs are the ones who are still harping about “it”–“the incident” as they call it”</p>
<p>Well, sure. It was a major incident in their lives. I’m assuming it wasn’t an equally major turning point in, say, xiggi’s career. I’m also assuming that unlike xiggi, they don’t think that they THEMSELVES are stupid grandstanders and dumber than canaries in a coal mine. If you think that about someone, it’s very puzzling to pay a great deal of attention to what they have to say…not to mention disseminating their words all over the internet.</p>
<p>“The incident” happened to them…passive voice. She didn’t do anything, it just happened?</p>
<p>I also don’t get the insinuation that it’s “puzzling” for xiggi to post a skit from about 8 weeks ago that parodies a song released this summer as somehow “harping about them on the internet years after the fact.” The DCs chose to make “the incident” the issue again in 2006, so what’s the problem?</p>
<p>Read again. There is no passive voice in my post, although there is in yours. If you’re going to read insinuations into people’s grammar, you really ought to get it right.</p>
<p>Posting the skit isn’t harping. Harping is the rest of the thread…especially the name-calling, the speculation about what this means to veterans who have much better things to think about, and the citation to additional quotes to prove to a bunch of strangers (us) that another bunch of strangers (Dixie Chicks) consists of stupid grandstanders. That’s pretty inconsistent with the idea that they’re just worthless fools and that their ideas don’t matter. Apparently they matter to xiggi.</p>
<p>The reference to passive voice was to that use by the DCs, in referring to the actions of one of their own as “the incident.” The reference had nothing to do with you.</p>
<p>I believe the harping began with another poster, likening those folks who trashed their own CDs in long-ago demonstrations to fascists. Who’s hung up on the past?</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but I’m not responsible for what other posters say. I also don’t view “He did it first!” as a convincing excuse in a conversation among adults.</p>
<p>The video was not very well done. If you’re going to parody someone, at least do it well. … And I agree with Opiefrommayberry. She had a right to say what she said–it’s called “freedom of speech.” And people had a right to react to her words in whatever rational or irrational way they chose.</p>
<p>
Well, as the uber-adult here, Hanna, what’s your excuse for harping on and on about this pointless ancient history?</p>
<p>whatsa, I made the decision to exit this ‘discussion’ when it was obvious that the point I was attempting to make was being ignored, intentionally or otherwise. However, I feel the need to reply once more since you have once again misconstrued my comment about book burnings and indicated that I was comparing these oh-so-enlightened individuals who burned their Dixie Chicks cds to “fascists” or “brownshirts”. I made no such reference. The bookburnings to which I was referring were those, which also have taken place in the U.S. If you’ll notice, I said “reminiscent”. I wasn’t around to witness the Nazi bookburnings. One doesn’t need to look to the “fascists” for such behavior.</p>
<p>Always:
Here, again, is the unanswered question I first posed to you way back in post number 9:
As I also said much earlier, the phrase “book burning” has a very specific historical inference. Like “lynching.” Shouldn’t be used carelessly. Assuming you didn’t just pull it out of thin air, which non-fascist American “book burnings” were you referring to?</p>