“Behold I come like John Holmes in the night. Blessed be he who stays “up” all night with his clothes off so that he may not go frustrated and be shamefully left to his own hand”
When did the Dixie Chicks ever say that their fans don’t have a right to free speech. When did they say that celebrities are the only ones with that right?
So now you have swooped to insulting them instead of debating ideas. If you don’t like their ideas, attack the idea, there is no reason to insult the person.
Daryl
They’ve essentially said that when before they’re comment in London they attacked fellow country musician Toby Keith. They criticized his song “The Angry American”. Natalie said that Toby made country music look ignorant, and that he needed to learn some TACT.
I criticize his song too. Its hateful. I think she was right. Telling him that he could use more tact isn’t insulting him. A lot of their fans agreed with them when they said that to him. That doesn’t answer the issue I’m putting up. They have never said that celebrities are the only ones with freedom of speech. They have never said that their fans have no freedom of speech. Telling him that he could use more tact isn’t insulting him. A lot of their fans agreed with them when they said that to him.
have to agree with daryl. And I’m not a fan of the dixies if you think that is case. It’s just because I agree with them…
“To declare that you are not allowed to critisize the president or that you should support him right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but also moral betrayal to the American people.”
I think that this country was pending a war and for those that were in agreeance w/Bush just got more upset. If she had said this in peaceful times, it probably would have been shrugged off. Now that things are winding down we’re analyzing all the things that went on in the media, we’re picking everything anybody has said apart. I may be thick skulled here, but people who have access to the media do need to think before they speak. They must know the impact they have otherwise they wouldn’t constantly use the media in their favor when they’re trying to sell more albums, or tickets for a movie. I’ve had a critical comment for every President that I’ve seen in my life and I’ve had heated arguments concerning those comments. I’m just tired of the celebrities “using” their status as a catalyst for their opinions. It’s hard enough for me to stay up to date on what Rumsfeld and Powell are saying, I don’t have room for what a hollywood type thinks.
Darumburgau….
Let me ask you this, don’t you think Roosevelt’s quote about critisizing the president could be applied to Clinton and his rediculous administration?
Why is it only NOW that we hear this sort of thing from the left? Amazing.
As for the CHixie Dicks (or is that dixie DORKS), do you have an issue with others speaking out against them?
Instead of “Boycotts not allowed” and Whiners” they should have written “Shutup and buy our album”. That’s basically the Dixie Chicks have been saying.
Right to speak: Do I?
Do I go into the locker room of Florida State and tell them University of Georgia is number 1?
Do I go to a Trekkie convention and tell them Star Trek was the lamest show I’ve ever seen?
Do I go to a WWF match and yank the microphone and yell “it’s all fake’?
I have every right to say these things, but I don’t…sometimes an opinion is better left unsaid..not everybody CARES what you think. The Dixies’ could have kept their feelings of shame to themselves and off of a stage..
“When did the Dixie Chicks ever say that their fans don’t have a right to free speech. When did they say that celebrities are the only ones with that right?”
If you can’t determine the constant wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Hollywood Left (including the Dixie Chicks) about how it’s unamerican and unpatriotic for the rest of us to oppose their opinions, how the “chilling winds” are blowing and how their free speech rights are being “trampled” by those who dare criticize them isn’t an answer to your question, then you haven’t been paying attention.
Question:
There is something I don’t get: why none of you ever attacked Bill O’Reilly? I mean, he is talking in the media, and expressing his ideas EVERY DAY. He defends war whenever possible, he obviously supports Bush. And he is nothing else than a celebrity, expressing his mind about war. Isn’t it what this website is all about?
So, I suggest to you to boycott the O’Reilly factor, and Fox News, as a general base.
I have to say that I don’t believe there is a more biased news in the industrialized countries…
Well, I agree with you commonfolk, and it is a nice comparison. Al Jazeera is probably VERY slanted. It just happens that in the US, one of the big news channels is Fox News. And as your comparison suggests, Fox News can only be compared with Al Jazeera. And it is pretty frightening for a country that wants to call itself “democratic” to have no better news than that- CNN or MSNBC are not as bad as Fox News, but still very biased.
By the way, I refuse to call most of the presenters from Fox News “journalists”. I don’t expect them to speak against war, just to be a lot more neutral in the way they present the news.
O’Reilly annonces constantly “facts” that are nothing but his own point of view. Go, be consequent, criticize him, tell people to boycott him. Only then will I understand your position on celebrities expressing their mind as if they were the pure truth.
For me, the Dixies, Tim Robbins or Michael Moore only give a little chance to balance the totally pro-war media that doesn’t leave much place for fair analysis of what happens in the US or the world.
Nickele- you asked a question so I answered it. You said “I have to say that I don’t believe there is a more biased news in the industrialized countries…”
This is all I was responding to. I have never listened to O’REilly, don’t watch FOX, especially with Geraldo, and can make up my own mind about what news channel is full of it and that which is not. The trend on this site has been to try to quiet the citizens of the US up, if they don’t agree with the celebrity stance. I feel that alot of people out there are misinterpreting the American citizens voicing their opinions. The people speak and then we get very derogatory comments thrown back at us by people like Robbins, etc. Why is this? They are calling us McCarthists, when in all actuality that is what they are doing. I’m not going to boycott anyone that you suggest because we obviously do not agree on this. Thanks for listening-
nikele writes: There is something I don’t get: why none of you ever attacked Bill O’Reilly? I mean, he is talking in the media, and expressing his ideas EVERY DAY. He defends war whenever possible, he obviously supports Bush….O’Reilly annonces constantly “facts” that are nothing but his own point of view.
Bill O’Reilly is an analyst. He ANALYZES current events, be it news, entertainment, or politics, and he does it through his own perspective. Just like the New York Times editorial views the world through their own (leftwing) prism. Or the L.A. Times, the L.A. Weekly. I’ve found there is really no media outlet that is truly unbiased, and frankly, I don’t care. Just reporting the facts is like serving popcorn with no butter. It’s tasteless and boring.
Back to Bill…to say that he “obviously supports Bush” is not altogether true, since I’ve heard him criticize Bush on numerous occassions, as per illegal immigration and the out-of-control situation on the borders, which, I have to agree, Bush has not addressed to my satisfaction.
Hey that crack about my other brother daryl was funny, never heard it. I want you to give me proof that the dixie chicks have said that their fans don’t have the freedom of speech. Telling me they whine doesn’t do the trick. Give me written proof where they have said that freedom of speech is only allowed for celebrities. You’re putting words into their mouths. Tim Robbins said that his freedom of speech is being trampled on. The dixie chicks never did.
I do think the cartoon is a little unfair, considering that at a recent concert Natalie Maines explicitly told the audience, “If you want to boo us, that’s okay.” There’s a difference between “You don’t have the right to criticize us” (i.e. the William Morris Agency) and “You have to right to criticize us, but we have the right to dish it right back out,” which is the impression I’ve gotten from the Chicks.
And telling Toby Keith that he needs to learn some tact — which is perfectly true — is NOT the same as saying he doesn’t have the “right” to speak.
Admittedly, I’ve been a fan of theirs since the first time I heard “There’s Your Trouble.” But I don’t think the criticism in the cartoon — or lumping them in with Susan Sarandon, the William Morris Agency, et al. — is warranted.
I think all the critism of the dixie chicks is warranted! I used to enjoy there music. In a time of war to go to another country and bad mouth the president is NOT RIGHT, plain and simple! I dont care for Clinton but I would feel the same respect be givin to him as well. The fake “Im sorrys” with the smug look on her face…..it just doesnt cut it with me. I couldnt enjoy another song by them even if I tryed.
So when is an ok time to speak out against a war you don’t agree with? When it’s over and the damage has been done? There’s no better time than when it’s about to start or while it’s happening. If a citizen really believes that his/her government is doing something they disagree with, then they have an obligation- not just the right- to speak out against that government and hope that they will be heard and the actions they disagree with will be stopped. What’s the point of voicing one’s disapproval AFTER the war is over? NO citizen EVER has to agree with his or her government just because they are at war. To say that one should shut up and keep their opinions to themselves until a ‘better’ time or place is pure garbage. What’s the point of having a democracy if citizens aren’t allowed to voice their approval OR disapproval of their government- any time they darn well choose to? Or what’s the point if they ARE allowed to, but receive death threats because of it? What kind of democracy is that?
I’m reading a lot of reference to Hitler here (and let’s be clear that I AM NOT saying that GWB is Hitler). I think it’s ironic that people are saying that it was terrible that no one spoke out against what Hitler was doing, (and I agree that someone SHOULD have spoken out about Saddam Hussein) but for a citizen to speak out against their own president, who is planning to attack a nation- resulting in the deaths of many innocent civilians- is discpicable? What’s the difference? If Natalie Maines, or anyone else, thinks that what GWB is doing is WRONG, then wouldn’t they be RIGHT to speak out- as would the Germans had they spoken out against Hitler? (again- not a GWB is Hitler analogy exactly) I just think that it’s responsible for someone to say ‘hey, I think my government is doing something wrong and it doesn’t represent MY views.’ That’s what a good citizen SHOULD say. Just like other citizens have the right to rally together and say ‘I think my government is doing exactly what they should be doing, and I totally support them.’ And they should if that’s how they feel. They SHOULD be out there making their opinions known. Everyone should be participating in this democracy.
Somehow it’s not surprising that the Chicks were able to pull off such a triumphant opener to their US tour in the face of so much misplaced opposition from the ever vociferous “right”. Apparently the temptation of a lucrative chance to exchange DC tickets for an opportunity to attend a corresponding Marshall Tucker concert wasn’t enough to keep the *real* country music fans away. Kudos to Emily, Martie and Natilie for their courage and for continuing to do what they’ve always done; produce great music for everyone. They rock!
The question is not liberal or conservative, pro-Bush or anti-Bush. People have the right to protest by burning records and not buying more. Radio stations have the right to break contract on their illegal payola agreements and not play any record they don’t want to. The Dixie Chicks apparently don’t believe this or they wouldn’t be crying “censorship”. Besides, this form of protest makes more sense than blocking ambulances in the name of “peace”.
People can say just about anything they want but with free speech comes a chance that, YES others wont argee and will stop going to movies or concerts. Gesssh it not like these actors arent able to still express there opinions because they still are with the media drooling at there feet. The government isnt allowed to stop most speech, I however can turn these people off and boycott them all Id like because thats my free speech like it or not. “Whats wrong with Natile Maines disagreeing with the president?” ok well whats wrong with me boycotting her??
Before the Dick Suck Chicks go criticizing Toby Keith about his “Angry American” song, saying that he needs to learn TACT, because he is offending people, What about their song ,”Goodbye Earl”.
Toby Keith was acting out in anger, because he loves America. He wasn’t saying that we,re going out to bully people, he said that we weren’t just going to let people disrupt peace without a fight.
The Dixie Chicks worry about people taking offense to Toby Keith’s song. Their song, “Goodbye Earl” talks about killing a man because he beats his wife. I’m not married, and I don’t abuse anybody, but I was still offended by their song, because it promotes just as much violence, as rappers promote busting a cap in your ass.
It is wrong, it portrays men as slobs, and wife beaters.
So all in all, before the Dixie Chicks start telling people to polish up their music, and stop making a bad impression, and stop offending people, maybe they should fix theirs first.
I was in Afghanistan 6 months ago, and Toby Keith’s song was popular with quite a few troops over there. Even people who prefer other types of music besides country, enjoyed it.
The Dixie Chicks are one of the most annoying groups, due to the fact of Natalie Maines shrill voice. It is like scrapinging fingers over a chalk board.
Then the two twins get a different lead singer, I probably start listening to them again, but not until Natalie Maines gets the boot.
Before the Dick Suck Chicks go criticizing Toby Keith about his “Angry American” song, saying that he needs to learn TACT, because he is offending people, What about their song ,”Goodbye Earl”.
Toby Keith was acting out in anger, because he loves America. He wasn’t saying that we,re going out to bully people, he said that we weren’t just going to let people disrupt peace without a fight.
The Dixie Chicks worry about people taking offense to Toby Keith’s song. Their song, “Goodbye Earl” talks about killing a man because he beats his wife. I’m not married, and I don’t abuse anybody, but I was still offended by their song, because it promotes just as much violence, as rappers promote busting a cap in your ass.
It is wrong, it portrays men as slobs, and wife beaters.
So all in all, before the Dixie Chicks start telling people to polish up their music, and stop making a bad impression, and stop offending people, maybe they should fix theirs first.
I was in Afghanistan 6 months ago, and Toby Keith’s song was popular with quite a few troops over there. Even people who prefer other types of music besides country, enjoyed it.
The Dixie Chicks are one of the most annoying groups, due to the fact of Natalie Maines shrill voice. It is like scraping fingers over a chalk board.
Then the two twins get a different lead singer, I probably start listening to them again, but not until Natalie Maines gets the boot.
Before the Dick Suck Chicks go criticizing Toby Keith about his “Angry American” song, saying that he needs to learn TACT, because he is offending people, What about their song ,”Goodbye Earl”.
Toby Keith was acting out in anger, because he loves America. He wasn’t saying that we,re going out to bully people, he said that we weren’t just going to let people disrupt peace without a fight.
The Dixie Chicks worry about people taking offense to Toby Keith’s song. Their song, “Goodbye Earl” talks about killing a man because he beats his wife. I’m not married, and I don’t abuse anybody, but I was still offended by their song, because it promotes just as much violence, as rappers promote busting a cap in your ass.
It is wrong, it portrays men as slobs, and wife beaters.
So all in all, before the Dixie Chicks start telling people to polish up their music, and stop making a bad impression, and stop offending people, maybe they should fix theirs first.
I was in Afghanistan 6 months ago, and Toby Keith’s song was popular with quite a few troops over there. Even people who prefer other types of music besides country, enjoyed it.
The Dixie Chicks are one of the most annoying groups, due to the fact of Natalie Maines shrill voice. It is like scraping fingers over a chalk board.
Then the two twins get a different lead singer, I probably start listening to them again, but not until Natalie Maines gets the boot.
Maddog & Me- The whole point here is Natalie Maines spoke against her country while in a foreign nation. That is defined as treason (websters if you want to look it up). It’s fine if their sold out show went ok- they wouldn’t refund the tickets- do you think maybe that is saying alot about their clients having a right to free speech? Their CD sales, before her comment, were sitting at something like 173,000; this dwindled to something like 23,000. (sorry couldn’t find the article that said this). I do believe that after this tour they will discover what the public truly feels. It’s pretty easy to say that they came out of this fine. That’s because the tickets were sold before. Now I hear that their album has increased in sales. I’d like to see if that increase is due to people, in other countries, started buying their CD’s because they were criticizing America. I just wished she would’ve said something like “I apologize to all of the people that I upset” and really mean it. I was a big fan of the Dixie’s. We do not advocate violence on this site. That is what they need to understand- that all Americans have the right to say as they feel, but say it in the USA instead of other countries.
I don’t understand what the difference is where the comment was made. The truth is that the media would have broadcast the comment in other countries even if it had been said in the USA. People in Canada, Britain, etc. would likely have heard it anyway- or read about it on the Internet. So what’s the difference where it was said? I don’t understand anyway- free speech is free speech. Either we can say whatever we want or not. There shouldn’t be limitations on that. To say that certain comments should only be made in certain places is like saying that certain things should only be said at certain times, or by certain people, or that only certain things can be said at all. How free is our speech if we’re limited in to certain locations? And so what if that is the definition of treason in the dictionary? It’s just a word- I know what’s right and wrong without having to look it up in Websters. Finally, I personally wish Maines had made no attempt to apologize at all. She should have stuck to her original opinion- if that’s the way she feels, she shouldn’t have let herself be bullied into changing it. She’s under no obligation to support the president or anyone else. FREEDOM- remember? That’s what it’s all about.
JMO. Take it or leave it.
By the way, I’m curious to hear what you think about the second half of my previous comment… about appeasement…
Me- first of all, what is JMO? You say “Take it or leave it.” I didn’t see anything about appeasement in the second half of your previous comment.
The dixie chicks weren’t bullied into the tv special or having their heads put on someone elses body. They were doing it for publicity. Right after Natalie said what she did in London, I went to their site. Emily’s husband had posted a note that this is not what the sisters felt. That was ok with me. I do disagree with her voicing her opinion in a foreign country. She apparently didn’t have the guts to do it in the US. As for the dictionary comment of mine, I’ve been questioned when I define treason so feel that it is always appropriate to say where I got the definition. That way, an argument is not started. Most of us on this site know exactly what is right and what is wrong. Everyone has different morales, values, etc. Freedom of speech is extended to every American- to that I will agree. Maybe you can tell all of us why William Morris Agency, Dotster, and Names… started to shut this site down. Does that sound like freedom of speech to you? It’s a real shame about the dixie’s and a bunch of actors and actresses- used to enjoy them. Now, I can’t stomach them. They’ve had free rein to boycott Dr. Laura and other things they don’t agree with; why can’t we? I think Americans have had it with them destroying our value system, trying to brainwash our kids with the junk on TV, and the morality issue is toast in Hollywood. It’s time we all started speaking up.
‘They’ve had free rein to boycott Dr. Laura and other things they don’t agree with; why can’t we? I think Americans have had it with them destroying our value system, trying to brainwash our kids with the junk on TV, and the morality issue is toast in Hollywood. It’s time we all started speaking up.’
=====================================
Again. I would ask you just what “morality” means to you. I see the reference to “Dr. Laura” who exposed herself as a bigot of the first order. I see you claiming that Hollywood and the entertainment industry is ‘trying to brainwash our kids with the junk on TV’.
This feels somehow insidiously anti human rights in general.
I think the assignment of blame re the “morality” issue is decidedly the domain of Right Wing Bible Belt Americans who, by in large, condemn and judge anything that is not “white”, “Protestant” and “heterosexual” as immoral.
From my perspective these false “values” are what truly threatens our great and diverse nation.
I say once more: ‘MORALITY’ is not simply about SEX!!! And your definition of ‘morality’ may well be relegated to the notion of what someone does in bed. To many, I assure you, ‘morality’ has much more to do with conscience than sexual practices.
When I wrote this, I was talking about appeasement:
I’m reading a lot of reference to Hitler here (and let’s be clear that I AM NOT saying that GWB is Hitler). I think it’s ironic that people are saying that it was terrible that no one spoke out against what Hitler was doing, (and I agree that someone SHOULD have spoken out about Saddam Hussein) but for a citizen to speak out against their own president, who is planning to attack a nation- resulting in the deaths of many innocent civilians- is descpicable? What’s the difference? If Natalie Maines, or anyone else, thinks that what GWB is doing is WRONG, then wouldn’t they be RIGHT to speak out- as would the Germans had they spoken out against Hitler? (again- not a GWB is Hitler analogy exactly) I just think that it’s responsible for someone to say ‘hey, I think my government is doing something wrong and it doesn’t represent MY views.’ That’s what a good citizen SHOULD say. Just like other citizens have the right to rally together and say ‘I think my government is doing exactly what they should be doing, and I totally support them.’ And they should if that’s how they feel. They SHOULD be out there making their opinions known. Everyone should be participating in this democracy.
(JMO means ‘just my opinion’- sorry for the confusion.)
I still don’t understand WHY you disagree with Maines voicing her opinion in a different country… I was hoping you’d explain so I can see your point of view more clearly.
I wasn’t questioning your citation of the definition source- I was questioning the relevance of discussing treason at all. I meant that sometimes the way we understand a concept (like treason) needs to be reconsidered. I said:
The truth is that the media would have broadcast the comment in other countries even if it had been said in the USA. People in Canada, Britain, etc. would likely have heard it anyway- or read about it on the Internet.
So having taken this into consideration, does it makes sense that speaking out against one’s country while on foreign soil should be considered treasonous? I don’t think so.
Finally, as for shutting down this site, I totally agree with you. It would be a terrible injustice to shut down a site because of the political views expressed here. There should be a place for ALL political opinions to be expressed- and debated. I think it’s wonderful that people can come here and hear DIFFERENT points of view, and can actively participate in discussions about important issues. I would be outraged if this site was shut down. (I also agree that however hateful one’s ideas- Dr. Laura- they must be allowed to be expressed. It seems to me that no one person, or group of people, should be able to define for the whole society what is acceptable to say publicly.)
PS I don’t think it’s the actors and actresses who are brainwashing our kids on tv- it’s pretty naive to think that they are the ones in control of what is aired and what isn’t… and besides (as much as I strongly agree that there is WAY too much violence on tv) as long as we are watching, those shows will continue to be aired. Viewers have the real power- to shut the tube off! We’re AT LEAST as much to blame for the erosion of these ‘values’ you talk about as the actors/ actresses on tv.
This discussion has veered off from the real issue. Natalie has always had “a big mouth” which she has freely admitted in several interviews through the years. (on CMT, the Grammys, etc.) She is currently reaping the rewards of being outspoken.
As I listened to parts of the interview with Diane Sawyer, I realized why I was so upset with her comment and half-hearted apology on their website. Natalie defended her comment by saying that the “anti-american” feeling throughout Europe was so strong at that time. So, she makes a “commander in chief” slamming comment? That is grade school behavior…this has been widely misinterpreted as her right to free speech and anti-war statement when it was really just an appeal for applause and adoration from an anti-American crowd! How sad for her! Natalie is an American who just wants to be liked in Europe (or sell records in Europe!) Frankly, the Dixie Chicks can move to Europe!
As for her comment about how she “just has/asks questions” what questions? I haven’t heard an intelligent comment come out of her mouth yet! She never explained her “so called” questions. The crux of the matter is that Natalie Maines is ignorant. Did she even graduate high school? Ah well, for some ignorance is truly bliss!
Also, this premise of “supporting the troops” but not the commander in chief. What have the Dixie Chicks done to support the troops? NOTHING!
I was offended by the comment, the location in which is was made and the (eve of war) timing of the comment. These types of comments made by well-known American citizens serve to justify inaccurate statements made by unreliable news-sources (i.e. Al-Jazeera, Abu Dabi, and Micheal Moore for goodness sakes!)
I am sure in the long run the Dixie Chicks will be just fine…their record sales will pick up, the American consumer has a notoriously short memory.
But, I won’t forget Natalie’s cowardly comment, lame explanation and subsequent whining. I will exercise my free speech to not purchase their records or attend their concerts…and I am not the least bit impressed by them posing naked on a magazine (Particulary not after they lied about posing nude for the PETA ad). Who is their publicist anyway??? Sheesh! One would think he would have some idea of who their core listening audience is.
Cool, I kind of like it. Plus this is a great blog, Anne the webmistress, is taking a short hiatus but the archives are great. Plus lots of bunny pictures, the hopping variety, not the long legged Playboy type.
Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need
in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto their leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar. – Julius Caesar
It’s odd, to say the least, to encounter a passage attributed to Julius Caesar which, as far as I can tell, never appeared in print before 2001. It’s equally odd that while the passage is cited in dozens of Internet discussions concerning post-9/11 political developments, it never turns up in articles on Julius Caesar himself. If it is to be found among his own writings, no one has yet been able to pinpoint where.
It has also been attributed (most famously by a red-faced Barbra Streisand) to William Shakespeare, who presumably would have composed the lines for his historical play, “Julius Caesar” — but they’re nowhere to be found there, either. Apart from one small phrase, “And I am Caesar,” which vaguely echoes the closing words of a couplet in the play (“I rather tell thee what is to be fear’d / Than what I fear; for always I am Caesar.”), the language is anachronistic and distinctly un-Shakespearean. The words “patriotism” and “citizenry” were unknown in Elizabethan England. The Bard’s Julius Caesar spoke in iambic pentameter, not mediocre prose.
Short of the culprit stepping forward, there’s little likelihood of ascertaining who did write this politically convenient baloney, but we know it wasn’t Shakespeare and we can be reasonably sure it wasn’t Julius Caesar. It does, however, bear all the markings of a “classic” Internet hoax.
Me- I believe it is wrong to speak out on foreign soil, the timing was not good. I also feel that if they wanted to speak out about the war, why not say it on US soil. It just doesn’t set well with me. I agree- everyone has the right to free speech and their opinion. And yes, every good citizen should question their government. That is part of being a patriot. Something would be very wrong if we couldn’t. My main concern is that, and this is JMO (meant in peaceful, joking way) that alot of the hollywood people, dixie’s included, have tried to quiet the american public down, and it feels like they are trying to censor us. The American public has had enough. And yes, you are correct, we can shut off the TV and not go to movies. That is exactly what my family has done for years. There are alot of messages, from Hollywood, that I do not want my children to see. They are not being censored, I just consider them too young to see all the nakedness and language right now. Thank you.
Choses- please do not lump everyone’s feelings with “I think the assignment of blame re the “morality” issue is decidedly the domain of Right Wing Bible Belt Americans who, by in large, condemn and judge anything that is not “white”, “Protestant” and “heterosexual” as immoral.” into a category. I feel that this is a categorization of all people that have decided to speak up. For way too long, the american citizens have sat back and not spoken out. I don’t think alot of the people in Hollywood have many values or morales or they wouldn’t be putting out the shows that they do.
LisaS- I know this is off of the real issue but felt I needed to respond to Choses and Me.
Have a great day everyone!
Nataile still isnt that slender!
LOL…good point!
Very nice job, and I couldn’t agree more.
LOL – - now this is what they look like before the air brush……. this is hilarious!
REVELATION 16:15
“BEHOLD, I COME LIKE A THIEF! BLESSED IS HE WHO STAYS AWAKE AND KEEPS HIS CLOTHES WITH HIM, SO THAT HE MAY NOT GO NAKED AND BE SHAMEFULLY EXPOSED.”
Oh boy, fundamentalists!!! Can we a bible verse for _everything_ from now on?
Book of Chosesinconnues 1:1
“Behold I come like John Holmes in the night. Blessed be he who stays “up” all night with his clothes off so that he may not go frustrated and be shamefully left to his own hand”
(Okay, I promise I’ll stop)
OZZY O. 2002
“SHAAAARONN!!!!”
That’s beautiful. I wonder if you can order poster size prints anywhere?
When did the Dixie Chicks ever say that their fans don’t have a right to free speech. When did they say that celebrities are the only ones with that right?
dee says:
Nataile still isnt that slender!
==================================================
So now you have swooped to insulting them instead of debating ideas. If you don’t like their ideas, attack the idea, there is no reason to insult the person.
Daryl
They’ve essentially said that when before they’re comment in London they attacked fellow country musician Toby Keith. They criticized his song “The Angry American”. Natalie said that Toby made country music look ignorant, and that he needed to learn some TACT.
Sandy
I criticize his song too. Its hateful. I think she was right. Telling him that he could use more tact isn’t insulting him. A lot of their fans agreed with them when they said that to him. That doesn’t answer the issue I’m putting up. They have never said that celebrities are the only ones with freedom of speech. They have never said that their fans have no freedom of speech. Telling him that he could use more tact isn’t insulting him. A lot of their fans agreed with them when they said that to him.
Sorry about the little repeat in my last post. copy and paste accident
have to agree with daryl. And I’m not a fan of the dixies if you think that is case. It’s just because I agree with them…
“To declare that you are not allowed to critisize the president or that you should support him right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but also moral betrayal to the American people.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
I think that this country was pending a war and for those that were in agreeance w/Bush just got more upset. If she had said this in peaceful times, it probably would have been shrugged off. Now that things are winding down we’re analyzing all the things that went on in the media, we’re picking everything anybody has said apart. I may be thick skulled here, but people who have access to the media do need to think before they speak. They must know the impact they have otherwise they wouldn’t constantly use the media in their favor when they’re trying to sell more albums, or tickets for a movie. I’ve had a critical comment for every President that I’ve seen in my life and I’ve had heated arguments concerning those comments. I’m just tired of the celebrities “using” their status as a catalyst for their opinions. It’s hard enough for me to stay up to date on what Rumsfeld and Powell are saying, I don’t have room for what a hollywood type thinks.
“If I must choose between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness”
-Theodore Roosevelt
Darumburgau….
Let me ask you this, don’t you think Roosevelt’s quote about critisizing the president could be applied to Clinton and his rediculous administration?
Why is it only NOW that we hear this sort of thing from the left? Amazing.
As for the CHixie Dicks (or is that dixie DORKS), do you have an issue with others speaking out against them?
Wondering,
GMAB
Instead of “Boycotts not allowed” and Whiners” they should have written “Shutup and buy our album”. That’s basically the Dixie Chicks have been saying.
Right to speak: Do I?
Do I go into the locker room of Florida State and tell them University of Georgia is number 1?
Do I go to a Trekkie convention and tell them Star Trek was the lamest show I’ve ever seen?
Do I go to a WWF match and yank the microphone and yell “it’s all fake’?
I have every right to say these things, but I don’t…sometimes an opinion is better left unsaid..not everybody CARES what you think. The Dixies’ could have kept their feelings of shame to themselves and off of a stage..
Daryl (and your other brother, Daryl):
“When did the Dixie Chicks ever say that their fans don’t have a right to free speech. When did they say that celebrities are the only ones with that right?”
If you can’t determine the constant wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Hollywood Left (including the Dixie Chicks) about how it’s unamerican and unpatriotic for the rest of us to oppose their opinions, how the “chilling winds” are blowing and how their free speech rights are being “trampled” by those who dare criticize them isn’t an answer to your question, then you haven’t been paying attention.
All these whining celebrities…jeesh..
Why haven’t they been speaking out on the behalf of someone w/real problems? Sergei Duvanov…no comparisons…
Question:
There is something I don’t get: why none of you ever attacked Bill O’Reilly? I mean, he is talking in the media, and expressing his ideas EVERY DAY. He defends war whenever possible, he obviously supports Bush. And he is nothing else than a celebrity, expressing his mind about war. Isn’t it what this website is all about?
So, I suggest to you to boycott the O’Reilly factor, and Fox News, as a general base.
I have to say that I don’t believe there is a more biased news in the industrialized countries…
How about Al Jazeera, Abu Dabu? (please forgive me if I misspelled this). They are VERY slanted.
Well, I agree with you commonfolk, and it is a nice comparison. Al Jazeera is probably VERY slanted. It just happens that in the US, one of the big news channels is Fox News. And as your comparison suggests, Fox News can only be compared with Al Jazeera. And it is pretty frightening for a country that wants to call itself “democratic” to have no better news than that- CNN or MSNBC are not as bad as Fox News, but still very biased.
By the way, I refuse to call most of the presenters from Fox News “journalists”. I don’t expect them to speak against war, just to be a lot more neutral in the way they present the news.
O’Reilly annonces constantly “facts” that are nothing but his own point of view. Go, be consequent, criticize him, tell people to boycott him. Only then will I understand your position on celebrities expressing their mind as if they were the pure truth.
For me, the Dixies, Tim Robbins or Michael Moore only give a little chance to balance the totally pro-war media that doesn’t leave much place for fair analysis of what happens in the US or the world.
Nickele- you asked a question so I answered it. You said “I have to say that I don’t believe there is a more biased news in the industrialized countries…”
This is all I was responding to. I have never listened to O’REilly, don’t watch FOX, especially with Geraldo, and can make up my own mind about what news channel is full of it and that which is not. The trend on this site has been to try to quiet the citizens of the US up, if they don’t agree with the celebrity stance. I feel that alot of people out there are misinterpreting the American citizens voicing their opinions. The people speak and then we get very derogatory comments thrown back at us by people like Robbins, etc. Why is this? They are calling us McCarthists, when in all actuality that is what they are doing. I’m not going to boycott anyone that you suggest because we obviously do not agree on this. Thanks for listening-
nikele writes: There is something I don’t get: why none of you ever attacked Bill O’Reilly? I mean, he is talking in the media, and expressing his ideas EVERY DAY. He defends war whenever possible, he obviously supports Bush….O’Reilly annonces constantly “facts” that are nothing but his own point of view.
Bill O’Reilly is an analyst. He ANALYZES current events, be it news, entertainment, or politics, and he does it through his own perspective. Just like the New York Times editorial views the world through their own (leftwing) prism. Or the L.A. Times, the L.A. Weekly. I’ve found there is really no media outlet that is truly unbiased, and frankly, I don’t care. Just reporting the facts is like serving popcorn with no butter. It’s tasteless and boring.
Back to Bill…to say that he “obviously supports Bush” is not altogether true, since I’ve heard him criticize Bush on numerous occassions, as per illegal immigration and the out-of-control situation on the borders, which, I have to agree, Bush has not addressed to my satisfaction.
jimg,
Hey that crack about my other brother daryl was funny, never heard it. I want you to give me proof that the dixie chicks have said that their fans don’t have the freedom of speech. Telling me they whine doesn’t do the trick. Give me written proof where they have said that freedom of speech is only allowed for celebrities. You’re putting words into their mouths. Tim Robbins said that his freedom of speech is being trampled on. The dixie chicks never did.
I do think the cartoon is a little unfair, considering that at a recent concert Natalie Maines explicitly told the audience, “If you want to boo us, that’s okay.” There’s a difference between “You don’t have the right to criticize us” (i.e. the William Morris Agency) and “You have to right to criticize us, but we have the right to dish it right back out,” which is the impression I’ve gotten from the Chicks.
And telling Toby Keith that he needs to learn some tact — which is perfectly true — is NOT the same as saying he doesn’t have the “right” to speak.
Admittedly, I’ve been a fan of theirs since the first time I heard “There’s Your Trouble.” But I don’t think the criticism in the cartoon — or lumping them in with Susan Sarandon, the William Morris Agency, et al. — is warranted.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/newsarticle.asp?nid=17994
I think all the critism of the dixie chicks is warranted! I used to enjoy there music. In a time of war to go to another country and bad mouth the president is NOT RIGHT, plain and simple! I dont care for Clinton but I would feel the same respect be givin to him as well. The fake “Im sorrys” with the smug look on her face…..it just doesnt cut it with me. I couldnt enjoy another song by them even if I tryed.
So when is an ok time to speak out against a war you don’t agree with? When it’s over and the damage has been done? There’s no better time than when it’s about to start or while it’s happening. If a citizen really believes that his/her government is doing something they disagree with, then they have an obligation- not just the right- to speak out against that government and hope that they will be heard and the actions they disagree with will be stopped. What’s the point of voicing one’s disapproval AFTER the war is over? NO citizen EVER has to agree with his or her government just because they are at war. To say that one should shut up and keep their opinions to themselves until a ‘better’ time or place is pure garbage. What’s the point of having a democracy if citizens aren’t allowed to voice their approval OR disapproval of their government- any time they darn well choose to? Or what’s the point if they ARE allowed to, but receive death threats because of it? What kind of democracy is that?
I’m reading a lot of reference to Hitler here (and let’s be clear that I AM NOT saying that GWB is Hitler). I think it’s ironic that people are saying that it was terrible that no one spoke out against what Hitler was doing, (and I agree that someone SHOULD have spoken out about Saddam Hussein) but for a citizen to speak out against their own president, who is planning to attack a nation- resulting in the deaths of many innocent civilians- is discpicable? What’s the difference? If Natalie Maines, or anyone else, thinks that what GWB is doing is WRONG, then wouldn’t they be RIGHT to speak out- as would the Germans had they spoken out against Hitler? (again- not a GWB is Hitler analogy exactly) I just think that it’s responsible for someone to say ‘hey, I think my government is doing something wrong and it doesn’t represent MY views.’ That’s what a good citizen SHOULD say. Just like other citizens have the right to rally together and say ‘I think my government is doing exactly what they should be doing, and I totally support them.’ And they should if that’s how they feel. They SHOULD be out there making their opinions known. Everyone should be participating in this democracy.
JMO. Take it or leave it.
Somehow it’s not surprising that the Chicks were able to pull off such a triumphant opener to their US tour in the face of so much misplaced opposition from the ever vociferous “right”. Apparently the temptation of a lucrative chance to exchange DC tickets for an opportunity to attend a corresponding Marshall Tucker concert wasn’t enough to keep the *real* country music fans away. Kudos to Emily, Martie and Natilie for their courage and for continuing to do what they’ve always done; produce great music for everyone. They rock!
The question is not liberal or conservative, pro-Bush or anti-Bush. People have the right to protest by burning records and not buying more. Radio stations have the right to break contract on their illegal payola agreements and not play any record they don’t want to. The Dixie Chicks apparently don’t believe this or they wouldn’t be crying “censorship”. Besides, this form of protest makes more sense than blocking ambulances in the name of “peace”.
People can say just about anything they want but with free speech comes a chance that, YES others wont argee and will stop going to movies or concerts. Gesssh it not like these actors arent able to still express there opinions because they still are with the media drooling at there feet. The government isnt allowed to stop most speech, I however can turn these people off and boycott them all Id like because thats my free speech like it or not. “Whats wrong with Natile Maines disagreeing with the president?” ok well whats wrong with me boycotting her??
Before the Dick Suck Chicks go criticizing Toby Keith about his “Angry American” song, saying that he needs to learn TACT, because he is offending people, What about their song ,”Goodbye Earl”.
Toby Keith was acting out in anger, because he loves America. He wasn’t saying that we,re going out to bully people, he said that we weren’t just going to let people disrupt peace without a fight.
The Dixie Chicks worry about people taking offense to Toby Keith’s song. Their song, “Goodbye Earl” talks about killing a man because he beats his wife. I’m not married, and I don’t abuse anybody, but I was still offended by their song, because it promotes just as much violence, as rappers promote busting a cap in your ass.
It is wrong, it portrays men as slobs, and wife beaters.
So all in all, before the Dixie Chicks start telling people to polish up their music, and stop making a bad impression, and stop offending people, maybe they should fix theirs first.
I was in Afghanistan 6 months ago, and Toby Keith’s song was popular with quite a few troops over there. Even people who prefer other types of music besides country, enjoyed it.
The Dixie Chicks are one of the most annoying groups, due to the fact of Natalie Maines shrill voice. It is like scrapinging fingers over a chalk board.
Then the two twins get a different lead singer, I probably start listening to them again, but not until Natalie Maines gets the boot.
Before the Dick Suck Chicks go criticizing Toby Keith about his “Angry American” song, saying that he needs to learn TACT, because he is offending people, What about their song ,”Goodbye Earl”.
Toby Keith was acting out in anger, because he loves America. He wasn’t saying that we,re going out to bully people, he said that we weren’t just going to let people disrupt peace without a fight.
The Dixie Chicks worry about people taking offense to Toby Keith’s song. Their song, “Goodbye Earl” talks about killing a man because he beats his wife. I’m not married, and I don’t abuse anybody, but I was still offended by their song, because it promotes just as much violence, as rappers promote busting a cap in your ass.
It is wrong, it portrays men as slobs, and wife beaters.
So all in all, before the Dixie Chicks start telling people to polish up their music, and stop making a bad impression, and stop offending people, maybe they should fix theirs first.
I was in Afghanistan 6 months ago, and Toby Keith’s song was popular with quite a few troops over there. Even people who prefer other types of music besides country, enjoyed it.
The Dixie Chicks are one of the most annoying groups, due to the fact of Natalie Maines shrill voice. It is like scraping fingers over a chalk board.
Then the two twins get a different lead singer, I probably start listening to them again, but not until Natalie Maines gets the boot.
Before the Dick Suck Chicks go criticizing Toby Keith about his “Angry American” song, saying that he needs to learn TACT, because he is offending people, What about their song ,”Goodbye Earl”.
Toby Keith was acting out in anger, because he loves America. He wasn’t saying that we,re going out to bully people, he said that we weren’t just going to let people disrupt peace without a fight.
The Dixie Chicks worry about people taking offense to Toby Keith’s song. Their song, “Goodbye Earl” talks about killing a man because he beats his wife. I’m not married, and I don’t abuse anybody, but I was still offended by their song, because it promotes just as much violence, as rappers promote busting a cap in your ass.
It is wrong, it portrays men as slobs, and wife beaters.
So all in all, before the Dixie Chicks start telling people to polish up their music, and stop making a bad impression, and stop offending people, maybe they should fix theirs first.
I was in Afghanistan 6 months ago, and Toby Keith’s song was popular with quite a few troops over there. Even people who prefer other types of music besides country, enjoyed it.
The Dixie Chicks are one of the most annoying groups, due to the fact of Natalie Maines shrill voice. It is like scraping fingers over a chalk board.
Then the two twins get a different lead singer, I probably start listening to them again, but not until Natalie Maines gets the boot.
Maddog & Me- The whole point here is Natalie Maines spoke against her country while in a foreign nation. That is defined as treason (websters if you want to look it up). It’s fine if their sold out show went ok- they wouldn’t refund the tickets- do you think maybe that is saying alot about their clients having a right to free speech? Their CD sales, before her comment, were sitting at something like 173,000; this dwindled to something like 23,000. (sorry couldn’t find the article that said this). I do believe that after this tour they will discover what the public truly feels. It’s pretty easy to say that they came out of this fine. That’s because the tickets were sold before. Now I hear that their album has increased in sales. I’d like to see if that increase is due to people, in other countries, started buying their CD’s because they were criticizing America. I just wished she would’ve said something like “I apologize to all of the people that I upset” and really mean it. I was a big fan of the Dixie’s. We do not advocate violence on this site. That is what they need to understand- that all Americans have the right to say as they feel, but say it in the USA instead of other countries.
commonfolk,
I don’t understand what the difference is where the comment was made. The truth is that the media would have broadcast the comment in other countries even if it had been said in the USA. People in Canada, Britain, etc. would likely have heard it anyway- or read about it on the Internet. So what’s the difference where it was said? I don’t understand anyway- free speech is free speech. Either we can say whatever we want or not. There shouldn’t be limitations on that. To say that certain comments should only be made in certain places is like saying that certain things should only be said at certain times, or by certain people, or that only certain things can be said at all. How free is our speech if we’re limited in to certain locations? And so what if that is the definition of treason in the dictionary? It’s just a word- I know what’s right and wrong without having to look it up in Websters. Finally, I personally wish Maines had made no attempt to apologize at all. She should have stuck to her original opinion- if that’s the way she feels, she shouldn’t have let herself be bullied into changing it. She’s under no obligation to support the president or anyone else. FREEDOM- remember? That’s what it’s all about.
JMO. Take it or leave it.
By the way, I’m curious to hear what you think about the second half of my previous comment… about appeasement…
Me- first of all, what is JMO? You say “Take it or leave it.” I didn’t see anything about appeasement in the second half of your previous comment.
The dixie chicks weren’t bullied into the tv special or having their heads put on someone elses body. They were doing it for publicity. Right after Natalie said what she did in London, I went to their site. Emily’s husband had posted a note that this is not what the sisters felt. That was ok with me. I do disagree with her voicing her opinion in a foreign country. She apparently didn’t have the guts to do it in the US. As for the dictionary comment of mine, I’ve been questioned when I define treason so feel that it is always appropriate to say where I got the definition. That way, an argument is not started. Most of us on this site know exactly what is right and what is wrong. Everyone has different morales, values, etc. Freedom of speech is extended to every American- to that I will agree. Maybe you can tell all of us why William Morris Agency, Dotster, and Names… started to shut this site down. Does that sound like freedom of speech to you? It’s a real shame about the dixie’s and a bunch of actors and actresses- used to enjoy them. Now, I can’t stomach them. They’ve had free rein to boycott Dr. Laura and other things they don’t agree with; why can’t we? I think Americans have had it with them destroying our value system, trying to brainwash our kids with the junk on TV, and the morality issue is toast in Hollywood. It’s time we all started speaking up.
“commonfolk” writes:
‘They’ve had free rein to boycott Dr. Laura and other things they don’t agree with; why can’t we? I think Americans have had it with them destroying our value system, trying to brainwash our kids with the junk on TV, and the morality issue is toast in Hollywood. It’s time we all started speaking up.’
=====================================
Again. I would ask you just what “morality” means to you. I see the reference to “Dr. Laura” who exposed herself as a bigot of the first order. I see you claiming that Hollywood and the entertainment industry is ‘trying to brainwash our kids with the junk on TV’.
This feels somehow insidiously anti human rights in general.
I think the assignment of blame re the “morality” issue is decidedly the domain of Right Wing Bible Belt Americans who, by in large, condemn and judge anything that is not “white”, “Protestant” and “heterosexual” as immoral.
From my perspective these false “values” are what truly threatens our great and diverse nation.
I say once more: ‘MORALITY’ is not simply about SEX!!! And your definition of ‘morality’ may well be relegated to the notion of what someone does in bed. To many, I assure you, ‘morality’ has much more to do with conscience than sexual practices.
Respectfully,
Commonfolk,
When I wrote this, I was talking about appeasement:
I’m reading a lot of reference to Hitler here (and let’s be clear that I AM NOT saying that GWB is Hitler). I think it’s ironic that people are saying that it was terrible that no one spoke out against what Hitler was doing, (and I agree that someone SHOULD have spoken out about Saddam Hussein) but for a citizen to speak out against their own president, who is planning to attack a nation- resulting in the deaths of many innocent civilians- is descpicable? What’s the difference? If Natalie Maines, or anyone else, thinks that what GWB is doing is WRONG, then wouldn’t they be RIGHT to speak out- as would the Germans had they spoken out against Hitler? (again- not a GWB is Hitler analogy exactly) I just think that it’s responsible for someone to say ‘hey, I think my government is doing something wrong and it doesn’t represent MY views.’ That’s what a good citizen SHOULD say. Just like other citizens have the right to rally together and say ‘I think my government is doing exactly what they should be doing, and I totally support them.’ And they should if that’s how they feel. They SHOULD be out there making their opinions known. Everyone should be participating in this democracy.
(JMO means ‘just my opinion’- sorry for the confusion.)
I still don’t understand WHY you disagree with Maines voicing her opinion in a different country… I was hoping you’d explain so I can see your point of view more clearly.
I wasn’t questioning your citation of the definition source- I was questioning the relevance of discussing treason at all. I meant that sometimes the way we understand a concept (like treason) needs to be reconsidered. I said:
The truth is that the media would have broadcast the comment in other countries even if it had been said in the USA. People in Canada, Britain, etc. would likely have heard it anyway- or read about it on the Internet.
So having taken this into consideration, does it makes sense that speaking out against one’s country while on foreign soil should be considered treasonous? I don’t think so.
Finally, as for shutting down this site, I totally agree with you. It would be a terrible injustice to shut down a site because of the political views expressed here. There should be a place for ALL political opinions to be expressed- and debated. I think it’s wonderful that people can come here and hear DIFFERENT points of view, and can actively participate in discussions about important issues. I would be outraged if this site was shut down. (I also agree that however hateful one’s ideas- Dr. Laura- they must be allowed to be expressed. It seems to me that no one person, or group of people, should be able to define for the whole society what is acceptable to say publicly.)
PS I don’t think it’s the actors and actresses who are brainwashing our kids on tv- it’s pretty naive to think that they are the ones in control of what is aired and what isn’t… and besides (as much as I strongly agree that there is WAY too much violence on tv) as long as we are watching, those shows will continue to be aired. Viewers have the real power- to shut the tube off! We’re AT LEAST as much to blame for the erosion of these ‘values’ you talk about as the actors/ actresses on tv.
‘Just my opinion’- take it or leave it.
This discussion has veered off from the real issue. Natalie has always had “a big mouth” which she has freely admitted in several interviews through the years. (on CMT, the Grammys, etc.) She is currently reaping the rewards of being outspoken.
As I listened to parts of the interview with Diane Sawyer, I realized why I was so upset with her comment and half-hearted apology on their website. Natalie defended her comment by saying that the “anti-american” feeling throughout Europe was so strong at that time. So, she makes a “commander in chief” slamming comment? That is grade school behavior…this has been widely misinterpreted as her right to free speech and anti-war statement when it was really just an appeal for applause and adoration from an anti-American crowd! How sad for her! Natalie is an American who just wants to be liked in Europe (or sell records in Europe!) Frankly, the Dixie Chicks can move to Europe!
As for her comment about how she “just has/asks questions” what questions? I haven’t heard an intelligent comment come out of her mouth yet! She never explained her “so called” questions. The crux of the matter is that Natalie Maines is ignorant. Did she even graduate high school? Ah well, for some ignorance is truly bliss!
Also, this premise of “supporting the troops” but not the commander in chief. What have the Dixie Chicks done to support the troops? NOTHING!
I was offended by the comment, the location in which is was made and the (eve of war) timing of the comment. These types of comments made by well-known American citizens serve to justify inaccurate statements made by unreliable news-sources (i.e. Al-Jazeera, Abu Dabi, and Micheal Moore for goodness sakes!)
I am sure in the long run the Dixie Chicks will be just fine…their record sales will pick up, the American consumer has a notoriously short memory.
But, I won’t forget Natalie’s cowardly comment, lame explanation and subsequent whining. I will exercise my free speech to not purchase their records or attend their concerts…and I am not the least bit impressed by them posing naked on a magazine (Particulary not after they lied about posing nude for the PETA ad). Who is their publicist anyway??? Sheesh! One would think he would have some idea of who their core listening audience is.
Do chicks have dics
On the Belligerant Bunny Blog:
http://www.petbunny.blogspot.com/
They came up with the term; Vichy Chicks
Cool, I kind of like it. Plus this is a great blog, Anne the webmistress, is taking a short hiatus but the archives are great. Plus lots of bunny pictures, the hopping variety, not the long legged Playboy type.
Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need
in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto their leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar. – Julius Caesar
Julius Ceasar Bush:
Sorry to tell you, but Julius Ceasar didn’t say it; Shakespear didn’t write it:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-caesar-quote.htm
It’s odd, to say the least, to encounter a passage attributed to Julius Caesar which, as far as I can tell, never appeared in print before 2001. It’s equally odd that while the passage is cited in dozens of Internet discussions concerning post-9/11 political developments, it never turns up in articles on Julius Caesar himself. If it is to be found among his own writings, no one has yet been able to pinpoint where.
It has also been attributed (most famously by a red-faced Barbra Streisand) to William Shakespeare, who presumably would have composed the lines for his historical play, “Julius Caesar” — but they’re nowhere to be found there, either. Apart from one small phrase, “And I am Caesar,” which vaguely echoes the closing words of a couplet in the play (“I rather tell thee what is to be fear’d / Than what I fear; for always I am Caesar.”), the language is anachronistic and distinctly un-Shakespearean. The words “patriotism” and “citizenry” were unknown in Elizabethan England. The Bard’s Julius Caesar spoke in iambic pentameter, not mediocre prose.
Short of the culprit stepping forward, there’s little likelihood of ascertaining who did write this politically convenient baloney, but we know it wasn’t Shakespeare and we can be reasonably sure it wasn’t Julius Caesar. It does, however, bear all the markings of a “classic” Internet hoax.
The left doesn’t care if it is a hoax. They do not care if it is a lie. As long as it helps them achieve…er, seize power, it has served it’s purpose.
Me- I believe it is wrong to speak out on foreign soil, the timing was not good. I also feel that if they wanted to speak out about the war, why not say it on US soil. It just doesn’t set well with me. I agree- everyone has the right to free speech and their opinion. And yes, every good citizen should question their government. That is part of being a patriot. Something would be very wrong if we couldn’t. My main concern is that, and this is JMO (meant in peaceful, joking way) that alot of the hollywood people, dixie’s included, have tried to quiet the american public down, and it feels like they are trying to censor us. The American public has had enough. And yes, you are correct, we can shut off the TV and not go to movies. That is exactly what my family has done for years. There are alot of messages, from Hollywood, that I do not want my children to see. They are not being censored, I just consider them too young to see all the nakedness and language right now. Thank you.
Choses- please do not lump everyone’s feelings with “I think the assignment of blame re the “morality” issue is decidedly the domain of Right Wing Bible Belt Americans who, by in large, condemn and judge anything that is not “white”, “Protestant” and “heterosexual” as immoral.” into a category. I feel that this is a categorization of all people that have decided to speak up. For way too long, the american citizens have sat back and not spoken out. I don’t think alot of the people in Hollywood have many values or morales or they wouldn’t be putting out the shows that they do.
LisaS- I know this is off of the real issue but felt I needed to respond to Choses and Me.
Have a great day everyone!
toby keith=brainwash