Quote:
Originally posted by skywalker:
the Dixie Chick this refers to is a member of a country music group who said...
"Just so you know, we're ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas"
...while on a concert tour in Great Britian. The band was boycotted so she apologized later.
This was before the war started.
Apparently freedom of speech falls short of critizing the President. I wonder why it was okay during the Clinton years?
Mark
|
You see Mark the point you're willing to ignore, is that the privately owned radio stations choosing not to play the Chick's records was an exercise of free speech as well. [img]smile.gif[/img]
Also, there were plenty of reasons to criticize Clinton, but when people stood up and said, "Clinton SUCKS!" without saying why, they sounded stupid. They sounded as if they had no clue. The people who said it was because of Monica, but couldn't tell you why Monica effected the presidency so badly they sounded like idiots. They were just screaming rhetoric. Just like the Dixie Chick. If people can't articulate their position better than the Dixie Chick's statement, then they aren't really talking about the issues.
She can say and believe what she wants, but since she'd never said anything in the US about her feelings, it seemed a bit distasteful and disingenuous to say it to a crowd in another country. She was saying it to please the crowd. I'm not doubting she meant it, but she hadn't said it in the states.
If she really believe in what she said, she wouldn't have apologized... she shouldn't have apologized if she really believed in her cause. Either you believe something or you don't. Either it's worth saying and standing behind or it isn't worth saying. I think we know which side of the issue she stands on, but apparently her stance is contingent on how it effects her group's popularity.
[ 03-22-2003, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]