Not Ready to Make Nice

Dean Dobbins · Post by **Dean Dobbins** » 16 Mar 2006 10:07 pm

As far as political statements. I don't want tohear them-same goes for sermons, if I want to be preached to, I'll go to church!
I came to hear the MUSIC!!!

------------------
Dino

Rick Garrett · Post by **Rick Garrett** » 17 Mar 2006 3:45 am

Hey Steinar, of course you're right it was London. Guess I had France stuck in my mind. Here's something else I didn't know. Natalie apologized on a tv show. You can read it in the article included below. Then went back to politics and tried to get John Kerry elected. oops again! I still believe that she could have said the same thing at a concert here in America with little or no repurcussions (sp) at all. While I was waiting for the 4 minutes and 1 second radio time, and hoping for an apology from them, I remember thinking this will be cool and I can go back to enjoying their music again. Then the song played. There's also a line in the song that says something about them receiving death threats??? over this stuff. I wish them no bad luck at all and I think they are probably the most talented women in Rock and Roll today.

On March 10, 2003, during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq (which would take place on March 20), Natalie Maines stated during a concert in London that the band was "ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas." (Maines is a native of Lubbock, Texas.) This remark sparked intense criticism from many Americans, on three different grounds: that Maines shouldn't be criticizing the nation's head of state while on foreign territory; that Maines shouldn't be criticizing the military's commander-in-chief while the country was on the verge of war; and that Maines shouldn't be making political statements that would offend the Dixie Chicks' culturally conservative audience base.

Following the uproar and the start of a boycott of their music, the singer attempted to clarify matters on March 12 with the statement "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world."

This statement failed to quiet her critics, and on March 14 she issued an apology stating "As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect. We are currently in Europe and witnessing a huge anti-American sentiment as a result of the perceived rush to war. While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American."

Some fans remained angry and pressed on with a boycott of Dixie Chick music, stations that played their music, and their sponsor Lipton Tea, while other fans were disappointed that she apologized. In one display of anti-Dixie-Chick publicity, former Dixie Chick fans were encouraged to bring their Dixie Chicks CDs so that they could be crushed by a bulldozer. The extent of the backlash resulted in the artists being concerned about their personal safety and that of their families. Bruce Springsteen and Madonna were among those who came out in support of the right of the women to express their opinion. Not one to back down from controversy, even Madonna herself was pressured to cancel the release of her anti-war video "American Life" which featured a Bush-double being murdered by a hand-grenade.

On April 24, the Dixie Chicks launched a publicity campaign to explain their position. During a prime-time interview with TV personality Diane Sawyer, Maines said she remained proud of her original statement. The band also appeared naked (with private parts strategically covered) on the May 2, 2003 cover of Entertainment Weekly magazine with slogans such as "Traitors," "Saddam's Angels," "Dixie Sluts," "Proud Americans," "Hero," "Free Speech," and "Brave" printed on their bodies. Many critics called the moves publicity stunts, since they were launched on the eve of a U.S. concert tour.[citation needed]

The original controversy was launched when a Guardian review of the group's London concert was picked up by U.S. media. (For the Guardian's summary of the controversy, see [1].)

President Bush responded to the controversy surrounding the Dixie Chicks in an interview with Tom Brokaw on April 24:

"[T]he Dixie Chicks are free to speak their mind. They can say what they want to say...[T]hey shouldn't have their feelings hurt just because some people don't want to buy their records when they speak out...[F]reedom is a two-way street...I...don't really care what the Dixie Chicks said. I want to do what I think is right for the American people, and if some singers or Hollywood stars feel like speaking out, that's fine. That's the great thing about America. It stands in stark contrast to Iraq..." [2]
At the first concert of their nation-wide tour the Dixie Chicks received a very positive reception. The concert was held in Greenville, South Carolina on May 1 and was attended by a sell-out crowd of 15,000. The women had come prepared to face up to opposition — and Natalie Maines invited those who had come to boo to do so — but the crowd erupted in cheers. (Tickets for their concert tour had gone on sale well before the controversy erupted, meaning that a cross-section of all their fans was at the concert.)

Nevertheless, the band remained controversial. On May 6, a Colorado radio station suspended two of its disc jockeys for playing music by the Dixie Chicks in violation of a ban on their music. On May 22 at the Academy of Country Music (ACM) awards ceremony in Las Vegas there were boos when the group's nomination for entertainer of the year awards was announced. However, the broadcast's host, Vince Gill, reminded the audience that everyone is entitled to freedom of speech. The Academy made the award to Toby Keith, an outspoken critic of the group.

In the fall of 2003 the Dixie Chicks starred in a broadcast TV commercial for Lipton Ice Tea which made a tongue-in-cheek reference to the corporate blacklisting and the grassroots backlash: in the tea spot, the Chicks are about to give a stadium concert when the electricity suddenly goes out - but they manage to electrify the stadium all by themselves, belting out a rousing a capella version of "Cowboy Take Me Away" to the raving cheers of the fans.

In a September 2003 interview, Maguire told Der Spiegel magazine: "We don't feel a part of the country scene any longer, it can't be our home any more." She noted a lack of support from country stars, and being shunned at the 2003 ACM awards. "Instead, we won three Grammys against much stronger competition. So we now consider ourselves part of the big rock 'n' roll family." However, in an open letter to fans on the Chicks' website, Maines said that Maguire had been misquoted.

In October 2004, the Dixie Chicks joined the "Vote for Change" tour, playing a series of concerts in American swing states. These concerts were organized by MoveOn.org with the general goal of mobilizing people to vote for John Kerry and against George W. Bush in that year's Presidential campaign. The Dixie Chicks' appearances were joint performances with James Taylor. This effort was unsuccessful in getting Kerry elected, and during the concerts Maines' stage remarks revealed a certain amount of nervousness over what the Dixie Chicks' future career path would be.

As of late 2005, CMT (though not CMT Canada) and country music radio in the United States still seemed to shy away from playing Dixie Chicks songs, but the group has not had any significant promotion or new material out since the controversy, so it is difficult to assess the lasting impact of these events.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 17 Mar 2006 5:03 am

These people ("stars" of any kind) think their talent and notoriety grants them special insight and influence. I hate it when big stars of any kind (singers, musicians, actors, actresses, etc.) use their "talents" and mass audiences as a soapbox for their own political agendas.

Theresa Galbraith · Post by **Theresa Galbraith** » 17 Mar 2006 5:50 am

I'm with ya Donny!

I listened to the song last week and turned it off.

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 17 Mar 2006 6:03 am

actually it was them that didn't move on and brought it all back..I'm thinking most folks forgot about it...until all the hooplah about the new CD...

I think Natalie and her pals have completely missed the point..

She has every right to say whatever the heck she wants..pretty much whenever she wants..

but not at a show during a performance..

The Chicks are a singing group not a political satire...

I guess it's now ok for successful artists to insult half there audience with the free speech clause..

Now that I am Rich I can insult half the people who got me there....

Can they do it ? Sure..

The question is actually "Should they do it"...

problem is , it works both ways..

we are all free to DISS anyone we like,.,and FREE to NOT spend $$ on products by folks who we feel cross the line persoanlly.

Natalie forgot the age old business sacrelidge....Keep business business and social social...never discuss politics or religion with prospective or paying clients ..

I think they choose the wrong song for the CD Lead..

it should have been the famous Wizard of Oz tune..

"If I only had a Brain"...

I think they are very talented but got TOO big for there own britches..too comfortable with the cash flow...

evidently it is them that is carrying the grudge...

How foolish is that..Let me come out with a CD and advertise I am mad at everyone.,.

so they will buy it ?

now thats a new chapter in Business 101...

------------------
------------------
TPrior
TPrior Steel Guitar Homesite


[This message was edited by Tony Prior on 17 March 2006 at 06:08 AM.]

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 17 Mar 2006 6:21 am

It's probably too soon to tell how the new album will be received in Lubbock. It's a red town in a red state, but the Maines name remains big here.

'Home' is the album that turned me on to country. Spare arrangements that let the women's talents show through better with Lloyd's transparent production--as compared with the two previous 'Nashville' productions--and indications of moving on to something a little different.

I understand Natalie was more interested in being a rocker, but Lloyd hooked her up with two of the original Chicks, and she found a venue for her strong style. I hope they continue to evolve, and I'm looking forward to the new album.

As far as "these people" keeping their agendas to themselves, I hope the same would be said about Toby Keith, who is hardly an apt spokesman for a better America. It seems it all depends on one's own agenda for this country.

The show in Austin was great, courtesy of my nephew, Sony's advance man in Austin.
My nephew spent the next morning at my house, fielding the occasional call about Natalie's t-shirt, to which he responded that the letters supposedly stood for 'Fans United in Tenderness and Kindness.'
Be that as it may, I am not the least offended by performers who will risk umbrage for speaking their minds. Country music fans did the same thing by destroying their Chicks' discs.

So much politics. It's interesting that support for the war in Iraq has dwindled. Three years ago, very few were speaking out against it, and a blue guy in a red state was happy that someone would make the bold move and speak out. They were bold in their dealings with Sony, and produced a third album that more accurately reflected their talents.

But put it this way: give a girl from Lubbock a 10,000 watt PA, and she's bound to say something to pi$$ somebody off.

Erv Niehaus · Post by **Erv Niehaus** » 17 Mar 2006 7:31 am

Aaaah, the Dixie Twits. A terminal case of "foot in the mouth disease".

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 17 Mar 2006 7:56 am

Two points I find particularly interesting:

[F]reedom is a two-way street...I...don't really care what the Dixie Chicks said. I want to do what I think is right for the American people, and if some singers or Hollywood stars feel like speaking out, that's fine. That's the great thing about America. It stands in stark contrast to Iraq..."

On May 6, a Colorado radio station suspended two of its disc jockeys for playing music by the Dixie Chicks in violation of a ban on their music.

1. So if the President can let this roll off his back, and even laud it as an example of Democracy in action, why can't all the minions that support him?

2. Bush notes that the freedom of speech/right to disagree with the government exhibited by the Dixie Chicks stands in stark contrast to life in Iraq under Saddam. I would add that suspending disc jockeys for playing music "in violation of a ban" is particularly reminiscent of life in Iraq under Saddam.

Oh, and a third point is, let's be honest, that many of the folks who object to artists making "political" statements do not object if the politics agrees with their own. It's only when artists espouse a different political opinion from their own that they get all bent out of shape.[This message was edited by Jim Cohen on 17 March 2006 at 08:11 AM.]

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 17 Mar 2006 8:03 am

I guess I'm in the minority here, but if you really felt something was horribly wrong, that it was ill advised, would lead to the senseless death of thousands of Americans, the lifelong maiming of thousands more, that there was no justification and you had a soap box and audience as well, how could you morally not say something and use your platform to divert disaster? Would it not be your patriotic duty to stand up and say something no matter how many people banned your records?

My mother-in-law is nearly 80. Every Wednsday she stands with other grandmothers protesting the war in front of Radio City Music Hall. She has stood there every Weds. rain or shine since the war began.

A month or so ago she was arrested in a protest she helped organize at the army recruiting station in Times Square. A group of grandmothers, some in their 90's went down to enlist. They felt their lives where over, so better they go than young people who had their whole lives ahead of them.

I'm sorry, but I think she is a bigger and better patriot than some members of congress who rubber stamped a senseless war.[This message was edited by Bill McCloskey on 17 March 2006 at 08:04 AM.]

Pat Burns · Post by **Pat Burns** » 17 Mar 2006 8:24 am

..I love the Dixie Chicks...period. Good Luck on the gig, Pete Finney...you landed a really good one!...

Barry Blackwood · Post by **Barry Blackwood** » 17 Mar 2006 8:59 am

So much for getting over it .... Thank you Jim Cohen for Point #3!

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 17 Mar 2006 9:16 am

I personally don't care what anyones political views are..or if they match mine..

at a show..I don't want to hear anyones views..mine or theres..

DJ's fired for playing music..thats absurd...

now..the Chicks..they never came out against the War..what Natalie said was..

"We are embarrassed that the President is from Texas"... which basically put everyone on the stage with her in the SAME catagory..she spoke for everyone..bandmates..father, whatever...

I still feel firmly planted that if you are being paid to do something..thats what you do...

If you are on a TV broadcast that someone else is paying the TAB for..you do not have the right to speak your will..out of the show context.

IF the Chicks or anyone else wants to promote/sponsor an anti anything show, and they pay the TAB..they can then feel free to use that 10,000 watt sound system to say whatever they want...

Artists don't own the stage..they are paid to perform..generally by someone else..

I visit dozens of clients each week..I guess I can say anything I want to them..these are the clients that purcahse my companies goods, and from that I yield an income.

Can I discuss Poltics with them ?

sure I suppose I could

Should I ?

common sense tells me not to...and I don't.

Do you guys that gig every week get up on the mic and start administering political spewings to the attendees ?

Why not ? You can...you have that right....

free speech....

I wish the Chicks success but I also wish they would take the lesson learned and apply it...they should never have dragged the Bull out of the Barn again...

This whole issue is so foolish..one side claims they have a right to say what they want , and they do..

but the other side has just as much right to say..go ahead talk it up.....but I don't have to pay to hear you or buy your records or go to your Movies..

so I ask..who actually has the clout ?

Those that do not have record deals or make Movies, or do not get invited to speak at the Awards shows...

they have another kind of power..kinda silent...but the stick is HUGE...

each one of us is and can be passionate about an issue, but that doesn't mean someone who has an opposing view is wrong...we can all come up with stories and incidents to support our own side of any issue.
t[This message was edited by Tony Prior on 17 March 2006 at 09:23 AM.][This message was edited by Tony Prior on 17 March 2006 at 09:24 AM.]

Steinar Gregertsen · Post by **Steinar Gregertsen** » 17 Mar 2006 9:24 am

but I don't have to pay to hear you or buy your records or go to your Movies..

That's correct, and the way it should be in any democratic society.

IMHO it's an entirely different thing when artists/bands are banned from radio stations, record chains, etc, because then we - the individuals - lose our right and opportunity to decide for ourselves how we want to deal with them.

Steinar

------------------
www.gregertsen.com
Southern Moon Northern Lights

[This message was edited by Steinar Gregertsen on 17 March 2006 at 09:24 AM.][This message was edited by Steinar Gregertsen on 17 March 2006 at 09:28 AM.]

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 17 Mar 2006 9:40 am

Here's how I REALLY FEEL about it:

It was great meeting Rick and Tony at the Dallas show! Can't wait to do it again!

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 17 Mar 2006 9:42 am

The Chicks continue to stick their feet in their mouths. Really bad business decision. We just buried another local soldier here in western N.Y. I can tell you that feelings are running very much against The Chicks here. They are never played on the radio. I think that they will be a distant memory by next year.

Rick Garrett · Post by **Rick Garrett** » 17 Mar 2006 9:59 am

Hey Bill it was great meeting you and Howard in Dallas. hope to hear yall play there sometime.

Jim,
"1. So if the President can let this roll off his back, and even laud it as an example of Democracy in action, why can't all the minions that support him? "

Why lump everyone who supports the president into the "minion" catagory?

"2. Bush notes that the freedom of speech/right to disagree with the government exhibited by the Dixie Chicks stands in stark contrast to life in Iraq under Saddam. I would add that suspending disc jockeys for playing music "in violation of a ban" is particularly reminiscent of life in Iraq under Saddam."

Why blame Bush? He didn't ban the Chickens, nor did he fire the dj's. we the listening audience banned them. In Iraq Sadam would have done it personally I guess.

"Oh, and a third point is, let's be honest, that many of the folks who object to artists making "political" statements do not object if the politics agrees with their own. It's only when artists espouse a different political opinion from their own that they get all bent out of shape"

When I go to a concert I'm there to hear music. If Natalie wants to espouse her political beliefs somebody should tell her to frikkin quit playing music and run for office somewhere. Hopefully anywhere BUT Texas.

I don't want to hear politics (one way or the other) when I'm there for fun same as I don't want to hear a preacher unless I'm in church.

Hope all of that made sense.

Rick

Pete Finney · Post by **Pete Finney** » 17 Mar 2006 10:06 am

Kevin,

You say:
"We just buried another local soldier here in western N.Y. I can tell you that feelings are running very much against The Chicks here."

Whatever anyone thinks of our invading Iraq (and there are legitimate opinions on both sides I suppose) it's George Bush who bears a great amount of responsibility for our soldiers who die there; he made that decision (though of course no one in HIS family will bear any of the consequences). Natalie Maines has no such power and bears no responsibility for ANY family's grief, she merely expressed her opinion. That's just a fact. Of course that doesn't mean one can't fully support Bush and his policies (NOT the same as supporting the troops!) but let's not confuse who has the power and bears responsibilty for the choices made.

[This message was edited by Pete Finney on 17 March 2006 at 11:54 AM.]

Henry Nagle · Post by **Henry Nagle** » 17 Mar 2006 10:11 am

Bill McCloskey! Well said.

Things were pretty tense at the time, weren't they?
I don't think any of us are seperating this from our own political beliefs.

I'm a contractor and speaking for myself, I'd rather not work for a client that I couldn't have a rational and polite conversation with them about politics. I don't care if they're blue or red or what ever. If they kind handle my opinion, then they sure won't like my bill

. Being self employed makes this much easier of course.

Personally... I think; if you've got an opinion and you can state it rationally, go for it. If you've got 10,000 people in front of you, more power to you. It's important that people care what's happening. It's also important that people listen to and tolerate each others beliefs. Being blacklisted for stating your opinion doesn't sound like free speech to me. Freedom only works if we allow each other to be free. I'm a lefty, and I still listen to "The Fightin' Side Of Me". Sincerity and strength are two things I love about Merle Haggard no matter what he's singing.

Having said that, I doubt that Natalie Maines would have made that comment in Texas. At least not at the time.

By the way. Congratulations on a great gig, Pete! [This message was edited by Henry Nagle on 17 March 2006 at 10:14 AM.][This message was edited by Henry Nagle on 17 March 2006 at 10:24 AM.]

Marlin Smoot · Post by **Marlin Smoot** » 17 Mar 2006 10:26 am

Radio stations banning records and artist's has a long list that goes way back. Remember the movie about New York DJ; Alan Freed?

Remember when John Lennon said the Beatles were more famous than Jesus? Somehow they got through it but lots a ton of fans in doing so. Imagine, maybe they could have been even bigger than they were. The magic of the early Beatles were lost that day much as the Chicks magic after their statement.

Radio stations are to reflect the communities from which they broadcast.
If the majority of that community does not want to hear an artist, they can voice thier view. That's why some stations play the Chicks music and some don't.

I recall an entire (small) town got rid of MTV from their cable provider. Some books are ban from public schools. Banning has a long history in public and it will continue to do so. Really, this is not new ground. Just new to the Chicks.

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 17 Mar 2006 10:31 am

The Chicks are free to say whatever they want, fans are free to buy whatever CDs they want, go to whatever shows they want, or speak out against said speech, provided they all respect reasonable legal limits. What's the uproar about? Sounds like democracy in action to me. Yawn.

Of course, Jim Cohen is exactly right with point 3 that a lot of people are hypocritical about what kind of political statements they deem "free speech" versus "seditious comments" or "intolerance of opposing views". This happens on all ends of the political spectrum, IMO. Funny, I don't think anything we say here is gonna change that.

BTW, thanks for the correction on France vs. London. In the early days of this "controversy", the angry DJs and news media made quite a point of the fact that the comments were made in, essentially, a country hostile to our plans, France.

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 17 Mar 2006 10:42 am

Rick,

I didn't mean to lump all supporters of Bush together; surely there are exceptions. But I think the general point remains that many (most?) who disapproved of Maines' comments, support the President and his agenda. So, if the President didn't take personal offense to the remark, why should they? In fact, he cited it as a prime example of American freedom at its best.

On point #2, I don't blame the President for the radio bans. In fact, if he is consistent and genuine in his comments, he should find them anathema to the American Way. I blame the radio stations for caving in and being willing to create a ban and fire DJs for their refusal to cooperate with it. That's downright Un-American, don't you agree? (I'm betting you do.) (Of course I realize that they weren't willing to take the economic risk entailed in resisting the popular outcry.)

Finally, I'm cool with anybody saying that they don't want any politics mixed in with their music. (In fact, I tend to be like that myself.) I just want to hear people add to the end of the sentence "... and that goes equally for political opinions with which I agree as well as those with which I disagree." And I'd like to see them call for crushing the CDs with a bulldozer of any artist who puts out a political song (or statement) with which they do agree. [This message was edited by Jim Cohen on 17 March 2006 at 10:44 AM.]

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 17 Mar 2006 10:55 am

Some books are ban from public schools. Banning has a long history in public and it will continue to do so.

Yes, and so does book burning have a long and sorry history. I would argue that banning of ideas - written, musical, or otherwise - is antithetical to the very notion of free speech. It's one thing to say "I don't want to read/listen to something", but quite another to say "You can't read/listen to something".

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 17 Mar 2006 10:56 am

Kevin,

I'm sorry, but your observation about feelings running high re: the Chicks because another soldier has just been buried struck me as absurd - then Pete Finney answered, probably more eloquently than I'm managing to do.....

I wanted to scream when that Sawyer woman 'interviewed' the group on GMA - Maines has nothing to apologize for!!!! If her original comments, given the extreme conservatism of the country music audience, prove to be ill-advised, then she'll lose money. That's unfortunate, in my view, because the group is one of the best country music acts of the last twenty years.

Bush seems to have her remarks in perspective - it's a pity the rest of America can't manage it...

RR

Steinar Gregertsen · Post by **Steinar Gregertsen** » 17 Mar 2006 11:03 am

Voltaire:

"I don't agree with you but I will defend to death your right to state your opinion"

Wise words that seems to have been lost somewhere.......

Steinar

------------------
www.gregertsen.com
Southern Moon Northern Lights

[This message was edited by Steinar Gregertsen on 17 March 2006 at 11:04 AM.]

Rick Garrett · Post by **Rick Garrett** » 17 Mar 2006 11:09 am

Valid points Jim. See, this is American Democracy in action and I think it's cool.

I agree with some of the President's decisions and disagree with other things he does or says. I could disagree with him vehemently and voice that opinion in public here in the USA but man there's no way on God's green earth that I'd voice an opinion like that overseas.

Thanks Dave! Now I know why I had it stuck in my head that they were in gay (snicker) Paris. I thought I was losing what's left of my mind.

The title of the song "Not Ready to Make Nice" pretty much says it all so far as their attitude concerning this. So when they are ready to "Make Nice" somebody call me and I'll buy their music again. In my opinion NOBODY is so good that they can tell their entire listening public where to get off and that's exactly what their new song seems to do.

Rick