I've never had a very strong opinion of the dixie chicks (probably partially because I hadn't heard of them before the aforementioned asinine comment).

However, in America we all live with an odd sort of deal-with-the-devil, where we all try not to care about how fundamentally wrong, screwed up, or otherwise deranged our neighbors are unless they cross over the line of becoming physically dangerous. We are nice to our neighbors despite the probability that our neighbor holds political views and votes for people who would ruin the country if they really held sway.

We work with people where (generally) n-1 of them necessarily believe in the wrong religion (generalizing to everyone beliving in a mutually exclusive religion, but in a small business this is viable). We buy things from people who probably would like to see us against the wall when the revolution comes, and if we knew enough we'd want them to be up against the wall when the revolution comes.

We have an odd sort of tacit understanding with each other to treat the important stuff as irrelevant and concentrate only on the minor things in order for life to actually work.

In some sense, it's a violation of the American melting pot to hold up the idiocy of a singer as something important when it comes to the (comparative) triviality of whether or not to buy their music.

Then again, the Dixie Chicks are the ones who brought it up.

I can't believe that Entertainment Weekly is putting THAT picture on the cover.

==========================================
Webby Awards voting ends 5/23/03
Cast a write-in vote for Dean's World as best Personal Site.
Click here to register and vote.
==========================================

Btw, is it just me or does the one in the middle (who's kneeling rather than sitting) look like she was recently lobotomized, though not too severely? She just has this vapid look like she doesn't know what's going on or why she's there or what that guy with the odd black box is doing or why he's pointing it at them.

It's a well-known formula, isn't it? Piss a lot of people off, take heat from the pissed-off people, and then act like an innocent, vulnerable victim who's been pilloried by the forces of ignorance and stupidity."

... and then take off your clothes to get more attention. At least we weren't subjected to that from Bill Clinton.

Frankly I really think they are the benefactors of the "just spell my name right" school of publicity. Personally I have never let anyone's politics interfere with my enjoyment of them as an entertainer. Or of friendship for that matter. One of my dear friends of 25 years is so far on the left he makes Jane Fonda look like a Republican. Conversely I have another friend whose personal hero is Rush Limbaugh.

Fact is this war was a very divisive issue, not so much for the issue itself but what is said about US foreign policy in the wake of the action in Afghanistan. And now there are those trying to beat the drums against Syria (not that I think that is very likely). So what it comes down to for a lot of people is what is US foreign policy? Are we now the liberator of the oppressed? Or is that only an issue when there are other national interests at stake? If that is the case then it seems that our desire to liberate Iraq has a bit of a cynical component to it. After all if you take George Bush at his word, he was willing to allow Saddam Hussein to continue his program of rape, murder and torture if he just gave up his WMD's. Where is the "moral" concern for the Iraqi people in that? There are a lot of questions that all of this suggests and precious few answers forthcoming.

As for the Dixie Chicks, and other anti-war celebrities, it's really the media that is giving this whole thing legs. I mean right up until the shooting started there are a lot of people who were more then just uncomfortable with the idea of a war with such dubious pedigree. For every moronic yahoo on the left screaming Bush = Hitler there were people on the right who thought that Iraqi's were the perpetrators of 9/11. I think that in a very short amount of time the Dixie chicks will be just fine because most Americans aren’t really all that political. People like the chicks were important for the ratings of people like Limbaugh and Hannity. If the chicks didn't exist, the Limbaugh's of the world would have had to create them. Americans love a villain.

We in the blogosphere have a somewhat myopic view, we are political, our readers are political but frankly the numbers are really small. The traffic generated on the top ten blogs combined wouldn't be enough to make a small cable channel profitable. There is a huge, vast population out there whose attitude toward the war was, "why are they interrupting my soaps/ballgame?" When the US goes to war there is another fairly sizable population who wants to, "kick ass and take names" regardless of the issues and don’t really have a critical understanding of the issues.

So all this focus on the Dixie Chick is kind of irrelevant. If the Beatles can rebound from the Jesus remark the Chicks will rebound from this. For most people the war is over (dispute the fact that the really hard part is just beginning), and will go back to whatever they were doing before the shooting started.

I think the Chicks aren't really country; they have a couple of decent songs, but the reason they're (or were) so popular is that they went pop. So they aren't really "country".

Aside from that, I think Dean nailed them pretty well: Maines blew her big, rude, mouth, and when her fans got pissed off she backed wind and tried to change tack. Didn't work.

The sad thing is, they still haven't done the one thing that would probably mollify their fans: do some free concerts for the troops overseas. Travis Tritt first suggested that, and I still think it's a good idea.

Rick: you've missed the boat completely on the Chicks. This isn't some blogger "thing", nor is it a media invention. Thousands of people all across the country heard about Maine's crack, and decided they were offended or insulted. Then they did something about it. Hell, I know a lot of folks around here that hadn't even heard about the "controversy" (I personally wouldn't use that word, but others have) until I brought it up.

Nope, Maine's big mouth got the Chicks in trouble with their fans; people who are for the most part simply patriotic and tired of hearing the media (like, oh, big network anchors or famous movie stars) run their beliefs into the ground.

Chris: yes, you certainly can make allowances for your friends, but the Chicks aren't my friends. They are professional entertainers. Big difference. But if you want to still buy their CD's, go for it. I'm not that radical about it. And I find your remark about how "the middle one ... looks lobotomized" considering that's the one (Maines) who made the "crack heard 'round the world." 'Nuff said. :))

>>I can't believe that Entertainment Weekly is putting THAT picture on the cover.

Ara, I CAN believe it. The best aspect of women rock-n’-roll performers is their looks, especially their bodies. Remember Pat Benatar. She dressed to kill; I mean to make men drool. Remember Pebbles and her very cute push up outfit? That was just too much. These chicks call themselves Dixie chicks, not Dixie women. They obviously sell their femininity at least as well as their music. For me, I prefer their svelte bodies their beautiful legs; their young pretty faces and their obviously beautiful hair. I only wish…well forget that thought. Women will only call me a pig…and rightfully so.

I am sure Entertainment Weekly will sell record numbers of copies this week due to the cover itself. Then readers can find themselves under whelmed by the vapid, shallow viewpoints expressed by these “talented” singers (foreign policy specialists). Sex sells. It worked on me quite well all through my formative years. After reading the article I am sure readers will turn back to the cover and remember that forever. They will forget the content of the article. There probably is nothing there to remember.

Here's Maine's own words from a Diane Sawyer interview:

"At that moment, on the eve of war, I had a lot of questions that I felt were unanswered," Maines said. "I think the way I said it was disrespectful. The wording I used, the way I said it, that was disrespectful. I feel regret for, you know, the choice of words. Am I sorry that I asked questions and that I don't just follow? No."

Maines, who was interviewed with Maguire and Robison, said despite telling the London audience she was "ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas," she does not feel that way.

"No, I'm not truly embarrassed that, you know, President Bush is from my state, that's not really what I care about," she said. "I felt like there was a lack of compassion every time I saw Bush talking about this. I honestly felt a lack of compassion for people that are questioning this (war), for the people that are about to die for this on both sides.

-----------End Quote----------

I guess that counts for an apology.

Kevin --

I guess you're right. I just can't recall a similar cover on a glossy mainstream magazine. Unless you count Rolling Stone and its similar cover showing the Red Hot Chili Peppers a few years ago.

Am I sorry that I asked questions and that I don't just follow? No.

Gads, this kind of talk is poisonous. I know that, more than any anti-war talk, it has driven a wedge between me and my former liberal friends.

See, everybody who disagrees with her is just a sheep following the party line. *She,* on the other hand, is a deceptively rustic but actually Will Rogers-ily country girl "asking questions."

Note to Natalie: I asked questions too. And when they were answered, I got with the program.

Do questions remain? Sure as hell they do. Asking questions is never a mistake. But neither is making up your mind.

PS is that really her body, anyway? Looks like photoshop to me.

I think all three bodies are the work of somebody in the ET art department. Didn't the blond (not Maines)just have a baby recently? She was very pregnant in the video that was hot a couple of months ago.

The Entertainment weekly cover is designed to appeal to the pop audience since that audience is less fickle about stupid comments than the country-western audience.

The Dianne Sawyer interview was designed to mollify the country-western audience.

The two bits of spin negate each other.

If that picture wasn't seriously retouched, I'll eat the cover whole. Maines is a hefty (big boned) woman who almost looks lithesome in that picture. I want to see the original negatives!

Entertainment Weekly and Rolling Stone are pretty well known for their covers. About 2 years ago there was a Britney Spears cover on EW, and I still have a RS magazine that has a supermodel on the front. Sex does sell well for my demographic, and I am vulnerable to that kind of advertising.

Sometimes the articles are good, too. : )

They still don't get it. They had a right to say what they did. We have a right to hold them accountable for it. God Bless America. Love it or get the Hell out!

Someone on a local radio station raised an interesting point that is illustrated just above: Maines was the one who made the comment. Do her teammates agree with her? Have they said so explicitly in public? This isn't rehtorical; I simply don't know. It may be a point of interest, though.

For those who don't know me, I think Maines was rude and stupid in her remarks. I think she has a right to speak her mind (and aren't we all glad to know how little is in it!), and other people have a right not buy their stuff.

But... I've been hearing stories, now, about vandalism and death threats. That is completely unacceptable! Well, except for Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky. :)

But for anyone else, not at all acceptable.

I agree Maine's image, at least, has been "enhanced."

Dean: this will probably be spun into a part of their "bad girl" image; now they're "rebels" too. Feh.

How am I to judge these women, other than the way they chose to portray themselves on a magazine cover? So:

The one on the left is horse-faced. The one in the center (is she the one who bad-mouthed Bush before a foreign audience?) is squat and piggish. The one on the right has good legs and probably could do some modeling if she were younger.

Very late 20s and early 30s. In that case, inside of 12-15 years they will be as forgetten as Linda Rondstadt, Grace Slick or Michelle Phillips. All of whom had real talent. Sic transit gloria. (And sic transit Natalie/Emily/Martie.)

Are their music or lyrics any good? Who knows? It all sounds like the same jibberjabber sung against a whiney background. (Nice thing about the Beatles way back when: You could distinctly hear every syllable of every word in their lyrics, and the music was truly unique.)

Their individual or collective opinions about Bush, Texas, Iraq or anything else? Couldn't care less. Let them comment on blogsites like the rest of us.

Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI

Just another cowardly cover-up. Drop those hands, ladies.

Hester Prynne got an A. I'm not inclined to give any of the Dixies more than a B-minus.

Mr. Hill is quite perceptive.

The Chicks also did a nude picture for PETA, but that ad has been put on hold due to the controversy.

The other two girls share Maines leftist perspective.

The photo is even more shallow - if possible - than the comment in Great Britain.

Too bad they didn't stick to singing, cause it sure look's like they're washed up now.

I rolled on the floor about "the one in the middle" looking lobotomized. I think she was.

Go away and leave us alone, girls.

this is the stupidest thing ive ever seen. shutup stupid dixie chicks. i hate you. no1 called you saddam angels they just thought you were stupid...this magazine cover is even stupider. i will never buy a record by you.

Give it a rest already. You morons that belabor the comments made nearly 2 mos. ago need to get on with your lives. The Chicks are not politicians. They're musicians - and damned good ones at that. Their music hasn't changed. If you liked it before, you still like it now. I cannot believe the uproar you all have created over this, you freakin' boneheads.

Musicians say controversial things all the time. It's unusual to hear it from country artists, but Natalie's comments have provided an interesting glimpse into the misguided and utterly blind loyalty with which country music fans follow their "idols."

GET LIVES, you hokeys! If you get so involved with your musicians that one comment can cause you to stir up a national situation, I've got a suggestion for you: broaden your horizons and get lives. This country musician hero worship is pathetic, and you double-wide livin' hicks need to get a grasp on reality.

They sound like drowned cats and look like 'em too. Their music should be on the WBND station.

Gimme a break.

they are Saddam's sock puppets. Guess where Saddams hand is? Thats right, You got it ,

I believe our soldiers fight for the freedom to voice your opinion and not only if it agrees with the next person. I just wish it had not been said overseas. She was just trying to be funny without thinking what it would sound like