The Boss Speaks, You Fools Better Listen

Mousebounce · #41 05-02-2003, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mousebounce

against her.

On my end, I own their CD, and haven't burned it yet.

:P

But I won't take that right away from anyone else.

You aren't worried about the safety consecuences of setting stuff on fire??

According to the world, we have guns to deal with on a daily basis. What is a little fire???

letitrock · #42 05-02-2003, 01:35 AM

a fire the's not big

Mike · #43 05-02-2003, 01:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mousebounce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mousebounce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek Bliss

Natalie Maines didn't say anything wrong.
The Dixie Chicks are a convenient scapegoat for the warmongers.
The point of freedom of speech is the ability to protest, complain, disagree with the government.

Think about this... country music as a whole is a very patriotic genre. They broke an unwritten rule of the country music community.
The radio stations who claim to be bombarded with people calling in asking for the banning of DIxie Chicks records... are they ClearChannel radio stations? Radio stations doing what their listeners call in and tell them to do... they're worried they'll lose listeners? Not really? That they'll lose advertisers? Not really. Do they think they can gain popularity as doing something current and milking a controversy and maybe gain some new listeners and attention? Sure.
Clear Channel organized several "pro troop" rallies around the US... and packaged "news" audio packages played on radio (we heard them in NY) - ridiculous.
Clear Channel is borderline monopoly and the FCC hasn't really gone after the fact that Clear Channel owns radio stations, owns concert venues, owns promoters.. and tried to buy agencies who book the artists into the venues, etc... It's a monopoly but the FCC hasn't nailed them. Whose in charge of the FCC? Colin Powell's son. Who's Bush's Secretary of State? Colin Powell? Somehow, it's all a bit sinister.

Mob mentality took over and those who don't think are those banning the Dixie Chicks... They were a bit clueless and didn't realize the ramifications of what they said, when they said it... but then again, they're just being used as the scapegoats. Speaking out against your government doesn't make you anti-American, it's that privilege that makes you an American.

Seems to me this is more about Clear Channel then the Dixie Chicks.

They were a bit clueless?? I doubt it.

If you want freedom of speech, go for it. But remember, people in turn have the freedom to react.

Not convinced how much it was the ppl reacting

Considering that a great many people were on the news, voicing their displeasure, I think people did react.

Clear Channel, wouldn't shock me if they had a part in it, because they do suck.

But, I really do feel people were annoyed with it and reacted and Clear Channel doesn't hold all the blame.

Image if real parliamentary debates were like this.... IDS said something Blair didn't like, so he took his shoe off, threw it at him & walked out of the room so that he didn't have to listen to the rest of his opening statement.

Mousebounce · #44 05-02-2003, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mousebounce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mousebounce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek Bliss

Natalie Maines didn't say anything wrong.
The Dixie Chicks are a convenient scapegoat for the warmongers.
The point of freedom of speech is the ability to protest, complain, disagree with the government.

Think about this... country music as a whole is a very patriotic genre. They broke an unwritten rule of the country music community.
The radio stations who claim to be bombarded with people calling in asking for the banning of DIxie Chicks records... are they ClearChannel radio stations? Radio stations doing what their listeners call in and tell them to do... they're worried they'll lose listeners? Not really? That they'll lose advertisers? Not really. Do they think they can gain popularity as doing something current and milking a controversy and maybe gain some new listeners and attention? Sure.
Clear Channel organized several "pro troop" rallies around the US... and packaged "news" audio packages played on radio (we heard them in NY) - ridiculous.
Clear Channel is borderline monopoly and the FCC hasn't really gone after the fact that Clear Channel owns radio stations, owns concert venues, owns promoters.. and tried to buy agencies who book the artists into the venues, etc... It's a monopoly but the FCC hasn't nailed them. Whose in charge of the FCC? Colin Powell's son. Who's Bush's Secretary of State? Colin Powell? Somehow, it's all a bit sinister.

Mob mentality took over and those who don't think are those banning the Dixie Chicks... They were a bit clueless and didn't realize the ramifications of what they said, when they said it... but then again, they're just being used as the scapegoats. Speaking out against your government doesn't make you anti-American, it's that privilege that makes you an American.

Seems to me this is more about Clear Channel then the Dixie Chicks.

They were a bit clueless?? I doubt it.

If you want freedom of speech, go for it. But remember, people in turn have the freedom to react.

Not convinced how much it was the ppl reacting

Considering that a great many people were on the news, voicing their displeasure, I think people did react.

Clear Channel, wouldn't shock me if they had a part in it, because they do suck.

But, I really do feel people were annoyed with it and reacted and Clear Channel doesn't hold all the blame.

Image if real parliamentary debates were like this.... IDS said something Blair didn't like, so he took his shoe off, threw it at him & walked out of the room so that he didn't have to listen to the rest of his opening statement.

I bet IDS would be a little more careful next time. :P

Mongoose · #45 05-02-2003, 02:13 AM

I bet she doesnt know who IDS is!!!

Quote:

You aren't worried about the safety consecuences of setting stuff on fire??

no, thats what keeps her husband in a job :]

Derek Bliss · #46 05-02-2003, 02:30 AM

Natalie Maines said what she said. She probably did not expect the hail and brimstone that they band has suffered. If she wants to speak her mind - so be it. If others choose to voice their opposition to her speaking out, let them do it by not buying her CDs. Or throwing out their concert tickets or breaking the CDs they own. But when you hear stories about the threats the 3 women are getting... and the fact that of all the people speaking out, the 3 "all American girls" in this country trio became the posterchildren for the horrible anti-American traitors? Please... they're scapegoats. They shouldn't be surprised record sales drop... that bought themselves some really bad press. And I don't think they don't expect other to disagree with them... it's just that it's been made into this huge story... and it's just not that big a deal. The media used them... radio used them... what's scary is the follow-the-sheep mentality of the redneck country llisteners who were so quick to drop the Dixie Chicks when they were 'told' that they said something that wasn't patriotic. No shortage of idiots out there.

Mousebounce · #47 05-02-2003, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mongoose

I bet she doesnt know who IDS is!!!

Quote:

You aren't worried about the safety consecuences of setting stuff on fire??

no, thats what keeps her husband in a job :]

Iain Duncan-Smith- Tory Party :P

letitrock · #48 05-02-2003, 02:11 PM

i shouldn't have to see that name on a friendly BJ board

IDS is a racist extremist

Mongoose · #49 05-02-2003, 02:18 PM

Conservative, use the proper terms please mousey

letitrock · #50 05-02-2003, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mongoose

Conservative, use the proper terms please mousey

what's wrong with Tory ?

that is a correct term?

The Boss Speaks, You Fools Better Listen

NBJ - Everything Else