News-Record.com

Well Bob, I guess the Chicks figure if it's good enough for Algore and Jimmie Carter, it's good enough for them.

Stand by for a deluge of links to npr as liberal 'proof' as to why you are wrong and the Chicks are the "true patriots".

This entire Chicks drama is one of the most meaningless, useless and insignificant stories put into newsprint and cyber bits that I've ever seen.

Who really cares what Natalie Maines or any other entertainer thinks about world politics? Laura Ingraham said it best to the Chicks, "Shut-up and Sing". Singing is what they do best, and without that ability, no one would care what Maines or the others think.

While the chicks enjoyed "Freedom of Speech" they neglected to consider "Freedom of Consequences." Capitalism Rules!

Your are right on the money ORR. Actually no one really gives a hoot and a hollar what the Dixie Chicks think when it comes to politics or much else either. The fact that they sing gets them the attention, Frankly I don't think much of their so called "Country singing" either. To me it's not country but then that's just my opinion and you are welcome to yours.

Mr. Goodman,
People are being shot, dying of hunger, have no insurance, and you're concerned about the Dixie Chicks. If that's the case, you are going to love the Gay Marriage Debate and the Flag Burning Debate that the Republicans will have you stirred up over.
Get a life!

"Their comments, during a time of war, cost them dearly, primarily with the country-and-western fans who used to buy their records. They deserved the repercussions they received for their comments."

The funny part, Bob, is that the repercussions you mention include having your new album debut at #1 on the charts.

http://top40-charts.com/news.php?nid=23993

I'm sure that they are suffering tremendously in this great country of ours.

That said, I agree with Oak Ridge Runner- I don't care what she has to say about politics. Hell, I don't even like their music, and certainly won't buy it.

Their new CD is doing quite well, isn't it.

Boycotts don't work. Remember the France boycott? LOLOLOLOL!!!!

I'm gonna go buy their new CD just because of their comments.

It's funny that people get their panties in such a bunch over nothing. They expressed their opinion that they were ashamed that Bush was from Texas. Well, many, many Texans feel the same way. Heck, I'm embarassed he's an American!

As I said in the last Dixie Chicks post, they have the right to emanate whatever they wish from their politically shallow minds, the market will then decide whether they are worth listening to or not. They will lose some fans and gain some new ones like Brian Harper and Micheal Moore. That's the way it works.

I, on the other had, have chosen to do business with customers of all political stripes and will not utter Dixie Chick nonsense that would alienate my clientele.

Once I saw a bumper sticker I really wanted. It read:

Annoy a liberal, work hard and be happy.

I decided this sticker wouldn't bide well with a left leaning client whilst pulling up in their parking lot, so my SUV is devoid of this charmer.

So don't worry folks, 'ol Dan will do business with everyone, no alienation here. Liberals your money is more than welcome as long as it's green.

Also posted earlier a quote from Micheal Jordan. He was asked why he didn't endorse a Democratice gubernatorial candidate. His response: "Republicans buy sneakers too".

"I'm gonna go buy their new CD just because of their comments."

With the Harperesque mentality it is no wonder the world looks at us and thinks we are foolish. Guess if the Chicks were selling dog poop and saying it was good snack, and the Republicans said it might make you sick, then you would buy that too huh! I love the mentality, it keeps folks with that mentality from getting elected. Talk about blind leading the blind. Cutting off the nose to spite the face mentality and other such saying that come to mind. I never want to hear a comment from this type of mentality saying that some of the posters here are blind and just follow along.That would indeed be a total joke after reading such comments as I'll buy it just because.........

I don't buy their music because as I said it sure ain't country to me. When they start doing some real country then I might be persuaded to buy otherwise it's a no go.

Well I'm in a pissy mood so I'll take on this crocka crap:

"Annoy a liberal, work hard and be happy."

Work hard like GWB.

Never have to worry about where rent is coming from.
Get into Harvard at least in part because your Grandpa and Daddy both attended.
Graduate with a "C", he probably worked some for it - but so did every other "C" student.
Enter into Business 1. When it fails, let Daddy's friends bail you out.
Enter into Business 2. When it fails, let Daddy's friends bail you out.
Enter into Business 3. When it fails, let Daddy's friends bail you out, but this time, cash in your stock for $800,000 before the world finds out. Don't worry about insider trading allegations; the head of the SEC was once your daddy's private attorney.
Enter into Business 4. This time - pick an easyone like ... I dunna, let's buy a baseball team.
If folks come to your house and offer to make you President, take them up on the offer.
Wear a Flag on your lapel to prove you work hard, and are more American then slimmy liberals.

I forgot - work hard to score your drugs, but work even harder to say, "I won't discuss it", as a final solution to avoid the bad vibes from your previous bad habits. As a a silver foot-in-mouth Bush baby, you can get away with simple denial, but be sure to call it "hard work".

"It's Hard Work", "It's Hard Work", "It's Hard Work", "It's Hard Work", "It's Hard Work".

OPPS I did It again - let me smile and put on my flag lapel ... there there, now I feel like an Real AMERICAN - inclusive and fair and all that!

JDR,
How can you say that "W" hasn't pulled himself up by the bootstraps like Dan insists everyone should do!

The Dixie Chicks are selling more records and making more money than Dan or Mr. P will ever see, but they don't understand why they didn't become Republicans when they became wealthy! Ten more years, and you won't be able to find a middle class Republican......and if the Republicans continue bankrupting the treasury, you won't find a middle class at all.

DD you don't read well do you. I don't give a crap about the Dixie Chicks so called "country music style" that is the reason I don't by their records. It has nothing to do with what they say or don't say. They can run off at the mouth all they want but either way it won't influence me to buy or not buy their music. I don't have a Harperesque mindset.

Just out of curiosity, what do you actually know about my finances. For all you know I could be part of the Williams Industries, or could have invested wisely and could be listed on the millionaires list. You do know that not all those having money are listed there, don't you? So DD, don't go making SWAG's on other folks finances unless you have seen the financial statement.

I try and try to see this as an issue, but I just can't.

The political views or success (or lack thereof) of the Dixie Chicks is of no consequence whatsoever to me.

They made political statements a few years ago and people reacted. Not exactly rocket science.

Where is the issue?

Never bought a Dixie Chick album before their comments. Won't buy one after their comments. Could care less.

DD since you opened the subject on spending the middle class into non-existance perhaps you need to take a look at some numbers on just who the big spenders are among our elected representatives.
Here are a few links that show just who the "real porkers" are.

Want to see who are really the big spenders and "porkers in Congress". Here are the links. These are rated from 0-100 with 0 being the worst and 100 being the best at controling spending.

The last two links show our NC big spenders and low spenders. Butterfield received a 0%, Etheridge 10%, Price, 15%,Brad Miller, 13%, Ballance, 22%,Watt, 0% These of course are all Democrats who I believe are up for re-election. The lowest rated Republican was 43%. So we see who the big spenders are in this state. Don't you think it's time to vote out the "HOGS". Of course I say vote them all out and start over again.

http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_Ratings_Intro&JServSessionIdr012=sz8to95ei2.app24a

http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/VoteCenter?location=S&page=congScorecard

http://www.cagw.org/site/VoteCenter?page=congScorecard&congress=108&location=H&lcmd=next&lcmd_cf=

http://www.cagw.org/site/VoteCenter?page=congScorecard&congress=108&location=H&lcmd=prev&lcmd_cf=

All we are doing by debating this issue and writing letters and discussing this is exactly what the Chiks wanted. To stir up people to get press. They made their comments, radio stations boy-cotted, people burned their cd's (like they cared, someone had to have bought them first) and generally raised such a fuss that the dixie chicks apologized and hoped to move on. So some time goes by and suddenly they don't feel so apologetic and they not only decide to write a few songs about it, but that now they want to take back thier apology. It just "happens" to be at a time when they are releasing a new CD. They just want attention. Seems like that's what they are getting. My advice, if you don't like them and you don't want them to succeed, then shut up about it.

"All we are doing by debating this issue and writing letters and discussing this is exactly what the Chiks wanted."

Exactly. It's all just schtick. They're playing both sides against the middle, and laughing all the way to the bank.

Here Mr. Produce, debate this!
Why DO We Fight?
by SusanG
Sun Jun 04, 2006 at 09:36:14 AM PDT
It's safer dodging bullets and IED's on the streets of Iraq than trusting America's broken health care system to take care of your family. Meet Staff Sgt. Matthew Kruger, via a recent article in the Los Angeles Times:

For Kruger, who returned to a war zone for his third tour in December, the danger of losing his family's health insurance was more real and immediate than the danger of dying in combat.

Kruger's not alone in his decision to reluctantly re-enlist; the article details several parents, including a single mom, who are re-upping because they believe their families are more in danger from an increasingly failing American health care system than from their own possible demise.

For many service members, it's a matter of balancing risk: Within the military, multiple deployments are commonplace, and more than 2,400 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq and 18,000 have been wounded. Outside the military, 46 million people in the U.S. have no health insurance, and those who do pay increasingly higher prices for it.

At what point can the question be raised: Is a country worth dying for that cannot ensure that a child's heart condition will be treated? This risking of parental death raises another troubling aspect, an undercurrent that runs through the whole article, that a parent's worth is more important as material provider than as an active and daily presence in family life. And it's not simply a health care gap that leads the brave to sign up for more tours; the lack of job opportunities in general is forcing the risk-taking as well. Air Force Staff Sgt. Alex Myers surveys the civilian landscape and like many others, reaches a logical conclusion:

...In the Air Force, he is a rising star with a job he is proud of. Out of it, he is just another guy with a high school diploma.

Myers' wife is understandably concerned:

"I don't want to raise our kids on my own. I saw my mom do it. It's not an easy life," Krissy said in the cheery living room of her home in Spanaway, Wash., near Ft. Lewis, a changing table in the corner awaiting the baby who would soon arrive. "It breaks the kids' hearts. It breaks everyone's heart."

But Myers has decided to reenlist in November for four more years. A $40,000 bonus cinched the deal. "It all came down to financial stability," he said. He is scheduled to return to Iraq in January for his fourth tour.

A March Gallup poll indicates that the concerns of these military families are the same as those of civilians, according to Editor and Publisher:

A new Gallup Poll released Tuesday reveals that the issue cited by most Americans as the one they worry about the most is "the availability and affordability of healthcare."

A total of 68% said they worried about this a "great deal." Coming in second is the social security system at 51%. Following close behind that were "availability and affordability of energy," drug use, crime and violence--and only then "the possibility of terrorist attacks in the U.S." (at 45%).

And a recent survey by Money magazine produced this eye-opening result:

What scares parents most when it comes to the safety of their family? Terrorism? No. Crime? Negative. Violent video games? The environment? Not even close.

A recent survey asked 300 parents of school-age children to rank a list of fears in order of which inspired the most horror. Ahead of all the above, believe it or not, was the high cost of college tuition.

When we've created a society in which people are more fearful of college tuition costs, lousy job opportunities and lack of health care than being blown to bits in a war zone, we have to ask ourselves what are we asking our troops to fight for in the end? Traditionally, warriors have gone off to battle ostensibly to preserve a nation's way of life at home. What happens when that way of life becomes so gutted by a culture of individualistic greed and self-preservation that communitarian cooperation and goals no longer exist?

Again, I ask: What are we asking our soldiers to fight for?

Guess the "Bush Derangement Syndrome" folks are too busy breaking up Gay Weddings and Flag burnings, to cipher on this post!

Those "deranged" supporters of 'W' have heard their master's voice and they are following his orders!

Make Gay Weddings and Flag Burning the big issues and no one will notice the war, the corruption and the incompetence!

neoCawn,
You are gonna love this one! I spoke with a former Guilford County Republican party officer who told me she was "embarrased" by the whole sanctity of marriage debate going on now. She is a graduate of a fine Virginia university and has multiple degrees. When I asked her why she still supported Bush, she said, "I don't support him one bit! He has abandoned the conservative movement, and his ploy with homosexuals and flag burning is so transparent that even our 'redneck' base will be leaving us". That was powerful stuff, coming from a powerful lady.
Of course, I assured her that one of her so called 'redneck' base was still with Bush 100%! (That would be you neo!)

JUst what in the name of common sense did your long post have to do with the Dixie Chicks and why I don't like their brand of "country music". Must you always, when you have nothing else to add to the subject attempt to blow smoke up somebodys butt and impress them with a long copy and paste?

And JDR what the heck was all that rant about. Did you forget your coffee this morning or did somebody just pee in your cornflakes. It has nothing to do with anything either that I can see, especially the Dixie Chicks and so called country music that I don't like and don't buy and for that reason and that reason only. I just flat don't like em.

For someone who keeps suggesting others are going to get "worked up into a lather" over the gay marriage/flag burning issue the demented deacon sure is foaming at the mouth. I see no one else sweating this. Just lil' 'jonny one note'.

Oh, and I was wondering when the "republican told me" story was going to surface. At least this one had a new twist: the demented deacon was in agreement with this republican. lol

Oh, this reminds me: Just today I happened to speak with the manager of the Dixie Chicks who happens to be a democrat and she told me that...

Do you not see how totally inept you sound, world traveler. Sounds like a kid in the playground trying to convince everyone else how important he is because he has a complex.

Mrp, just be glad you didn't have to suffer through about 19 npr links instead of a long cut and paste job. It could have been a LOT more boring.

Soprry MRP - I hadn't had my coffee, and was just following Dan's lead >>

"Once I saw a bumper sticker I really wanted. It read:

"Annoy a liberal, work hard and be happy."

Stupid, imho, it needed some Hard Work applied back.

(you know, like the hard work GWB used to become president)

neoCawn,
Tell me again, "Why" do you support GWB? What "GREAT" things has he done?
You make a lot us laugh out here, and for that we thank you. But it is still unclear why you support Bush so solidly. He's definitely not a fiscal conservative. Oh, it must be his opposition to Flag Burning and Gay marriage!!! You know, the REAL issues of the day. They must be real for you and Mr. Produce, because you both try to deny that the President held a televised announcement that was also carried on local talk radio, about how we were in danger of activist judges (Roy Moore excluded) letting homo-seck-shewels get married! Get a life!

JDR,
Dan would tell you that GWB pulled himself up by the bootstraps!

No, Dan would tell Deacon that he is so predictable and boring with continuous rants about gay marriage and flag burning. Everyone go look at the LTE about the aquatic center in Greensboro. Deacon manages to tie in Bush/gay marriage/flag burning into a LTE about an aquatic center in Greensboro, NC.

Last week there was an LTE about illegal immigration and Deacon brings up what an idiot Bush is with the global warming issue.

Do you have anything else to offer than a moving target with no substance in the argument?

JDR, sorry to get you so worked up about that bumper sticker, hope you aren't losing sleep over it.

I think the whole 'gay marriage ban' is a dead issue. It has no chance of being passed. It will die on the Senate floor. Currently, states (and their voters) have decided whether or not to allow gay marriage in their state and that is probably the best way to deal with this issue.

The media and others have basically written this off as nothing more than politics in an election year. And I would agree with that. However, it does at least attempt to get people on record with how they stand on gay marriage. And I do consider gay marriage to be an issue when election times come. Is it the most important issue? Definitely not.

Oh, one more point about this gay marriage debate that has nothing to do with the Dixie Chicks.

Over the last few days, much of the media has tried to use the 25th anniversary of the discovery of the AIDS epidemic as support for why gay people should be allowed to marry. Basically, they are saying that unless gay people are married in a court of law, they cannot be faithful to one another.

Talk about spin.

Personally, I think that is just insulting to gay people and the rest of us to say that unless you have a piece of paper from a court, you can't determine to be faithful to each other.

Another opinion of mine. Get the government out of ALL of our marriages.

Yellowdog here is a take on the gay marriage issue.

The Defensive Marriage Act passed under Bill Clinton is basically being challenged by lower courts but has not been sucessful as of yet. However it is feared that a challenge will be made and then heard by the Supreme Court and be struck down., forcing those states who do not wish to recognize same sex marriage to do so. Example Mass same sex couple moves to Minn where same sex marriage is not recognized would be forced by the court to recognize the marriage. Clinton felt it was up to the states to decided and the majority have decided that marriage should be between man and woman by hugh majorities. Unfortunately there are judges who would override the will of the people. Thus you have a call for a Federal Constitutional amendment.
Rather than a constitutional admendment would it not be better to allow the states to rule and not be overturned by overzelous judges who are influenced by a very few rather than by what the will of the people of that state wish. I would prefer it to be a states right but there needs to be a protection for the states who have such laws on the books.
Civil Unions: In many countries it is customary to have both a civil union and a religious marriage ceremony. The civil marriage is the contract which is binding in a court of law not the religious ceremony. Those prefering not to have a religious ceremony are not forced to do such.Afterall no one can go to the church to have the marriage disolved through divorce, annulment yes but then there are civil laws that also cover this so actually the church is only giving their religious seal of approval. So what is the problem with allowing those states who wish to recognize same sex marriages to have the option of a civil ceremony which give all rights and priviliges to those wishing it.
Is it a matter of legality or is it a matter of forcing an agenda on and over the will of the majority of people. I feel it is an agenda. After all is said and done the earlier gay marriage advocates advocated for the same rights as hetrosexuals when it came to inheritance, insurance and other civil legalities. It appears that this group has been taken over by the farleft fringe groups and that this group is forceing their agenda upon the majority of gay's who wish only to have the legal rights of a union. Just as in so many other issues it is the fringe groups be they farleft or farright who wish to infringe upon the rights of others inorder to push their own agenda against the will of the majority.

Now as to why this President has decided to announce his support for the amendment. I beleive it is partically due to the facts that I have mentioned above. It is also, in some of his advisors eyes, a good political move during a pivitol election year. It brings it to the forefront regardless of whether the actually candidates wish it to be or not. It worked in 04 when the marriage amendment for states was on the ballot in 11 states. In each instance, the amendment or ruling passed and in each state Bush won the majority as well as did the Republican or in one or two cases the Democrat was in favor of the ruling against same sex marriage recognition. Tom Daschle , if you will remember ran strong in favor of same sex marriage and was soundly defeated by his opponent who stood on the premise that marriage is to be only between man and woman. So in effect it worked and some of the republican leadership are gambleing that it will work again.
It was interesting to note that Byrd of WVA, a strong critic of this president on many issues , is for the amendment. So I suppose we shall see if the stragedy works. It is doubtful that the amendment issue will pass in the 06 elections so it will once again be placed for passage in the 08 elections and once again become a non-issue issue.

mrp,

thanks for the comments. I know this is way off subject. I don't care, however.

As far as inheritances and other rights, I'd guess the best policy is to have a current legal will in place to protect your assets after you die. Unfortunately, there are those who would do other than what the deceased had in mind, but I think they'd do that regardless of whether there was a civil union law in place.

I guess that for most of us it is really a matter of what you believe. I can think of three distinct beliefs.

If you believe that gay marriage is just utterly and morally wrong and should never be legitimized by our legal system, then I guess there is no argument that will make you in favor of it.

If you believe that it is wrong from a religious standpoint and personally would never do such a thing but don't feel it is your place to tell others how to live your life, then you might be against a gay marriage ban or ambivalent about it.

Then there are folks who see homosexuality as completely normal--just another form of love. You'd probably be completely against it.

Personally, I have a problem with tax incentives or penalties and other laws that only apply to married people. I just think that marriage should be about love, not money or legal status.

it simple divide and conquer. be a sucker if you want, I'll not fall for it. I also find is a really good example that the Republican party is not about "Conservative", it's about "Morals".

A true "Conservative" approach would keep government out of the peoples lives, but the current definition is for massive government incrochment in peoples lives - with this just one of the many examples everyone is tired of hearing about but still get sucker-punched anyway.

btw - I like the difference between "Values" and Morals" - "Values" being what you hold true and "Morals" being what you implse on everone else.

James,
My sentiments exactly! Flag Burning too!

Guess the hard core ("Bush Derangement Syndrome")folks would really love a flag burning at a gay wedding!

What a waste of time and taxpayer money to even discuss such lame issues.

Then why do you always bring up the issue Deacon?
It would appear that you are the only one to even mention the subject and you have managed to do that in nearly every post regardless of the subject. Could it be that you have nothing to add to the conversation so you feel you have to throw in some idiot remark.