Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:14 pm
Wed Apr 30, 2003 6:24 pm
Wed Apr 30, 2003 6:47 pm
Wed Apr 30, 2003 8:24 pm
The people who are stomping on their CDs and whatever have every right to do that.BS has every right to say what he said.And you and I have every right to say what we say.Pete Dube wrote:We need to be careful here JB or this thread can quickly turn political and get deleted. On the one hand, I strongly disliked what Natalie Maines' said and how & where she said it. But on the other hand I have to support her right to say what she said, no matter how much I may dislike what she said and disagree with her viewpoint. One thing that is really troubling me is that it seems the Dixie Chicks are becoming demonized over this issue! People are even holding rallys to publicly stomp on there cd's! This kind of activity comes a little too close to the Nazi book burning for my liking. I think this may have been Springsteen's point!
Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:04 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 1:42 am
Thu May 01, 2003 3:52 am
Thu May 01, 2003 4:46 am
Thu May 01, 2003 11:02 am
Thu May 01, 2003 11:03 am
Thu May 01, 2003 11:59 am
Thu May 01, 2003 5:30 pm
Scotch;scotch wrote:I was going to refrain from this thread, but a stupid comment has been made and I will not let it go. (thank you Tom for pointing it out)
Before I get to that, let me first state that I disagree with the Ditsy Chicks and I have the right to stomp on their CD's, even burn them if I want to. No GOVERNMENT is silencing the Chicks, it is the people. Using a steamroller might be a bit silly, but so is equating that spectacle to Nazi GOVERNMENT-sponsored book burnings.
That said, jb, your statement concerning "homos" was very ignoarant and narrow-minded. I'm sorry, but saying that "homos" tried to silence Dr. Laura is about the stupidist thing I have heard. Just because the left-wing organization GLAAD was against Dr. Laura does not mean there was some "homo" conspiracy to silence her. I listen to Dr. Laura quite a bit and often enjoy her show, but she was just whining when she said she was being "attacked", just like some are whining that the Chicks are being "attacked". Both Laura and the Chicks were wrong to try to solicit sympathy and need to grow up and realize that when you say something people don't like, others have a right to speak against you and yes even write to businesses that sponsor radio shows/concert tours and threaten to boycott and/or protest those sponsors. The sponsors in turn have a right to listen to the CONSUMERS and then pull out of sponsorship agreements that might harm their sales, sales that they were attempting to increase by their support of the entertainers. Radio stations also have a right to listen to the people's requests that songs NOT be played by the chicks and have a right to decide if they weant to carry the Dr. Laura show or not.
As for this thread, jb, you need to read the guidelines of this web site which include not having political debates and no personal attacks.
FECC has not had to delete a thread yet, and I hope they go ahead and KEEP this one. Now that you know the rules, jb, I'm sure you won't attempt to start another political debate, will you?
Thu May 01, 2003 5:39 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 7:17 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 7:29 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 7:34 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 8:29 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 9:16 pm
jb wrote: Scotch;
Took your post ti heart,and realize that my message was way off key.My intent was not to start a political debate,but rather a statement of regret that as compared to Elvis,many entertainers dont know when to shut up.As I said,my intent wasnt to start a political debate,but I dont blame anyone for thinking that.And,I truly regret the homo statement,and anyone
offended by this remark will,I hope,accept my apology.
As for the liberal remark,no,jb dosent stand for Jeb Bush(good shot,Tom).
Im a centrist democrat,and was against the damn war from the beggining.
Im no "Bushie",but feel that many stars hurt the peace movement by their sometimes silly statements.
Again,please forgive a hurried,and not well thought out thread,as thats where the problems started.Thanks and God bless.
Thu May 01, 2003 9:41 pm
Thu May 01, 2003 11:56 pm
Fri May 02, 2003 4:36 am
Fri May 02, 2003 10:16 am
Sat May 03, 2003 6:34 am
A confederacy of amnesiacs
Friday, May 2, 2003
©2003 San Francisco Chronicle Page D - 18
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 291098.DTL
Let us wander together back to that golden time we like to call 2002. The Evil One, as officially identified by the White House, was Osama bin Laden. The government had sworn to take him "dead or alive." Most Americans thought that was a good idea because he had sent the planes into the World Trade Center and then bragged about it.
Bin Laden was in Afghanistan, protected by the nutso mullahs of the Taliban. Some of us worried about bombing an entire nation just to get bin Laden and his henchmen, but omelets and eggs and blah blah blah. Besides, we promised to rebuild Afghanistan after we kicked out the Taliban and captured bin Laden.
Later that year, it became clear that bin Laden had escaped our net. It also became clear that we were going to have neither the will nor the resources to rebuild Afghanistan. Also, the Taliban were not wiped out, they were merely hiding out.
You'd think some of this would raise some questions about broken promises, but by that time the focus was on the next Evil One, Saddam Hussein, and his weapons of mass destruction. How could we worry about Afghanistan (no longer a threat to us) when Hussein was there building nukes and anthrax bombs and God only knew what horrors in his secret labs.
The failure of the U.N. inspectors to find said labs was put down to their own typically European ineptitude (what kind of name is "Hans Blix," anyway?) plus the well-known craftiness of Hussein.
So we bombed another nation into submission; at this point, we pretty much have the power to bomb anyone into submission, although some of them, like North Korea or Israel, might do some bombing of their own first, which would not be good around election time.
And now it is May of 2003 and Saddam Hussein is just as alive as Osama bin Laden, the budget for the war on terror has been cut and shaved and generally abandoned (World Trade Center -- yesterday's news), and those secret Weapons of Mass Destruction have still not shown up.
Since Hussein did not use them in his fight for survival against the invading infidels, it might be inferred that he did not have them to use. But perhaps he pulled the crafty double switch "You expect me to use them, so I won't" thing just to make President Bush look bad.
But we're forgetting about that too. The administration is now downplaying the whole WMD thing, calling it "a matter of emphasis." We're now talking about freeing the Iraqi people, which is of course a swell thing, but if we're in the freeing-people business, I have a little list of countries that need it even more.
But we have done the important thing: We have revealed to a breathless world the secret contracts let to Halliburton and Bechtel before the war even started. Oh, and the thing with Dick Cheney and Halliburton: just a coincidence. George Shultz and Bechtel: just a coincidence. And it really, really is not about the oil. Forget the oil. Not about the oil.
If we had an opposition party in this nation, someone might have protested this serial amnesia. But the Democrats have decided that they support our troops, which apparently means supporting the president, even when he changes his story.
Then there's always the amazing changeable tax cut, a panacea that works in good times and in bad times, that provides growth (or stability) and stimulates (or cools down) the economy. Because wherever Hussein and bin Laden are, whatever hospitals do or do not get rebuilt, it's important for rich people to have more money. That's one thing the administration will always remember.
We need to invade just one more country before the 2004 elections. France?
Sat May 03, 2003 6:52 am
Sat May 03, 2003 11:52 am
Hosted by ElviCities