Am I the Only Person Who Doesn't Care About the Dixie Chicks?

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by Billster I've seen Santana in concert, and he made this weird speech in the middle of the show about Nelson Mandela and "angels all around us if you look for them", and so on and so forth. I'm sure that is part of the show everywhere he goes...and no one makes a stink about it. BUT, if he wanted to, he could have his publicist get it on CNN that "Santana says Bush is a loon" and get a lot of attention for himself.

Funny you should mention that. I just watched his concert in Brazil yesterday and in the middle of a song he just stopped playing and motioned to the band to take it down a notch. He asked the light man to bring up the lights on the audience and said, "Look at yourselves! This is the dream! One world, one love. And BUSH is the nightmare!"

Terrry D.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Excuse me for this simple question, i live in a complete other political systen, and politicans here are hardly ever subject in art.

- Is there actually a US artist who supports Mr. Bush, or is it just en vogue to be against any president no matter what he does?

- How was that with Regean back then, who sent troups to university camps and people got killed?

.

[franknputer]

Yes, there are artists who support Bush. They don't get banned anywhere, though.

[Rique]

Originally posted by jamesp Okay... here goes. I, jamesp, am also ashamed to be from the same state as Bush. Ban my songs if you must! (do I have a career yet?)

[Rique]

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide Excuse me for this simple question, i live in a complete other political systen, and politicans here are hardly ever subject in art. - Is there actually a US artist who supports Mr. Bush, or is it just en vogue to be against any president no matter what he does? - How was that with Regean back then, who sent troups to university camps and people got killed? .

Criticizing your Country in Country Western music is the kiss of death, it just isn't
done. That's why it's called COUNTRY MUSIC.

How pro-war songs help sell Country:

http://www.poppolitics.com/articles/2003-04-10-bandwagon.shtml

Yet where Maine

[blue2blue]

Originally posted by franknputer Yes, there are artists who support Bush. They don't get banned anywhere, though.

But it's probably safe to say that these days those artists probably are not talking that up, much.

And though those artists undoubtedly have a welcome home on the big chains like ClearChannel (strong supporters of the current president in his campaigns) those same artists are probably viewed with a jaundiced eye by the youthful staffes of some other show biz entities.

But it's the golden rule: the man with the gold makes the rules.

And the bosses call the shots on what goes on the playlists -- much of which is bought and paid for directly, of course, by payola from promotres and record companies. But outfits like CC find many ways to inculcate their politics into the minds of the lumpen radio masses.

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide Excuse me for this simple question, i live in a complete other political systen, and politicans here are hardly ever subject in art. - Is there actually a US artist who supports Mr. Bush, or is it just en vogue to be against any president no matter what he does? - How was that with Regean back then, who sent troups to university camps and people got killed? .

Country artists are all about love of country, patriotism, "my country right or wrong," simple values, small towns, honest work on the ranch or farm, etc. Very conservative, simple ethos. At least that's the paradigm. What each artist really thinks is probably kept to themselves, with the notable exception of the Dixie Chicks.

This is the value system that plays well in Middle America, which is largely rural and "Bible Belt." Hence your red states and your blue states.

Having said that, and having been on the road with various country stars for years as a soundguy, I'd say the stereotype is fairly accurate. Most of these guys aren't posing, they're the real deal.

Now lately we've got some "drugstore cowboys" at the top of the charts, guys who, as we say in Texas, are "all hat and no cattle." Just like our current president, who is actually from Connecticut and Maine.

Terry D.

P.S. It was Nixon, not Reagan, who sent the national guard to Kent State where the troops opened fire on unarmed students.

P.P.S. There are many country stars who still openly support Bush, though nothing like right after 9/11. The drummer in my band is a big Bush supporter, as are most people in Texas where I live.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

In this matters, are there huge differnces between country side and metropolitan areas?

.

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide In this matters, are there huge differnces between country side and metropolitan areas? .

Yes. The states running north to south in the center of our country have fewer large cities and more rural population. They're also extremely Christian, often fundamentailist Christian. Just driving through Nebraska, Oklahoma, Iowa, South Dakota, etc. you see large numbers of billboards against abortion, promoting Jesus, etc. The radio stations are predominantly religious in these regions also.

The "blue states" are primarily on the coasts. These states are more urbanized (NY and CA, for example), and tend to have a mix of ethnicities and religions.

As an aside, both parties have their initial primary elections (where a candidate for each party is selected) in the northeastern states, which are very liberal. Thus, New Hampshire et al get to vote on the Democratic candidate first. By the time the primaries get down to the "heartland," most of the candidates have dropped out due to their poor showing in the liberal states.

So we get a candidate like Kerry, who was perceived as quite liberal and a "war protester," even though he was a decorated veteran. This sort of candidate isn't palatable in the heartland states or in the south, and therefore will take CA and NY but will always lose in a close election due to the electoral college system which gives the thinly populated states a disproportionate vote.

The Democrats make this same mistake again and again, they never seem to learn. Note that the last few Democratic presidents were all from the South.

Terry D.

[Rique]

Originally posted by MrKnobs The Democrats make this same mistake again and again, they never seem to learn. Note that the last few Democratic presidents were all from the South. Terry D.

That

[Gus Lozada]

Originally posted by MrKnobs The "blue states" are primarily on the coasts. These states are more urbanized (NY and CA, for example)

... so maybe the seabreeze makes them smarter !

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by Rique That

[Rique]

Originally posted by MrKnobs It's really so simple, but they just don't get it In the last election, they had it sewed up if they just picked the right candidate. NY and CA were givens, they needed IL, FL, OH. They could have picked Gen. Clark, for instance, who was palatable to the South and MidWest, but instead they went with the Massachussetts liberal Kerry. And still, it took rigged voting machines in Ohio for Bush to win! Terry D.

Clark still believes we have to stay in Iraq though. I think a civil war there isn

[blue2blue]

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide In this matters, are there huge differnces between country side and metropolitan areas? .

Not quite as much as the difference between rural and urban in the old Bosnia -- but almost.

For instance, in California, most coastal, urban and suburban areas tend to be moderate-right to left (with the exception of San Diego County, which is where many of the white Californians who found mixing with people of color distasteful moved to during the 60s-80s).

But in the central valleys, agribusiness has dominated civic life for a long time. By and large, the only people of color are disenfranchised latinos.

And the politics in those areas will be familiar to anyone familiar with the politics of Serbia in the late 80s, early 90s.

Even there (central Cali), though, Bush has lost a lot of support.

But for a different reason -- he's seen as too liberal.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Originally posted by blue2blue Not quite as much as the difference between rural and urban in the old Bosnia -- but almost.

There are no cities in Bosnia Herzegovina, except you call Sarajevo a city, but the Wienerschnitzel are exellent there. I am a fan of Croatia and it's dalmatian coast

The rest of the discussion is very interesting to me!

.

[blue2blue]

The Dalmatian coast is pretty wonderful.

I was lucky enough to spend a week or so there in 1971, long before the troubles. We stayed in a VERY pretty little wooded campground, trees right to the edge of the water, on a little inlet not far from Pula.

My GF (girlfriend) and I had just spent a strange but groovy week in Venice, staying in a garret room in the private quarters of a little hotel not too far from one of the side canals. It was August and it was absurdly hot and humid with all that brings in Venice... but it was, nonetheless, really beautiful and fun. But even in the dead of night it was stinkin' hot. (Operant word: stinkin'.) But, because of where we were, we could go out on the roof to sleep, which has really stuck in my head... I'll always remember sitting up there with my first, very funky guitar, putting TS Eliot poetry to my clumsy fingerpicking. (Talkin' Wasteland and Prufrock stuff, here. No cats. BIG diff.)

[Jotown]

Originally posted by Lee Flier Exactly. Jotown, that's pretty disingenuous of you to say that anybody claimed they "tried to ruin their career on purpose." Nobody said they did that. If it really is true that 95% of country stations have blacklisted them, that's {censored}ed up in its own right,.

Well you say that you thought it was a publicity stunt and you did say that you thought it was contrived; so I am not sure what you are saying now.

Again; that most all of country radio (which was their main source of getting their music heard) is blacklisting them makes this a free speech issue.

I think Lee, you should look into to facts behind this story before you jump to conclusions about it.

I am not now, nor ever have been a Dchix fan. In fact I caught some heat at musicplayer over my dislike of the formula that created them. But this is different and its about free speech and blacklisting; something all artists should be concerned about.

[Billster]

Originally posted by Jotown Again; that most all of country radio (which was their main source of getting their music heard) is blacklisting them makes this a free speech issue.

Only if the radio stations were controlled by the government.

The radio stations (despite the many problems with radio related to corporate conglomerate ownership) are exercising their own free speech to disagree with the artists politicizing themselves.

Are you aware of any coercion by the FCC to get the radio stations to pull an artist?

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by Billster Are you aware of any coercion by the FCC to get the radio stations to pull an artist?

Well, I'M aware of a near-monopoly as nearly all radio stations in the US are owned by Clear Channel Communications

www.clearchannel.com

In fact, I'm under contract to them for a few more months. Maybe they'll fire me for writing this, the contract I signed was the thickest agreement I've ever seen in my life. Probably something about posting a negative opinion in there...

Terry D.

[Jotown]

When political action groups launch an attack on someones career that prohibits them from participating in the arena they have made their living in it is coercive whether the government supports it or not.

And if this effort in effect takes away someons right to free speech we have a problem.

It is the principal that one should be paying attention to here.

[Brittanylips]

Originally posted by Jotown When political action groups launch an attack on someones career that prohibits them from participating in the arena they have made their living in it is coercive whether the government supports it or not.

That's arguably what the DixChicks were doing when they launched their attack on Bush, attempting to prohibit him from participating in the arena in which makes his living. When people speak out against politicians they are attempting to interfere with their carreers.

Originally posted by Jotown And if this effort in effect takes away someons right to free speech we have a problem. It is the principal that one should be paying attention to here.

It sounds like the principal is the very thing that you are ignoring, which is that speech is free for both sides, and suggesting rather that the side whose views you prefer should have greater freedom to express them.

Calling for a boycott of the Dixie chicks whether we like it or not (and neither of us do) is nonethless an exercise of free speech - every bit as much as the chix dissing the Prez is an excercise of their free speech. The principal is that both sides are entitled to the same freedom.

peaceloveandbrittanylips

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Originally posted by Brittanylips ...attack on Bush, attempting to prohibit him from participating in the arena in which makes his living. When people speak out against politicians they are attempting to interfere with their carreers.

For me politic should be a public service, at least on presidential level.

Apart that he is the president, are there "arenas" creating business he also participates on, or are there none ?

.

[Brittanylips]

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide For me politic should be a public service, at least on presidential level.

Sure, although the benefits of salaries outweight the drawbacks: without salaries, only rich people could afford to be politicians, so there would be even worse representation of the general population. (although most politicians tend to be rich anyway, without salaries it would automatically exclude anyone but the rich. Clinton, actually, needed the salary. Bush doesn't. ).

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide Apart that he is the president, are there "arenas" creating business he also participates on, or are there none ? .

None: When he becomes prez, he has to put his business interests in a blind trust, so that any political decisions are not linked to personal enrichment (again, not a perfect system).

-plb

[Ani]

None: When he becomes prez, he has to put his business interests in a blind trust, so that any political decisions are not linked to personal enrichment (again, not a perfect system).

Of course, the blind trust is called Halliburton.....

[underbug]

Originally posted by John Sayers hey what does the country music biz know anyway - they've got an aussie with a twang winning their awards at the moment - do you think I should tell them?? :DHe's about to marry Tom's ex. cheersjohn

Actually ... he's a Kiwi ( New Zealander).