:: The Bitch Girls ::

:: Thursday, March 20, 2003 ::

Dixie Chicks Thing, Again I just wanted to put my two cents out there because it's my blog and I'll bitch if I want to. (That was bad, so sue me.) My attitude has been that they were stupid, the comments were uncalled for simply because they didn't criticize policy at all, and the group deserves whatever people want to do to their pocketbooks. They only apologized after backlash began that did hit their bank accounts. I don't believe that they mean it at all. That's fine, it's their reputation. They can kill it if they want to. I do have to admit that I like Travis Tritt's suggestion to them. I'll be curious to know if they respond at all.

"The bottom line is ... what's going to happen is going to happen. To be a good American ? regardless of which side you're on ? you have to get behind President Bush. More important, you have to get behind the troops," the singer said recently.
...
"If the Dixie Chicks really wanted to do something to prove just how sorry they are about those statements, they would volunteer to go and perform at some military base," suggested Tritt.

Maybe instead of their upcoming US tour, they should do performances for the troops. Perhaps people that are very upset about this could contact stations that will be promoting the tour to encourage the Chicks to take Tritt's advice.

I guess my views can be summed up like this: They are protected by the same First Amendment that protects us. They should also have to deal with the same consequences. Very few people would have their jobs protected if they started spitting off political views in the workplace. The same applies to Hollywood and Nashville. We, as the people who pay the salaries of the stars, have the right to no longer hand over their pay check if they do things that we don't approve of. Of course I love the response of the people at the concert that Spooky attended the other night. :)

UPDATE: At least someone was thinking for the Chicks in this situation.

The Dixie Chicks — who took a lot of heat after one member of the group made anti-Bush comments — narrowly averted another controversy with some of their red-blooded fans. The Scoop was startled to learn that the country and western crooners posed for one of those “I’d Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur” ads for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals — but the ad was never released.
THE TRIO POSED in a field of flowers, wearing nothing but blossoms and their strategically placed instruments. A photo of the ad can be seen on the photographer’s Web site, sebreephoto.com.
It turns out that the Chicks are staunch animal-rights supporters, but at the last minute the group’s management put the kibosh on the ad.
“The Chicks themselves were lovely about the whole thing, but their management got worried that some of their fans were rifle-toting, Bambi-shooting types who would take offense at an anti-fur, pro-animal message,” says a source. “They forbid release of the ad because they were worried about backlash or boycott. They even tried to pay PETA $10,000 to say it never happened.”

Now that we know they have a history of lying for money, even offering to pay people off to stay popular, what do they have to say for themselves?

The Chicks’ spokeswoman didn’t return calls for comment.

Of course not, that would mean taking responsibility for one's actions. We can't promote that or anything.

...
:: Bitter 6:12 PM [+] ::
...