Dixie Chicks get booed

[guiseppewv]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/05/21/cma.awards.ap/index.html

LAS VEGAS, Nevada (AP) -- The two most successful artists at the Academy of Country Music Awards continued their winning ways, with Alan Jackson capturing album of the year for "Drive" as well as a video honor and Brooks & Dunn being named top vocal duo.

But in a program strong on patriotism, some in country music showed they were not prepared to forgive the Dixie Chicks' Natalie Maines for remarks critical of President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq.

The trio was nominated in three categories but went home empty-handed. When Vince Gill announced their nomination for entertainer of the year, it was roundly booed by the Las Vegas audience.

The award to Brooks & Dunn extended their collection of ACMs to a record 17. Jackson's tally rose to 11.

"Stick with us. We love you," Ronnie Dunn said.

The show repeatedly saluted the armed forces, including cheers for three freed POWs of the Iraq war who were invited on stage -- Chief Warrant Officer Ronald Young Jr. from Fort Hood, Texas; and Pfc. Patrick Miller and Spc. Shoshana Johnson, both from Fort Bliss, Texas.

Kenny Chesney captured two major awards -- male vocalist of the year and record of the year for "The Good Stuff," ending a six-year drought since he was named new male vocalist in 1997.

Jackson, who won three honors including male vocalist a year ago, had six nominations this year -- two behind Toby Keith and one ahead of Chesney.

Keith avoided a second straight shutout by taking entertainer of the year but had departed before the presentation was made.

Martina McBride was named female vocalist for the second straight year. Her current single is the poignant "Concrete Angel."

"I am so proud of country music and the songs that we're making and the performances that were here tonight, and I'm proud to be a part of it," she said.

Joe Nichols, who is touring with Jackson, captured new male vocalist honors, riding back-to-back hits "The Impossible" and "Brokenheartedsville." He dedicated the award to Tony Brown, the head of his record label Universal South, who is recovering from a severe head injury received in a fall.

New female vocalist honors in the male-dominated awards want to Kellie Coffey, a former backup singer to Barbra Streisand, whose first hit was "When You Lie Next to Me."

Canadian singers Emerson Drive, named top new duo or group, thanked the American crowd for listening to their music.

Rascal Flatts won their second and third ACMs as group of the year and for the song "I'm Movin' On," written by Phillip Brian White and David Vincent Williams.

The show featured more than a dozen performances, including the Dixie Chicks, a late addition appearing by satellite in their hometown of Austin, Texas.

Maines sat silently as Emily Robison, another of the Chicks, briefly introduced the song.

When the boos began at the end of the show, Gill urged the audience to "Stop it, stop it." He added: "You know who gets blessed when you forgive -- you."

Gill said after the show the reaction was more subdued than at the Flameworthy Awards. "It was a pretty volatile crowd that time. This one wasn't so bad," he said.

Willie Nelson competed against himself in the vocal event of the year category and won it for "Mendocino County Line," with Lee Ann Womack. He also was nominated for "Beer for My Horses" with Keith and "Whiskey River" with Trick Pony.

The show, televised by CBS, moved to Las Vegas this year for the first time in the event's 38-year history. A certain Las Vegas touch: Wayne Newton as a presenter.

Host Reba McEntire managed to get both the Chicks and Las Vegas in her opening monologue: "Everybody here loves to gamble," she said. "They're backstage right now checking the latest odds on the Dixie Chicks playing the Bush family reunion."

The awards were determined by the 3,000 members of the California-based academy, except for the humanitarian award, which is decided by fans. McEntire won the humanitarian award last year.

This year's winner was Lonestar. Lead singer Richie McDonald said, "The truth is, Nashville and the country music community have huge hearts." Home Depot will build a playground in their honor in a town of their choice.

The academy earlier announced that George Strait would receive the special achievement award and Alabama, the pioneer award.


Nice to see that they are still getting booed. :D

[Jenny]

w00t! Wish I had been there to boo along with them.

[nickel]

Originally posted by Jenny
w00t! Wish I had been there to boo along with them.

me too :P

[raimin]

and i'd keep on booing...It's my right :D

[zenbooty]

The Dixie Chicks need to ditch their hopelessly backwards and anachronistic country fan base and move on to greener pastures. I think they'd make a great riot grrl band up here in NY or CA, where they'd be appreciated.

[nickel]

zen, i honestly don't think they have the look or the energy to be a riot grrl band. :P

[zenbooty]

Originally posted by nickelback
zen, i honestly don't think they have the look or the energy to be a riot grrl band. :P Hey, a guy can dream, can't he? Looks can be fixed. Energy can be generated.

[molecularfire]

Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought.

[blueindian]

Originally posted by molecularfire
Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought. :stupid:

well said.

[raimin]

Originally posted by molecularfire
Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought.

are you saying this becasue they didn't win becasue of the comments?

or the fact that fans booed whenever their name was announced.

if it's the booing, freedom of speech goes both ways, they can say what they want, and people can not like it, and boo them, or critize them

[hapoo]

I completely agree molecularfire.
Yes we do have freedoms, but they come along with a price. You CAN say whatever you want, but you'll have to pay for it somehow.

[Cubsfan]

Originally posted by molecularfire
Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought.
I appreciate my right to be able to react to what someone says. Why do you want to take away that right from people, and also call them idiots?

I mean, if that's the case, do you also think that people should ignore it if a band says something amazingly racist?

[nickel]

Originally posted by raimin


are you saying this becasue they didn't win becasue of the comments?

or the fact that fans booed whenever their name was announced.

if it's the booing, freedom of speech goes both ways, they can say what they want, and people can not like it, and boo them, or critize them

i agree. it's their right to speak what they feel, and my right to boo or cheer.

[Apex]

Someone here talking about the Bill of Rights actually want to quote what the Bill of Rights says?

Man, you would think this is Hollywood.

[bachviet]

Originally posted by molecularfire
Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought.
I exercied my freedom of speech by booing.... ;)

[chrissy]

The first article didn't even mention Natalie's T-shirt...

http://www.cmt.com/news/feat/acm.awards.052103.jhtml


Natalie Maines may have donned the T-shirt, but it was Toby Keith who wore the pants at the Academy of Country Music awards, held Wednesday (May 21) in Las Vegas.

With eight nominations, Keith won the entertainer of the year trophy, his first victory in that category. However, he apparently left the ceremony early, so Vince Gill and host Reba McEntire -- fellow Oklahomans -- accepted on his behalf.

Perhaps Keith was on a flight to Austin, Texas, to put a boot in Maines' you-know-what. Beamed in from a Dixie Chicks concert in Austin to sing "Godspeed (Sweet Dreams)," Maines wore a shirt with the letters "F.U.T.K." Considering their public battles, it can be assumed the last two letters signify "Toby Keith," and the first two letters probably don't need to be deciphered.

[guiseppewv]

Originally posted by nickelback


i agree. it's their right to speak what they feel, and my right to boo or cheer.


:stupid: You can say what you want and I can say what I want. If you express your opinion and I don't agree with it I can express my displeasure in what you said. If I express my opinion and you don't agree with it you can express your displeasure in what I said. :)

[molecularfire]

I'm not saying that people don't have a right to disagree with someone else's remarks. However, I think that to let it get in the way of something that doesn't have anything to do with their profession is petty. If they were politicians, then yes their political opinions could be used to hinder their carreers. But, I don't see shunning a band because of it. People definitely have a right to do it... people definitely do it. I just think it's stupid. It would be like booing shaq because he was against the war. He's a basketball player, not a politician.
Let me ask a question... would anybody have a problem if I booed someone because they were Jewish? What if I hindered their carreer because of that?

[guiseppewv]

Originally posted by molecularfire
I'm not saying that people don't have a right to disagree with someone else's remarks. However, I think that to let it get in the way of something that doesn't have anything to do with their profession is petty. If they were politicians, then yes their political opinions could be used to hinder their carreers. But, I don't see shunning a band because of it. People definitely have a right to do it... people definitely do it. I just think it's stupid. It would be like booing shaq because he was against the war. He's a basketball player, not a politician.
Let me ask a question... would anybody have a problem if I booed someone because they were Jewish? What if I hindered their carreer because of that?

What you are talking about is discrimination. What was done to the Dixie Chicks is NOT discrimination it is called freedom of expression.

The Dixie Chicks used their concert as a forum to express their political opinions so people that disagree with their opinion are not supporting them anymore. Period. If you use your position as a star to further your political views then you make yourself fair game. They brought it upon themselves. If Shaq would have, let's say, worn an anti-war symbol/shirt/etc... during one of the Lakers games (which is probably not allowed under NBA uniform rules) then, yes, he would have been fair game too. If Shaq would have expressed his political opinions at an LA Lakers post-game press conference, then he would make himself fair game to be booed at games or anywhere else. Again, this is called freedom of expression, if he can express his political views then anyone can express their disagreement. Those people who disagree can boo him, stop buying his jerseys, etc...

[le_stick]

I do not care what they have said or what are they going to say, at
long they keep posing nude......:heh:

[InfiniteNothing]

:heh: to le_stick I can't tell if you are kidding. Funny either way.

:shake: There's too much hate in the world.


Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do

I have to agree here. I think we should praise people for going against the grain and voicing their opinion as long as they are not are not hurting anyone.

I'd never boo them. Then again I wouldn't boo most people.

[sbp]

Booooo to the whole lot of ya!

[nickel]

Cheeeeers to you! :cool:

[blueindian]

Originally posted by le_stick
I do not care what they have said or what are they going to say, at
long they keep posing nude......:heh:

is case anyone hasn't seen it.

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20030424/mdf263141.jpg

[xsiled2]

they are all fugly.

[Cantacuzene]

Originally posted by xsiled2
they are all fugly.

True, I'd be happier if it was Shania Twain naked.

[hang10wannabe]

Originally posted by molecularfire
Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought.

werd

[hang10wannabe]

Originally posted by Cantacuzene


True, I'd be happier if it was Shania Twain naked.

double werd with a bit of "hell yea" in there too

[blueindian]

i think the one on the left is pretty. not necessiarly(sp?) hot, but pretty.

i call the one in the middle piggy.

[Dave_7]

Originally posted by molecularfire
Man... seems kinda sad that in a country where we value people having the right to speak their mind, that people are so critical of those who do. I guess the bill of rights should be further ammended to say the right to free speech as long as a bunch of idiots agree with what you said. Personally, I wasn't too much of a chicks fan before, but I have to admit that they had some sweet songs in their last album, and it's sad that they are being penalized for having a thought.


The Bill of Rights says nothing about being able say whatever you want and remain POPULAR.

Free speech in the States (constitutionally), has to do with the right to say what you like... and not be prosecuted by the government for it (more or less). It has NOTHING to do with the Dixie Chicks other than the fact that the government will not throw them in jail for saying what they said. You can't use the 1st ammendment in this case.

True, they are not polititians. So if they want to keep making HUGE sums of $$$ based on their POPULARITY, then they should keep their big yaps shut unless what's coming out of it is in the key of C.

They are being penalized for being stupid. Not that the opinion itself was stupid... but for not realizing that announcing it on stage would alienate a large portion of their fan base. Not realizing that... is stupid.

They did exactly the same thing that Trent Lott did... they were wingin' it and trying to be cute by going for cheap-applause from their immediate audience, not realizing the potential ramifications.

Any mention of the Constitution or the 1st ammendment in the case of the Dixie Chicks is invalid unless they are brought up on charges by the State Department. Then bring up the 1st ammendment.

CubsFan made a good point/hypothetical about how a racist statement would have been taken.




Dave.

[molecularfire]

True, they are not polititians. So if they want to keep making HUGE sums of $$$ based on their POPULARITY, then they should keep their big yaps shut unless what's coming out of it is in the key of C.
Personally, I don't think they sing well enough to tell if what's coming out of their mouth is C.


Free speech in the States (constitutionally), has to do with the right to say what you like... and not be prosecuted by the government for it (more or less). It has NOTHING to do with the Dixie Chicks other than the fact that the government will not throw them in jail for saying what they said. You can't use the 1st ammendment in this case.
Kinda sad when we expect things out of the government that we are not willing to do ourselves.


They are being penalized for being stupid. Not that the opinion itself was stupid... but for not realizing that announcing it on stage would alienate a large portion of their fan base. Not realizing that... is stupid.
They've been stupid for years, nobody cared before. People are caring now because they are starting to show some thought.


They did exactly the same thing that Trent Lott did... they were wingin' it and trying to be cute by going for cheap-applause from their immediate audience, not realizing the potential ramifications.
Yeah, and I can see his political opinion being used against him... but of course, he's a politician.


I appreciate my right to be able to react to what someone says. Why do you want to take away that right from people, and also call them idiots?

I mean, if that's the case, do you also think that people should ignore it if a band says something amazingly racist?
If you don't like their music, then don't download their MP3's. If you like their music, I don't see the point in attacking what they say when they are not singing. The country music community has shown that they like the chick's music. They aren't booing them because the caliber of their music has gone down. They're booing them because of what they're saying, not what they're singing. If they had put political stuff in their lyrics, then I could see people having a problem like with Darryl worley (sp?).

What you are talking about is discrimination. What was done to the Dixie Chicks is NOT discrimination it is called freedom of expression.
What's the difference? Either ways, their opinions are what is being attacked instead of the quality of their music. We just gave them different names as a way of justifying our actions to ourselves.

[spigidygak]

Dixie who?

[xsiled2]

Originally posted by Cantacuzene


True, I'd be happier if it was Shania Twain naked.

bingo.

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by molecularfire

Personally, I don't think they sing well enough to tell if what's coming out of their mouth is C.


Kinda sad when we expect things out of the government that we are not willing to do ourselves.


They've been stupid for years, nobody cared before. People are caring now because they are starting to show some thought.


Yeah, and I can see his political opinion being used against him... but of course, he's a politician.


If you don't like their music, then don't download their MP3's. If you like their music, I don't see the point in attacking what they say when they are not singing. The country music community has shown that they like the chick's music. They aren't booing them because the caliber of their music has gone down. They're booing them because of what they're saying, not what they're singing. If they had put political stuff in their lyrics, then I could see people having a problem like with Darryl worley (sp?).

What's the difference? Either ways, their opinions are what is being attacked instead of the quality of their music. We just gave them different names as a way of justifying our actions to ourselves.


Here is my .02

I think the Dixie Chicks, Sean "I see no WMD's, with "I AM A WMD SEAN PENN" painted on the side on a street corner" Penn, Susanne "I am still a hippie" Sarandon and her wannabie boyfriend/whatever, and Madonna "I am uber-euro now with a bigass gap in my teeth to look that way" should all just take a long walk off of a short pier.

Why?

Because they think that they should be able to use their influence at getting camera time to forward their own agendas and face no repercussions for those decisions. It was Maines' decision to BELITTLE our president on an international scale, she had free will. She used her position of influence to voice her opinion. Now, first, I fail to see anywhere where her actions were based on any sort of logic, thought, or even rationale. They were a heat of the moment idiotic thing to say in front of people who only agreed with her.

Sure, she has the RIGHT to say what she wants. However, that does not entitle them the right to a totally unassailible position. For example, if your neighbor put a campaign sign in his front yard for a presidential candidate that you HATED, would you think less of him? I sure would.

There are actions in this world and there are reactions. Maines and the rest of the lefty celebrities think that they can say/do what they want because they are popular. However, they are only popular because of their image. Destroy your image, destroy your popularity. It is CONTINGENT on people liking them, regardless of their product quality. They have engaged in character suicide. It is every man, woman, and childs right to agree or disagree with what somebody says, and to like them more/less for that statement.

So, what your saying is something like this.

They can disagree with the president, be ashamed that he is the president and he is from Texas because that is their RIGHT. However, nobody else can be ashamed of them because its not our right to disagree with a famous person?

What kind of education do the D-Chix have? I wonder if even ONE of them has graduated from college, while our president's IQ is above MENSA requirements, he scored in the 90th percentile on his SAT's, graduated SUMA CUM LAUDE from Yale...etc. Who are the idiots here?
Who do you trust? A guy who wants to stay in power to do more for the world to build a legacy to be seen as a good president (which in the end, helps anyway), or some morons from Texas who just want to sell a few more tickets and CD's so they can badmouth more people with impunity?

I will never buy or advocate the purchasing of a Madonna, D-Chix, Sean Penn, Sarandon product for the rest of my life. Why? Because the sooner we ruin these nut jobs, the sooner they shut up and act like real people with real worries, like putting food on the table after having to pay for higher insurance because of terrorist acts, higher gas because middle east destabilization, their dads/moms/brothers/sisters being killed by suicide bombers and everything else.

Go listen to that Good Charlotte song "Lifestyles of the rich and famous", it actually has a ring of truth.

I find it SOOO ironic that the DC's got their beginning by then Governor Bush inviting them to play at his inaguration. Add backstabbers to what is painted on them.


LK

[Dave_7]

Originally posted by LegendKiller
...popularity. It is CONTINGENT on people liking them, regardless of their product quality...

LK


http://www.lemonizer.com/uploads/burger1.gif

CORRECT-A-MUNDO.





Dave.

[guiseppewv]

:stupid:

[molecularfire]

I guess the difference is that I don't put any extra stock in someone's opinions just because they are a celebrity. The dixie chicks are singers... period. I don't really care what they say when they are not singing "you were mine". It's just my opinon, so take it for what it's worth, but I have never understood why we give celebrities power, and then punish them when they don't do what we want. The dixie chicks are singers... they aren't politicians, so why should anyone care about their political opinions, much less punish them for it.


There are actions in this world and there are reactions. Maines and the rest of the lefty celebrities think that they can say/do what they want because they are popular. However, they are only popular because of their image. Destroy your image, destroy your popularity. It is CONTINGENT on people liking them, regardless of their product quality. They have engaged in character suicide. It is every man, woman, and childs right to agree or disagree with what somebody says, and to like them more/less for that statement.
Sadly enough... you're right about this. This is what I see is wrong with people... when a person is judged on their beliefs instead of their product quality.

As for my neighbor... as long as he's a nice guy, why should I lose respect for him because our political opinions differ? He's my neighbor... not my alderman. As long as he keeps his beer bottles off of my lawn, I could care less if he thought that Hitler had a cool mustache.


They can disagree with the president, be ashamed that he is the president and he is from Texas because that is their RIGHT. However, nobody else can be ashamed of them because its not our right to disagree with a famous person?
I don't have a problem with someone critizing a politician for his/her political beliefs. If people are booing the dixie chicks because their music sucks, I would be fine with that.

What kind of education do the D-Chix have? I wonder if even ONE of them has graduated from college, while our president's IQ is above MENSA requirements, he scored in the 90th percentile on his SAT's, graduated SUMA CUM LAUDE from Yale...etc. Who are the idiots here?
Who do you trust? A guy who wants to stay in power to do more for the world to build a legacy to be seen as a good president (which in the end, helps anyway), or some morons from Texas who just want to sell a few more tickets and CD's so they can badmouth more people with impunity?

IQ is overrated. I have an IQ of 85 and have done ok in academics against people who have much higher IQs. However, that isn't the issue here. Personally, I don't agree with what the chicks said... However, I will defend to the death their right to say it. The argument that sure people can say whatever they want, but if we don't agree with it, we'll just punish them for it is IMO ludicrous. If you're going to punish someone for saying something... I'd like to argue that you're inhibiting their right to say it. What's the difference... because it's people doing it and not the government? I don't see how we can expect our government to do things that we won't. That's just hypocritical.

I will never buy or advocate the purchasing of a Madonna, D-Chix, Sean Penn, Sarandon product for the rest of my life. Why? Because the sooner we ruin these nut jobs, the sooner they shut up and act like real people with real worries, like putting food on the table after having to pay for higher insurance because of terrorist acts, higher gas because middle east destabilization, their dads/moms/brothers/sisters being killed by suicide bombers and everything else.
What if your janitor had this opinion? Is it right to fire him or not promote him because of it? Why should celebrities be treated differently?

[LegendKiller]

Because a janitor doesn't have to be popular, doesn't have to have an image, and doesn't pretend he is better thus he has a stronger opinion. Furthermore, if a random person walking down the hallway is told by the janitor that the president sucks, that person cannot fire the janitor.

However, if a DC tells me a president sucks, I can fire her, just dont buy the CD.

Image is everything in the music world, they are destroying theirs.
LK

[molecularfire]

Because a janitor doesn't have to be popular, doesn't have to have an image, and doesn't pretend he is better thus he has a stronger opinion.
We are the ones that give celebrities the power. We buy things just because they endorse them, we give them preferential treatment. We tell them that they are better than us. And you're right, we punish them for not agreeing with us. Kinda sad IMO.

Furthermore, if a random person walking down the hallway is told by the janitor that the president sucks, that person cannot fire the janitor.

However, if a DC tells me a president sucks, I can fire her, just dont buy the CD.

Ah... I see... the difference is power. It's wrong for us to use the janitor's opinion against him because we don't have the power to hurt his career but we can use a singer's opinion against them because we have that power? But wait... we could go and complain to the janitor's boss and if we put in enough pressure, we might be able to get the janitor fired. However, I doubt that most people would think very highly of someone who did that. So... what's the difference?


Image is everything in the music world, they are destroying theirs.
Can't argue with that. You're right. I just think it's sad that in the music world, politics is more important than music.

[LegendKiller]

The difference is that they think they have the devine right to get that preferential treatment. A janitor doesn't want anything but to clock in, clock out, and get his paycheck. Actors, actresses, singers think that they have a RIGHT to be where they are, they have a RIGHT to be better than anybody else and they have a RIGHT to abuse that position.


If they were there just to sing, then why not just sing? As soon as they step over that line, then its open war.


LK

[molecularfire]

The difference is that they think they have the devine right to get that preferential treatment. A janitor doesn't want anything but to clock in, clock out, and get his paycheck. Actors, actresses, singers think that they have a RIGHT to be where they are, they have a RIGHT to be better than anybody else and they have a RIGHT to abuse that position.
When was the last time you went up to a janitor and asked him/her for an autograph? Celebrities think they have that right because over the last several decades, we've been giving them that right. I don't think it's completely fair to blame that solely on the celebrities. As a society, we have to take some of the blame. We tell them that they are better than us. If you tell anyone (celebrity or not) that they are better than you, sooner or later they will believe it. We tell them that they are better, and then we tell them that they better say what we want them to say or else. If a janitor had said that at his job, nobody would've given it a second thought. Why is it different just because they don't know how to wax a floor.

As for them stepping out of line. How is it out of line to state your opinion? I used to talk about politics all the time with some of the maintenance people when I went to UCLA. Now... how is their opinion different than the dixie chick's opinions? Well... the difference is that when they tell me that hitler has a cool mustache, I don't use that as an excuse to criticize their work.

[guiseppewv]

Originally posted by molecularfire

When was the last time you went up to a janitor and asked him/her for an autograph? Celebrities think they have that right because over the last several decades, we've been giving them that right. I don't think it's completely fair to blame that solely on the celebrities. As a society, we have to take some of the blame. We tell them that they are better than us. If you tell anyone (celebrity or not) that they are better than you, sooner or later they will believe it. We tell them that they are better, and then we tell them that they better say what we want them to say or else. If a janitor had said that at his job, nobody would've given it a second thought. Why is it different just because they don't know how to wax a floor.

As for them stepping out of line. How is it out of line to state your opinion? I used to talk about politics all the time with some of the maintenance people when I went to UCLA. Now... how is their opinion different than the dixie chick's opinions? Well... the difference is that when they tell me that hitler has a cool mustache, I don't use that as an excuse to criticize their work.

It is different b/c they (celebs) try and use their status and popularity from their celeb status to further their political opinions. When you offend people who you depend on for your popularity b/c your income depends on your popularity you can't expect to make the same income afterwards. I respect a janitor's opinion more than I would respect most celebs' opinions, mainly b/c most celebs have their heads so far up their a$$.

You try to justify that society needs to take the blame but that is BS. I will not take ANY of the blame for that. I never have and never will tell any celebs that they are better than anyone else.

Saying that hitler has a cool mustache and saying that hitler was a great person are 2 totally different things. If they would have said that Bush has a bad haircut or big ears then you could draw the parallel that you did and it would have some correllation to hitler's mustache but that isn't the case, is it?

As Westley said to Vizzini in the Princess Bride "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."

[molecularfire]

You try to justify that society needs to take the blame but that is BS. I will not take ANY of the blame for that. I never have and never will tell any celebs that they are better than anyone else.
Not true. You do treat them differently, whether it be better or worse. That does separate them from everybody else. If you expect them to act like everybody else, treat them like so, no better or worse.


Saying that hitler has a cool mustache and saying that hitler was a great person are 2 totally different things. If they would have said that Bush has a bad haircut or big ears then you could draw the parallel that you did and it would have some correllation to hitler's mustache but that isn't the case, is it?
Ok... the hitler had a cool mustache thing was meant sorta as a joke. I didn't mean for it to be interpreted as differences in attacking a person's looks versus their political opinions. I was actually using it as an unpopular opinion that nobody could possible agree with... sorry for the confusion, my bad.


As Westley said to Vizzini in the Princess Bride "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
And you were so close to posting a post that didn't have an insult in it.