Dixie Chicks

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



ThePittman

Shakyamunison
Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

However, I don't care one way or the other. I don't listen to their music.

botankus
What are they doing? Link? I hate to say it but I don't recall anyone bursting through the front doors of our office yelling something about the Dixie Chicks. I watched about 5 minutes of it last night, and one moment was when the Dixie Chicks were winning something. The only thing I remember was that lead singer Natalie Maines' arm looked like it had been stuffed with a 6-month supply of Jello Gelatin.

ThePittman

ThePittman

botankus

Shakyamunison

ThePittman
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is not what I was talking about. Didn't they insult the country music listeners? They did this after everyone started saying they were un-American and radio stations started banning them from their stations.

The Core
This year's Grammy's, not that I care about who they go to, seemed like one big sham after another. My biggest pet peeve being the Dixie Chicks edging out Gnarls Barkley for three awards, namely Record of the Year.

Gnarls made what was arguably one of the most important albums in alternative music history with "St. Elsewhere", and along come the antithesis of the American sweethearts in the Dixie Chicks, and more or less sweep the most important categories with the same music they've been making for the past decade.

Not to mention John Legend getting snubbed, John Mayer winning a pop Grammy over Justin Timberlake, and Rick Rubin winning for producer pretty much by default.

The Grammys, in a word, are worthless. They're bestowed upon artists based on the opinions of a select few people who supposedly have a "more valid" or educated opinion than anyone else, just because they're in the industry. Then said winners just use those awards as bargaining chips for their next record deal, or for the labels to whore out new artists with, because they have said winning artists on their roster.

Gnarls got robbed. They got robbed. However, the best part was when virtually nobody applauded the Chicks when they won. They're still hated, and rightfully so.

botankus
Nice post, Cory. Didn't Rick Rubin produce Slayer's albums for a while?


I'll tell you who the real losers are in the Dixie Chicks argument. Everyone who gave a damn, which would include the band itself, fans, ex-fans, and people who couldn't name one word from one of their songs yet will defend them to the death. Why? Because they acknowledged a damn country music trio who broke into the music industry as "The Dixie Chickens" (no lie) as having political clout.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by ThePittman
They did this after everyone started saying they were un-American and radio stations started banning them from their stations.

Ok. Let me put it this way. I sale a product and you are my customer. If I say something that upsets you, rather it is true or not, I need to apologize for offending my customer. If I don't, and if I insult you in the process, you have every right to not buy my product. The Grammies are irrelevant if no one buys their CD. However, a ban can be a two edged sword. Take for example: The Beatles and the ban that took place after John Lennon miss spoke about Jesus. In some ways the ban helped The Beatles later on. However, John Lennon did apologize.

ThePittman

Shakyamunison

ThePittman
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Ok. Let me put it this way. I sale a product and you are my customer. If I say something that upsets you, rather it is true or not, I need to apologize for offending my customer. If I don't, and if I insult you in the process, you have every right to not buy my product. The Grammies are irrelevant if no one buys their CD. However, a ban can be a two edged sword. Take for example: The Beatles and the ban that took place after John Lennon miss spoke about Jesus. In some ways the ban helped The Beatles later on. However, John Lennon did apologize. Yes they did apologize for offending some of their customers but not for what they said, it started snowballing and nothing they could do made a difference. However people are still buying their product and still selling out concerts, it is the Country radio industry that is keeping the ban going and not the fans.Originally posted by Shakyamunison
laughing Not most of the people who buy country music. laughing True laughing

botankus
Pittman, you're the only one who's talking about George Bush. The rest of us are talking about how they're b!tches. I don't care if they named George Bush Man of the Year or told him to perform an act of fornication on himself, they still suck. I don't think they're Simpsons impersonation helped their image either.

This thread is kind of like two guys arguing about what kind of dog they like. One will pick the Golden Retriever over the Labrador Retriever, and the other guy will say, "It's because you're racist, right?" and the guy will say no, he likes golden retrievers because of their domesticated nature, and the other guy goes, "so you like them because you're racist, right?" What's that word? Coercion?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by ThePittman
Yes they did apologize for offending some of their customers but not for what they said, it started snowballing and nothing they could do made a difference. However people are still buying their product and still selling out concerts, it is the Country radio industry that is keeping the ban going and not the fans. True laughing

I don't know what their fans think, I'm not one, and I don't know any, but I would guess that it maybe a case of the radio industry leading the way.

ThePittman

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by botankus
Pittman, you're the only one who's talking about George Bush. The rest of us are talking about how they're b!tches. I don't care if they named George Bush Man of the Year or told him to perform an act of fornication on himself, they still suck. I don't think they're Simpsons impersonation helped their image either.

This thread is kind of like two guys arguing about what kind of dog they like. One will pick the Golden Retriever over the Labrador Retriever, and the other guy will say, "It's because you're racist, right?" and the guy will say no, he likes golden retrievers because of their domesticated nature, and the other guy goes, "so you like them because you're racist, right?" What's that word? Coercion?

What do you have against Golden Retrievers dude? laughing

botankus
Pitt, if you're going to quote my post, at least have the courtesy to address it!!

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What do you have against Golden Retrievers dude? laughing
I'm racist against Golds.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by botankus
If you're going to quote my post, at least have the courtesy to address it!!


I'm racist against Golds.

I don't think he can see your point. laughing out loud You racist bastard you. laughing out loud

Unless you buy one of my songs, then I apologize, and you are absolutely right. laughing out loud

ThePittman
Originally posted by botankus
Pitt, if you're going to quote my post, at least have the courtesy to address it!!


I'm racist against Golds. I did, you were off as to what I was talking about. It is not about if you like them or not or think that they are b*tches but an industry banning them.

botankus
Let's switch industries here. Does anyone think Mel Gibson has gotten it easy from his peers and the industry as a whole in recent years for what he has said.......whether you agree with them or not.

Those last seven words were so important. End of story and there are zero exceptions.

ThePittman

sithsaber408
Originally posted by The Core
This year's Grammy's, not that I care about who they go to, seemed like one big sham after another. My biggest pet peeve being the Dixie Chicks edging out Gnarls Barkley for three awards, namely Record of the Year.

Gnarls made what was arguably one of the most important albums in alternative music history with "St. Elsewhere", and along come the antithesis of the American sweethearts in the Dixie Chicks, and more or less sweep the most important categories with the same music they've been making for the past decade.

Not to mention John Legend getting snubbed, John Mayer winning a pop Grammy over Justin Timberlake, and Rick Rubin winning for producer pretty much by default.

The Grammys, in a word, are worthless. They're bestowed upon artists based on the opinions of a select few people who supposedly have a "more valid" or educated opinion than anyone else, just because they're in the industry. Then said winners just use those awards as bargaining chips for their next record deal, or for the labels to whore out new artists with, because they have said winning artists on their roster.

Gnarls got robbed. They got robbed. However, the best part was when virtually nobody applauded the Chicks when they won. They're still hated, and rightfully so.

Co-signed.


Gnarls Barley is amazing. They played on pop stations, urban stations, even rock stations.

A neo-funk groove by solid artitsts who make their own type of music.





The Dixie chicks aren't hated by any industry. (excluding country music)

They sold well on this last album, they have a documentary about the whole Bush thing (up for an Oscar, isn't it?) and they swept the Grammy's.


Hardly seems like they are shut-out.


No, it's more likely that an average group of artists were "honored" because of the "importance" of how they "took a stand".

Basically saying what people have been saying about Bush for a couple of years now. (see Michael Moore.)



The music industry liberals who run things like the Grammy's felt like whinning against daddy Bush by giving the Chicks some recognition.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by sithsaber408
Co-signed.


Gnarls Barley is amazing. They played on pop stations, urban stations, even rock stations.

A neo-funk groove by solid artitsts who make their own type of music.





The Dixie chicks aren't hated by any industry. (excluding country music)

They sold well on this last album, they have a documentary about the whole Bush thing (up for an Oscar, isn't it?) and they swept the Grammy's.


Hardly seems like they are shut-out.


No, it's more likely that an average group of artists were "honored" because of the "importance" of how they "took a stand".

Basically saying what people have been saying about Bush for a couple of years now. (see Michael Moore.)



The music industry liberals who run things like the Grammy's felt like whinning against daddy Bush by giving the Chicks some recognition.

What are these people going to do when Bush is no longer in the white house?

Dr. Strangelove
Originally posted by The Core

The Grammys, in a word, are worthless. They're bestowed upon artists based on the opinions of a select few people who supposedly have a "more valid" or educated opinion than anyone else, just because they're in the industry. Then said winners just use those awards as bargaining chips for their next record deal, or for the labels to whore out new artists with, because they have said winning artists on their roster.

Gnarls got robbed. They got robbed. However, the best part was when virtually nobody applauded the Chicks when they won. They're still hated, and rightfully so.

Couldn't say it better myself. I wonder how much BEP's label paid off those Grammy dopes so "My Humps" could win a award.

sithsaber408
^^^^L laughing out loud L

So true.

Nellinator
I get Dixie Chicks all the time on country radio stations in Canada. They are still very popular up here and they have a huge fan base here.

The Core
Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove
Couldn't say it better myself. I wonder how much BEP's label paid off those Grammy dopes so "My Humps" could win a award.

I totally forgot about that. I read a review of the ceremonies last night, and it closed with "See you next year, if the industry still exists". Considering the majority of artists I enjoy are on independent labels, I couldn't care less. I'm just disappointed in where it has gone as of late, which is down the toilet.

Solo
Gnarls Barkley should have sweeped this year's Grammys. That was bullshit.

I also love how the Grammys have the ability to completely ignore anything that wasn't released under a major label.

The Core
I know there's bound to be some politics tied to a lot of these "awards" shows, which is why I have said before, I hold MTV's Music Awards in higher regard than the Grammys. I don't care if it's little girl voting for who they think is the cutest band er what have you. Those girls still bought the albums, got tickets for the show, and directly impacted the bands that won, which is probablt a lot more than can be said for those that decide the stupid awards.

As far as the Dixie Chicks go. Their fanbase is about 75% Republican, is what should be taken into consideration first and foremost. Secondly, she was took the chicken-shit way out and made her remarks during a concert in London. Not the United States. She obviously felt safe.

That said, I am all for freedom of speech, but people go to Dixie Chicks concerts for some twangy fun music, not a ****in' politcal bash. I hate when musicians abuse their priviledges by using their "art" as a soapbox to get across their politics. There are exceptions to the rule such as RATM and SOAD who could always back up their feelings with cold hard facts. It's when spunky, mouthy country singers with little to no insight, just venom, speak their mind is when it crosses the line.

I just think it's pathetic that they get an "Album of the Year" award for a song that's about pretty much saying "**** you for not liking my opinion. I'm not apologizing".

Most recently after a show in Canada, they had a sign that dissed Bush once again. Just to show that they're too afraid to come back to the U.S. knowing they've already done irrepairable damage to their careers talking the shit they have talked already.

So, along with this stupid documentary...they've sold themselves on their politics, much more than their music, so it seems. It's pathetic that people buy into it, and it's equally as pathetic that they just can't let it go and shut their big ****ing mouths, and save it for the appropriate venue...which is not a MUSIC concert.

Solo
I couldn't agree more. But what really gets me is that they use their crybaby political bullshit as a marketing strategy rather than it being their actual opinion. I can imagine why you'd like them if you enjoy empty political sloganeering.

BackFire
Dixie Chicks - "We hate Bush! He sucks!"

Grammies - *gives awards*

The end.

ThePittman
Originally posted by The Core
As far as the Dixie Chicks go. Their fanbase is about 75% Republican, is what should be taken into consideration first and foremost. Secondly, she was took the chicken-shit way out and made her remarks during a concert in London. Not the United States. She obviously felt safe.
Talk about reading into something.

Originally posted by The Core
That said, I am all for freedom of speech, but people go to Dixie Chicks concerts for some twangy fun music, not a ****in' politcal bash. I hate when musicians abuse their priviledges by using their "art" as a soapbox to get across their politics. There are exceptions to the rule such as RATM and SOAD who could always back up their feelings with cold hard facts. It's when spunky, mouthy country singers with little to no insight, just venom, speak their mind is when it crosses the line.
That is your opinion; it is their concert singing their music so why not say their opinion. If you don't like there view or what they do then don't go.


Originally posted by The Core
I just think it's pathetic that they get an "Album of the Year" award for a song that's about pretty much saying "**** you for not liking my opinion. I'm not apologizing". So if it was about shaking your butt it would be better?


Originally posted by The Core
Most recently after a show in Canada, they had a sign that dissed Bush once again. Just to show that they're too afraid to come back to the U.S. knowing they've already done irrepairable damage to their careers talking the shit they have talked already. They have still made fun of Bush and this whole thing at EVERY concert they have had in the US or abroad.


Originally posted by The Core
So, along with this stupid documentary...they've sold themselves on their politics, much more than their music, so it seems. It's pathetic that people buy into it, and it's equally as pathetic that they just can't let it go and shut their big ****ing mouths, and save it for the appropriate venue...which is not a MUSIC concert. Again, their music and their venue.

The Core
Originally posted by ThePittman
Talk about reading into something.


I don't speak on things I don't know about.




Because it's a music concert, not a political deliberation, maybe? Not that I would go, but considering Tony Blair and London being part of the coalition with the United States, that was a stupid move to out her opinion, out of place, out of thin ****ing air, to fans of their MUSIC, not expecting to hear her politics rant.



No, but would you reward a song that's as meaningless as being stubborn?




Maybe by singing their songs. The shows that they DID play were in CANADA. They cancelled the entire Southern leg of their tour, and took it up North where their album actually sold. If you can find me any instances of them making fun of Bush in the US, please cite them.




Again, a concert and not a political debate.



Right after they apologized, got their new album on the radio, and sold a bunch of their albums. Convenient.

ThePittman

The Core

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.