Dixie Chicks Pay a Price for Free Speech
By Scott Spicciati Editor | Scott's Archive
February 18, 2003

Anti-war protesters are often regarded as left-wing liberal pacifists. But in many debates, those on the side of 'peace' have the tendency to be much nastier than their pro-war counterparts. In the past week, I have been called everything from a blinded radical to a right-wing nutcase. In the most extreme cases, I have been charged with trying to bring back McCarthyism. Why? All because I brought up the idea that a Dixie Chicks boycott may be a good idea.

You may remember that while in concert, Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks told a London audience earlier this week, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."

That is ridiculous. Sure, free speech allows you to say whatever you please, but there's no reason to tell a foreign audience in a foreign nation that you're ashamed of where you're from because that happens to be where the President of the United States resides. These girls are American entertainers making very un-American statements. I don't care if you support the war or not, but there is no need to slap Mr. Bush in the face during the week of his war plan announcements.

Their remarks have angered many US fans, including many Texans who refuse to listen to the Dixie Chicks. Several radio stations have removed their songs from their play lists and have started petitions and online forums for people to leave comments on the issue. This isn't being taken well by the anti-war protesters who cheered for the Dixie Chicks after they made those statements last week.

Writing under different screen-names in several forums, I have brought up the issue of boycotting the Dixie Chicks because of their statements. In almost every case, I was maliciously attacked by 'Chicks' supporters and anti-war demonstrators who just don't see it my way.

One poster told me, "You can get the ---- out of this country with every other conservative who criticized Clinton." One writer said, "anyone who actually supports Bush is Nazi who sees no harm in bombing innocent children."

These are just two of the negative comments I have received, and those don't compare to what true stanch-supporters of Bush get when they engage in online chat and social debate. It's amazing how quickly a person who justifies his/her anti-war protest using freedom of speech can forget that Dixie Chicks protestors have that same right.

When I call people out with the comment, "You are a hypocrite for scorning pro-war supporters when you yourself are just as passionate to be against it. You cheer for the Dixie Chicks when they defile Bush, and yet you jump all over anyone who was offended by the Chicks' anti-Bush statements."

This is not a two-way hypocrisy. Pro-war and pro-Bush supporters at least try to use logic when arguing a case, yet anti-war marchers only see the war as baby killing and innocent blood-shed. No, not every pro-Bush supporter is right. In fact, many are just as blind as anyone who actually believes this is a war for oil and total world domination. It is also true that many pro-war supporters don't know their facts and many have no idea what they're talking about, but you don't see them attacking protesters the way protestors do in return.

I honestly believe that anti-war doves feel they must be aggressive to be taken seriously. As each day brings us closer to a war against Iraq, the so-called "peace demonstrators" have been anything but peaceful during their demonstrations. Many have already begun spreading their message of peace, even though the war has yet to commence. Two men were arrested today for trespassing on a military base. They were trying to dispense anti-war leaflets while causing mischief in the process. That seems harmless, but anti-war strategies are getting more creative.

Thanks to one disgruntled protester, Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen got a friendly dousing of red pain upon arriving at the nation's Parliament today. Rasmussen was seen with red streaks running down his face and suit. Even after being covered in paint, Rasmussen didn't change his position and support of the US. Who would have thought that the paint trick wouldn't work?

Workers at US embassies around the world have faced massive scuffling from protestors. In the United States, protestors have been busy getting heard by obstructing businesses and other offices. In San Francisco, 40 people were arrested for blocking the financial district.

This aggressive pattern will continuingly become more severe as we get closer to war. It almost makes the thousands of college students who are prepared to protest the war seem useless. In campuses across the country, students have planned walkouts as soon as the war begins. At least a walkout doesn't physically hurt anybody nor does it block people from doing their job in the case of the embassy workers.

I'm not making a case for war. People have the right to protest, but as we do get closer to the inevitable, I will support the arrest of any and all protesters who use peaceful demonstration as a mode of causing harm to those who don't share their same narrow point of view.

[  Home  |   About  |   Columnists  |   Archive  |   Search  |   Contact  ]
Copyright 2003. All rights reserved. Contact Editor: Scott Spicciati