Dixie Chicks...this has to piss off Tex/Snipe/limpwallperry - Page 5 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Jeff Lebowski · 06-09-2006, 01:42 PM

I disagree. Are you saying that one should pretend to change one's core beliefs in order to pander to a commercial audience? They are basically saying "This is who we are. If you don't like us, tough." I respect that. If you read the article you also know that they are embarassed by their early recordings because they feel like some of them were dumbed down and made sappy under pressure from Nashville executives. Now they are going to record what they want, how they want. I think that is awesome.

As for this being some crafty move to increase sales by pandering to a liberal crowd, I think you are really reaching. There is not a big liberal audience for this kind of music.

DrumNFeather · 06-09-2006, 03:05 PM

Of course they're going to say that they don't like their earlier stuff, they're trying to distance themselves from that music and that audience...but if you look into their history at all, you know that they are/were a 100% blue grass band...that's what they did with their Home album and that is what the chicks were before Maines came into the picture.

I'm not suggesting that they are changing their core political beliefs to meet the demands of a new liberal audience...I'm saying that at this point, they have no choice but to cator to that audience because of the steps they continue to take to insult their previous audience...

Perhaps they've always been liberal, but when Maines opened her mouth, it took it to a different level, because now her thoughts were out there for everyone to either accept or reject. Naturally, it became a her vs. Toby Keith thing...the other two haven't said much other than, "we support Natalie," but the article even said that Emily Robison was very nervous about what Maines was saying when she said it...

I'm glad to see them supporting each other, it's nice to support your friends, but they are playing the musical political game the same way that Toby Keith does with his audience, same with U2 and everyone else...and yes, I think that there is some strategy to it.

Jeff Lebowski · 06-09-2006, 03:19 PM

"strategy"? You continue to imply that there is some ulterior financial motive. So far it has been an overwhelming financial disaster for them. Toby Keith shamelessly panders to his core audience. Which stance takes more guts?

As for changing the music, nobody ever said they were going to change the style. Rather they intend to change the lyrics and get away from sappy, formulaic crap that plagues the Nashville music scene.

DrumNFeather · 06-09-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homeboy

"strategy"? You continue to imply that there is some ulterior financial motive. So far it has been an overwhelming financial disaster for them. Toby Keith shamelessly panders to his core audience. Which stance takes more guts?

As for changing the music, nobody ever said they were going to change the style. Rather they intend to change the lyrics and get away from sappy, formulaic crap that plagues the Nashville music scene.

If you are writing a song that is politically charged or motivated, then yes, I think there is a strategy. After 911 the songs poured out from songsters mostly in country. As you noted, Toby Keith has capitalized on the ability patriotic songs have to unify people. Does he care about the troops? Sure. Does he even go on tours and perform for soldiers in Iraq? Absolutely, he's one of the most supportive people out there. Does he know that his bread is currently buttered by his patriotic songs? I would think so...unless he is completely oblivious...So, when Toby Keith goes out to record a new album, does he think..."hm, should I put another patriotic song on my album?" Yeah he does...and so do the Chicks and everyone else involved.

It has been 3 or 4 years since their last album...and everyone has wondered if they are going to apologize or do something to win back their fan base and the First release off their album is called "I ain't ready to play Nice Yet" (or something like that) Coincidence? I think not. It was 100% a strategic move to release that song in addition to Articles and News Pieces on them all stating the same thing...I'm not sorry and I don't need those fans.

They may be sticking to their guns, but it is still a strategic move...one that they can afford to make because they are loaded. Every challenge they've made, they've won. They have the #1 album in the country if I'm not mistaken.

UteStar · 06-09-2006, 04:25 PM

They have the #1 album in the country because they are actually quite talented. I understand what you are saying, but this move has hurt them much, much more than it has helped them. If they kept their mouths shut, they would have sold more records and they touring would be sold out. They are about to go on tour and they have cancelled a show already because of low ticket sales.

I am sorry, I don't see how it this is a winning strategy. Yes, they are doing well. Yes, they are making money but they could have made A LOT more money by keeping quiet. If you think this has helped them more than hurt them, you are mistaken. But they want to make a point with their message. Yes, they will stay rich...but they are taking hits 'cause of it and they are losing money cause of it.

realtall · 06-10-2006, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homeboy

I disagree. Are you saying that one should pretend to change one's core beliefs in order to pander to a commercial audience? They are basically saying "This is who we are. If you don't like us, tough." I respect that. If you read the article you also know that they are embarassed by their early recordings because they feel like some of them were dumbed down and made sappy under pressure from Nashville executives. Now they are going to record what they want, how they want. I think that is awesome.

That's not the way I see it. I see, "I am going to shout in the wind and nobody can stop me." Which, of course, is correct.

Its not their political opinion that bothers me the most. Its that they have a huge megaphone to yell their opinions into and they do so. Over and over again. Is this really a necessity? Do I always have to be informed of what their opinions are? Why the hell should I care(or have to listen to) WHAT they think? Just play the damned music and vote for who you want in November.

What gets my goat about a lot of these hollywood celebrities is that they seem to think that their opinion is more important or more valid than mine. Such arrogance.

Jeff Lebowski · 06-10-2006, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by realtall

What gets my goat about a lot of these hollywood celebrities is that they seem to think that their opinion is more important or more valid than mine. Such arrogance.

Yeah, but that cuts both ways. Shouldn't celebrities be allowed to have political opinions, even strong ones? Have they ever implied that their opinion is more valid than yours?

And if this is your attitude, I am assuming that you are similarly offended by Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwartzeneger, and Charlton Heston.

realtall · 06-10-2006, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homeboy

Yeah, but that cuts both ways. Shouldn't celebrities be allowed to have political opinions, even strong ones? Have they ever implied that their opinion is more valid than yours?

And if this is your attitude, I am assuming that you are similarly offended by Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwartzeneger, and Charlton Heston.

Have they ever said it? No. Have they ever implied it? They have never tried to communicate to me in a coded message if that's what you mean. But lets see if we can discern a pattern here...the Mike Farrell press conference right before the Iraq invasion(a bunch of stars get together at the press conference - so they must really be on to something. Right? Because they're stars), Sean Penn at the Oscars, Barbara Streisand..anytime, Janene Garafolo anytime. I really could go on.

As far as the right wingers that you name, I don't make a point of listening to their opinion and they don't make a point of shouting it at me.

And I didn't say that celebrities weren't 'allowed' to have opinions. I just said that I shouldn't have to listen to them.

Archaea · 06-10-2006, 04:23 PM

It would be pleasant if celebrities didn't publish their opinions.

The Dixie Chunks don't have informed opinions. When we have uninformed, uneducated with the loudspeaker, it is irksome. It would be preferable for the educated to express perspectives on international relations and musicians express opinions on music.

Entertainers are often the most uneducated, ill-informed of our public speakers but because the media, i.e., the entertainment industry, listens to itself, we will always be inundated by information from the uneducated morons such as the Dixie Chunks.

Their music is average and their looks are truly horrendous. If you're a dame, without a brain, and you're as butt-ugly and fat as those, please stay out of the limelight.

What is the curse of liberalism that makes a liberal gal butt ugly?

06-09-2006, 01:42 PM	#41
Jeff Lebowski Charon Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo) Posts: 9,564	I disagree. Are you saying that one should pretend to change one's core beliefs in order to pander to a commercial audience? They are basically saying "This is who we are. If you don't like us, tough." I respect that. If you read the article you also know that they are embarassed by their early recordings because they feel like some of them were dumbed down and made sappy under pressure from Nashville executives. Now they are going to record what they want, how they want. I think that is awesome. As for this being some crafty move to increase sales by pandering to a liberal crowd, I think you are really reaching. There is not a big liberal audience for this kind of music. __________________ "... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr.

06-09-2006, 03:05 PM	#42
DrumNFeather Active LDS Ute Fan Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Nantucket : ) Posts: 2,566	Of course they're going to say that they don't like their earlier stuff, they're trying to distance themselves from that music and that audience...but if you look into their history at all, you know that they are/were a 100% blue grass band...that's what they did with their Home album and that is what the chicks were before Maines came into the picture. I'm not suggesting that they are changing their core political beliefs to meet the demands of a new liberal audience...I'm saying that at this point, they have no choice but to cator to that audience because of the steps they continue to take to insult their previous audience... Perhaps they've always been liberal, but when Maines opened her mouth, it took it to a different level, because now her thoughts were out there for everyone to either accept or reject. Naturally, it became a her vs. Toby Keith thing...the other two haven't said much other than, "we support Natalie," but the article even said that Emily Robison was very nervous about what Maines was saying when she said it... I'm glad to see them supporting each other, it's nice to support your friends, but they are playing the musical political game the same way that Toby Keith does with his audience, same with U2 and everyone else...and yes, I think that there is some strategy to it. __________________ "It's not like we played the school of the blind out there." - Brian Johnson.

06-09-2006, 03:19 PM	#43
Jeff Lebowski Charon Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo) Posts: 9,564	"strategy"? You continue to imply that there is some ulterior financial motive. So far it has been an overwhelming financial disaster for them. Toby Keith shamelessly panders to his core audience. Which stance takes more guts? As for changing the music, nobody ever said they were going to change the style. Rather they intend to change the lyrics and get away from sappy, formulaic crap that plagues the Nashville music scene. __________________ "... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr.

06-10-2006, 04:23 PM	#49
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	It would be pleasant if celebrities didn't publish their opinions. The Dixie Chunks don't have informed opinions. When we have uninformed, uneducated with the loudspeaker, it is irksome. It would be preferable for the educated to express perspectives on international relations and musicians express opinions on music. Entertainers are often the most uneducated, ill-informed of our public speakers but because the media, i.e., the entertainment industry, listens to itself, we will always be inundated by information from the uneducated morons such as the Dixie Chunks. Their music is average and their looks are truly horrendous. If you're a dame, without a brain, and you're as butt-ugly and fat as those, please stay out of the limelight. What is the curse of liberalism that makes a liberal gal butt ugly? __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

06-09-2006, 04:25 PM	#45
UteStar Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,817	They have the #1 album in the country because they are actually quite talented. I understand what you are saying, but this move has hurt them much, much more than it has helped them. If they kept their mouths shut, they would have sold more records and they touring would be sold out. They are about to go on tour and they have cancelled a show already because of low ticket sales. I am sorry, I don't see how it this is a winning strategy. Yes, they are doing well. Yes, they are making money but they could have made A LOT more money by keeping quiet. If you think this has helped them more than hurt them, you are mistaken. But they want to make a point with their message. Yes, they will stay rich...but they are taking hits 'cause of it and they are losing money cause of it.