Only One Question

[LadyLuck]

I'd love to ask the Dixie Chicks if they are glad that they shot their mouths off and would they do it again?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by LadyLuck

I'd love to ask the Dixie Chicks if they are glad that they shot their mouths off and would they do it again?

They were right to speak as they did, if you mean what they had to say about President George W Bush, even though they maligned Texas by incorrectly stating he is from there when in fact he only pretends to be from there (he's from Connecticut, but you won't hear them boasting about him).

Here's what they said.

We don't want this war, this violence, and we're ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.

That was 9 days before Gulf War 2 kicked off. I would say history has vindicated them for bravely saying something which was unpopular but very fair comment about a huge American policy mistake. Incidentally, they are the biggest selling all girl group in the USA since 1991 and the biggest selling country group, over 27m albums sold in the USA alone. I dont think they have much reason to feel that opposing Gulf War 2 has cost them financially.

[sandhunter]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

They were right to speak as they did, if you mean what they had to say about President George W Bush, even though they maligned Texas by incorrectly stating he is from there when in fact he only pretends to be from there (he's from Connecticut, but you won't hear them boasting about him).

.

I don`t have a problem with speaking out about the War , that is their right as one of our citizens but to disparage the office of the president is why most of us were upset with them , they can call President Bush all the names they want but they should never have brought the office of The President of the United States into there rant , there is a difference.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by sandhunter

I don`t have a problem with speaking out about the War , that is their right as one of our citizens but to disparage the office of the president is why most of us were upset with them , they can call President Bush all the names they want but they should never have brought the office of The President of the United States into there rant , there is a difference.

But when you are a US citizen and you wish to criticise the current president, can you not criticise the man and his policies without criticising the office? In point of fact, President George W Bush was the man serving at the time. The Chicks were right and I was wrong, because I supported the second Gulf War, even though I was misled by the false information we were being fed at the time. I regret the line I took then and I wouldn't do it again; I would be very surprised if the Dixie Chicks regret the absolutely justified line they took then or if they wouldn't do it again. I don't think they were disparaging the office. I think they were expressing contempt for the man himself.

[sandhunter]

The way they said it they were disparaging the office too, also doing it while in another country makes it seem worse, and yes you can put down the president with out putting down the office.
Hate the person in office but you should never hate the office.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by sandhunter

The way they said it they were disparaging the office too, also doing it while in another country makes it seem worse, and yes you can put down the president with out putting down the office.
Hate the person in office but you should never hate the office.

I agree with that point totally; but I also think you might feel that the president as a man is so unworthy that he is dishonouring the office and that the office itself has been stained by the incumbent. It is not only the US presidency; for example, the Queen of Great Britain is 89 years old and I dread the thought of her dying unless that gobshite, Prince Charles, dies first. He will not make a good King.

God save the Queen.

[sandhunter]

I have always thought that is why she has stayed on the throne , so that he would not get the throne .

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by sandhunter

I have always thought that is why she has stayed on the throne , so that he would not get the throne .

This is where it gets quite tricky for me, because I am a subject of the British crown and you are not; by expressing my view on Prince Charles directly to a foreigner I am arguably being disloyal and letting my own side down, and I am conscious of this as an issue. You, on the other hand, are unconditionally free to say anything you like about Prince Charles, to whom you will never owe allegiance. I hope with all my heart that the reign of Prince Charles as King Charles (or whatever he elects to call himself) will be a far day from now, and I not here to see it. But if I am still here and he is indeed the King, I will be far more careful how I word whatever I feel I need to say about him. So to that extent I think your point about the office as opposed to the man is entirely right.

[sandhunter]

I understand what you are saying and hope I didn't say anything disrespectful , for I did not mean too ( are they gone now ) . Your Queen seems to be one very smart person .

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by sandhunter

I understand what you are saying and hope I didn't say anything disrespectful , for I did not mean too ( are they gone now ) . Your Queen seems to be one very smart person .

Mate, you never complain if I say naughty things about Mr GW Bush or Mr Obama, you can say anything you like about Prince Charles or even Her Majesty the Queen, who are not your royal family after all. Since they are mine, my correct response, were I to happen to agree with criticisms a foreigner has to offer concerning them, would be Sir Francis Urquahart's famous line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JizOVAOeLE