Natalie Maines’ Mindless Outbursts
Some celebrities should just keep their mouths shut on anything that touches on the political. When they speak, they are gaffe machines. Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks (above center) just keeps bringing on more disdain for herself and her band. Here is Natalie’s latest pearl of wisdom (via Michelle Malkin):
“The entire country may disagree with me, but I don’t understand the necessity for patriotism,” [Natalie] Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. “Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don’t see why people care about patriotism.”
The problem with Maines is that her thoughts on political matters are typically stuck around the level of a high school sophomore. If you haven’t thought through things much, you shouldn’t be blurting out opinions in public where the media will record what you say. It would be far better for her to say nothing. Otherwise she is just going to tick off a lot more people.
The Dixie Chicks were once my favorite band. They got their start playing here in the Dallas area. I liked their music and their sassy style. I still like their older music. But now I don’t listen to them much (and since Dallas area country stations seem to have an informal ban on playing them, that makes not listening pretty easy).
When Maines made here first gaffe (or you might say super-gaffe) in the UK at the moment her country was going to war, I could have cut her slack if she had handled the aftermath with a little humility. At the time she made a rather unconvincing apology. What is her view now of the comments that she made in the UK about being ashamed that President Bush was from Texas? From a recent Time magazine interview:
“I apologized for disrespecting the office of the President. But I don’t feel that way anymore. I don’t feel he is owed any respect whatsoever.”
So Bush is so bad that the office of the President no longer deserves respect as long as he is in it. Huh?
Lately the Dixie Chicks have been badmouthing all sorts of people. They just blurt out any put-down thought that pops in their heads about other people, often other famous non-political people. But the even more annoying thing is that they expect this all to be consequence-free. They seem to think that they should be able to offend people without anyone getting upset about it and criticizing them in return.
Personally, I am more saddened than angry about what the Dixie Chicks have become. And, like so many others, I won’t be buying any more of their CDs.
Update: Solving the Natalie Problem - The Dixie Chicks sing I Will Never Apologize.
June 17th, 2006 at 12:54 pm
The chicks deserves credit for standing up for what they believe to be right, at great personal cost. Their latest tour has had some sales difficulties because of their political stands. It is never easy to go against your own base. These girls have more courage than most Republican politican who knows what their base want on issues like immigration but is too afriad to lose corporate contribution. So, lets go easy on them.
Their core problem is that they have not make it clear that they distain for the current administration is not the same as distan for the country. But again, too many people who dislike them automatically equate attack on the person sitting in the white houe as an attack on the office of the presidency.
As far as being patriotic, the spinmaster have stolen what it means to be a patriot. A patriot is someone who pleadge allegiance to the Republic, and not to any particular administration. Since administrations come and go, they are open to critism and attack by the oppossion. The public need to be reminded of this little forgotten fact.
On the other hand, why are people linking the artists political views with their work? Their work is either good or bad. Have we become so political in this country that we must draw a line on the sand on everything? This is a bit irrational. We give people credit for what they do on the merits regardless of their political affiliation. This is what make this a great country.
June 17th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
This guys hero is jane fonda….let the chicks live in another country…..
June 17th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
nobody,
You say, “The chicks deserves credit for standing up for what they believe to be right, at great personal cost.”
There are lots of entertainers that I have no problem enjoying their work even though they are liberal. I think most people only reject them if they start poking their fingers in someone else’s eyes. If you make very personal attacks, or thumb your nose at core beliefs, that gets people upset.
For example, saying the man in the Whitehouse is such a loathsome person that the office of the presidency, the most honored position in the US, does not deserve respect as long as Bush is in it is a very personal attack. And to say that you are ashamed he is president on the verge of war is another personal swipe. If they are courageous and want to talk politics, why not state their positions on Iraq rather than making personal attacks? They are being no different than DailyKos or Atrios.
Now Maines says “I don’t see why people care about patriotism.” Most Americans care deeply about their country. But now Maines implies that she has no special affection for the USA. The 4th of July must mean nothing to her. If you take her words at face value, all the things that we think are special about this country are not enough to make her care.
I guess I don’t see the chicks as being all that courageous here. Mainly they are just standing up for their right to say inflammatory things and put down people. That is different from taking unpopular positions on controversial issues and taking the heat for that.
June 17th, 2006 at 2:26 pm
Dopes. In the business to sell records and live concert tickets, and make insane comments like that…Dopes. On top of that, their core listeners/fans are generally conservative Americans. Dopes. They get what they deserve, their careers are going to tank again…Dopes. They need a new Manager that will install 3 muzzles on these….you guessed it…DOPES.
June 17th, 2006 at 2:41 pm
They must be desparate to sell records….it wasnt only what they said about the president, but they did it overseas not in the USA
June 17th, 2006 at 8:09 pm
I have to ask, where are the adults ? Is there not someone in the dixie chick entourage that can save them from their own immaturity.Their business first and foremost is entertainment,
and although I am not a fan, I understand they had a very promising and lucrative future.They seem to be willing to risk it for a very sensitive political opinion. A political opinion that has the country divided. What makes it even worse is the arrogance with which they make these comments. As if they are saying, our opinion is absolutley right, any one that does not agree with us is an ignorant, flag waving, patriotic hick.
I hope they feel damaging their once promising career beyond repair was worth their political opinions.
June 17th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Borrow one CD or check one out from the libary, burn a hundred copies and give them away at the record stores. Don’t sell them for a penny, give them away. Maybe if they only sell a couple thousand CD’s the other two will strangle the big mouth.
June 18th, 2006 at 12:44 am
You can’t insult your fan base without accepting the consequences. Natalie’s ignorance is so appalling.
When an artist tries to use their status to influence me politically it’s no longer just about their work.
June 18th, 2006 at 3:08 am
Clueless:
iIsn’t there a physical limit on how stupid one person can be? Between the lot of them the Dixie Chicks can’t come up with two IQ points to rub together.
June 19th, 2006 at 12:39 am
Earl Didn’t Die!
Earl woke up And found his truck, Now hes lookin for Mary Ann and Wanda. The future looks bleak for those little sneaks, cause EARL DIDNT DIE. Hi Eaarrrlll.
July 3rd, 2006 at 9:26 am
Hey Nobody,
Natalie didn’t even pledge allegiance to the Republic. She didn’t think there was ANY reason to be patriotic.
“A man’s country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers, and woods, but it is a principle and patriotism is loyalty to that principle.” by George William Curtis.
Natalie must not have any principle.
October 27th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
Oh I see.. Since Natalie is just an entertainer with no political sense, then she doesn’t deserve the right to voice an opinion. And since Bush is the genius level leader who isn’t just a corporate puppet for the republican party, then we all must respect him and bow down to him, no matter what decision he makes. And I guess it’s our patriotic duty to burn all Dixie Chick CD’s to proclaim our allegiance to Bush.. Much the same way the Nazi’s did when they burned forbiddon literature for Hitler. It’s so sad that we all proclaim to be patriotic, but when someone stands against the establishment using the very same rights that the establishment created, they are blacklisted and considered anti-amerian. When she made the remarks a few years back, I didn’t give a notice, but considering that the war in Iraq has turned into a complete failure that God himself couldn’t fix, then I guess she was too far from the truth. Owe him an apology.. I think Bush owes the American people one.
November 12th, 2006 at 6:35 pm
Amen to that! –> invasionforever! You’ve hit it dead on. Natalie was excercizing her consitutional right, and its ridiculous that people judged her for having an opinion. What she said was in response to the fact that her country was just about to enter into a way that she, and the other chicks didn’t agree with. They knew people were going to die, and there wasn’t a clear and material reason for going to war. The initial movement was not about Saddam Hussain so much as it was about removing these “weapons of mass destruction”… these weapons that did not exist!!! Tons of celebs stood up against the war later, Natalie just made one brief comment that implied her dissatisfaction with the decisions that her president had made sending her country into a war that would inevitably cause thousands to die, and solve no real problem (as evidenced by the dissatisfaction of over 60% of the current American public). The Bush administration was wrong in its decision to go to war… and he does owe the American people an apology.
Those american people who judged the chicks for simply having an opinion and voicing that, need to apologize to them. Or at least reconsile themselves to understanding that people should not be shunned just for having an opinion which contrasts the rest of the country loving world. Patriotism isn’t so much about love for ones country, its about worship of one’s country. And if Americans worship their president, then you are overlooking very serious things. No one is perfect, and everyone makes mistakes. Look at the history of american foreign relations…. its just filled with so called “mishaps.” Believing whole heartedly in your governmnet is idealistic and nieve.
Don’t judge Natalie becasue she has an opinion. Just listen to her music, which is amazing…
November 21st, 2006 at 8:17 am
I don’t think that the comment natelie made should have caused a big thing like it did.
November 21st, 2006 at 9:53 pm
kaylin,
I think it only did because we were just about to go to war. It was just the worst timing possible to make a put-down comment about the president while in a foreign country.
November 30th, 2006 at 8:45 pm
Ad hominem arguements rarely lead to an informed discussion. You would be wise to avoid throwing around insults which are based upon personal factors and instead address the issues raised.
The main problem when discussing patriotism is that people like Natalie and some other people on this page make the mistake of referring to Nationalism as patriotism and also not recognising that unreasoning patriotism is in fact jingoism. Patriotism relates to a conditional pride in your common culture, nationalism to a loyalty to an abstract concept called the nation and jingoism in an unquestioning belief in the superiority of your culture. The term jingoism was created for the British at the height of their Empire and the parallels with modern America are frightening.
People should not be expected to put a nebulous concept, such as their nation, ahead of the reality of their family, friends and principles. By doing so you remove the possibility of discussing how you can improve your nation and move to a state whereby the government can do whatever it wishes and counter any criticism with a claim of unpatriotic behaviour.
It would be wise to remember that the concept of nationalism only came in existence after the nation-state came into being. Nationalism is used to create allegience to a geographical area, rather than a common culture. Prior to the nation state people really did not need to choose between nation and family, the nation did not exist. A country was seen as a grouping of people with a similar culture and set of traditions. Only after a move to a government dominated by a merchant class rather than a land owning aristocracy was nationalism required. With aristocracies the borders fo control were defined by the land the aristocrats owned. When the aristocracts lost power and loyalty a new way of defining a zone of control was required and therefore the concept of the Nation was created. This started to happen in the 18th century.
Before the Nation if an aristocract married someone living in another part of the world, then that part of the world would come into their control. This is why the King of England controlled part of Germany for a while and why Spain used to control the Netherlands. Nations just did not exist.
Now as ever people are encouraged to give up their freedom and follow their governments policies by making reasoned debate impossible through peer pressure. This is the truly insiduous problem with Nationalism. Patriotism is not about unreasonable and unquestioning pride in your country, patrotism in practise (when subverted by a nationalist agenda) is about making criticism of your country impossible and stifling anti-government sentiment, even if it is genuine. Uncontrolled Nationalism exists to turn patriotism into jingosim and ensure support for government policies through emotion, rather than reason.
A Libertarian should not be so willing to give allegience without question to their government.
As Mark Twain said “Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.”, or as Natalie said its about the people and wanting what’s best for them and not about supporting the the government unquestioningly.
December 3rd, 2006 at 12:00 pm
Neil,
You say: “You would be wise to avoid throwing around insults which are based upon personal factors”.
I referred to Natalie Maines’ comments as being “mindless”. The dictionary defines mindless as “Lacking intelligence or good sense; foolish.”
So I am saying her comments are lacking in intelligence and good sense and are foolish. That is not saying that she is an unintelligent person, lacks character, or is morally defective in any way.
I have tried, on this blog, to not attack the character of others. And I don’t see that I have committed a personal attack on Natalie Maines.
However, in the world of political opinions stated publicly, everyone (including myself) has to accept that other people are going to sometimes say you are saying foolish things.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Wow- a site with mostly reasoned debate and only a few rocks thrown. Well done, all. Debate can sometimes makes us see other sides and reduce conflict- that is IF the participants are willing to forego the opportunity to bash others anonymously. This debate did a fair job.
I think ol’ Nat got a little hot after the first row and ran her mouth a bit without engaging the brain.
And I think she did, indeed say patriotism while having the concept of nationalism in mind. Neil, the quick lesson in confusing the two was very well stated.
Well done, all. I just found this after the minor whoop-up over the grammies.
We are the nation with life and death power over hundreds of small defenseless countries and people. And they know it and are cautious about us- all the while taking advantage of the financial gains inherit in being our “friends”. I think we’re silly if we believe that some of the partners in our “coalitions” are in them for any other reason than the financial. I am terrified about the responsibility we have, and the fact that one mistake in a leadership choice by us can have catastrophic consequences for the world.
March 30th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
What is your real objection to her comment? The question is, what is it that you prompts one to be patriotic? The Founding Fathers, to my knowledge, never asked for patriotism on an unquestioning basis; if they had, we’d all be drinking tea and warm beer.
The hysterical reaction to the Dixie Chicks’ relatively minor objections to the thoroughly discredited war in Iraq simply points up the hypocrisy of the present administration and the few supporters of it who are left. They claim to be supporters of “democracy” but have no recourse in facing those who object to U.S. foreign policy but to claim that opponents are disloyal and should “shut up and sing.”
The objection that Natalie Maines’ comments are childish is itself a lame attack. She raised, when it was far from fashionable to do so, an opinion that many of us held and that has been proven to be true: that this was a misguided mission launched by ideologues and political hacks. That this travesty has been embraced by the country music industry is depressing. The men and women who are being sent out to die are the working class. They deserve better than to be told that their lives are being sacrificed for some noble cause, when in fact, it’s a war fought for benefit of the very few.
Listen to Natalie! Listen to the truth, instead of the lies the Bush Administration issues every time it opens its collective mouth.
May 2nd, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Natalie maines just like everyone else in this country has the freedom of speech. They obviously are smarter then 2 as an I.Q. because they are the ones making milions of dollars. what she said was considered wrong in most of our eyes because it is not the way we see it. I am an American and I am very proud of it. There is no reason what Natalie Maines said should make her less of a person.
June 27th, 2007 at 9:56 am
You all seem to be the most democracy-hating gang I’ve ever come across. Freedom of speech i apperantly not there for the critics, am I right? The war in Iraq is not about spreading democracy, it never was. Bush lied and everybody but you knows it. It’s about the U.S needing oil and getting it by taking it from who has it, in this case the Iraqies.
Creds to the Dixie Chicks who can take a stand and speaking their mind, even if it meens selling fewer albums in the conservative south.
/ Jenny, Sweden
June 27th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Jenny,
“The war in Iraq is not about spreading democracy, it never was.”
Wrong, that is exactly what the goal was. Unfortunately, it was a big mistake to take on such a large nation-building task. It has cost the US trillions of dollars and thousands of dead young soldiers. Democracy and freedom may or may not take root over 10 years or so. No one knows.
How many Swedes have died lately while overthrowing a dictator? It may not be a wise thing to attempt, but before you declare you know the evil intentions of the US (US needing oil), you might stop and think first.
Sweden sat out WWII rather than help fight Hitler. If the US had done as Sweden did, all of Europe might today be ruled by Nazis and every last European Jew would have been exterminated.
It is pretty dumb to declare that the war was only about getting oil. Invading Iraq has helped the US in no way regarding oil. No one ever argued before the war that it was going to benefit us in terms of oil. It may feel good to think you have great insights in the low motives of others, but cynicism is easy.
June 28th, 2007 at 3:43 am
Dan Morgan: First of all, I am no patriot, so I will not defend my country in all cases. I do, however, like the idea of the swedish military neutrality. It keeps us, as a small country, relativly independent and doesn’t have to be a part of wars that are crimes against civilians.. The problem is that we were’nt exactly neutral in the WWII. We were more or less ready to support Germany, just like Finland. “Finland’s fight is our fight”-kind of thing. Communists were put in camps etc etc.
About Iraq: There’s been nothing but lies from the beginning. Did you find any weaponds of mass destruction? No. Because that was never the issue. Here is an article mostly on Israeli interests, but also on how the US has benefited from the “new market” of Iraq.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070702/klein
This is another article you could read for a better view on things: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html
Otherwise this speaks more than a thousend words: http://bp3.blogger.com/_WdgqunkEjMI/RjSSQKvJt3I/AAAAAAAAAUk/93UYKWhuIRw/s320/FASCISM_NOT_US.jpg
June 28th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Jenny,
The dictionary defines a patriot as “One who loves, supports, and defends one’s country.” If you are Swedish, I cannot imagine why you would not feel patriotic unless it is for some odd ideological reasons. Sweden is a great country with plenty to feel good about and be proud of. I am always amazed how some in Europe declare you can’t like your own country because somehow this is inappropriate. I say that Sweden is a great country even if you won’t!
I just don’t get why so many European young people have to have such a dreary outlook on the world. In fact, it almost seems like a self-loathing of Western institutions.
“We were more or less ready to support Germany …”
I don’t believe that Swedes would have supported Hitler during the war, but I have not read up on it. Again, this sounds like self-loathing on your part.
I read the articles. Naomi Wolf’s article about dictatorship coming to America is pretty silly. Bush will be out of office in 2008. Check FreedomHouse a couple of years from now, and you will see that freedom is unchanged in the US:
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=15&year=2006
The Fascist cartoon in the last link is just so far removed from reality that there is no humor in it.
“the US has benefited from the “new market” of Iraq”
The Iraq war has not gone well. To say that we have economically benefited from this war tells me that you are just hell-bent on seeing sinister motives in whatever the US (or at least the Bush administration) does. If you believe that everyone is motivated by the darkest of motives, well there is not much I can do to change your mind. The world to you must be a pretty ugly place.
July 4th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Dan,
I just dropped by here. I am seldom reading US blogs. (And I wish my English were a bit better, but it is understandable.)
I noticed some things. Words like IQ, silly, patriot are used. They make me a bit suspicious. Not that they should not be used, but they are used with an intention. I think they are distracting to any conversation.
I have often thought about peoples motives. Are there sinister motives? Are there really people that are evil?
I do not believe so. It is a belief of course, no one can really know. What I see instead of sinister motives are selfish motives. (That is why I do not like the words above.) Selfishness tends to divide.
We only have one world. That is what I believe.
August 19th, 2007 at 2:58 am
Mr. Morgan,
I don’t think anything I say can sway you set mind, but man, people like you DO exist!
August 19th, 2007 at 8:04 am
lawrence,
What are you saying, that the Dixie Chicks are somehow above criticism?
September 19th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
How about you get a grip!
If they want to state their opinions then let them, its their own skin theyre risking, i dont see why people are so bothered about what they say. If you dont like it, ignore it. Easy.
If someone doesnt like the president then boohoo, u just get on with your life licking his backside, whilst the rest of us NORMAL people (in my opinion) will get on with ours listening and loving the Dixie Chicks! Viva La Chikas!
October 30th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
this site is wonderfully brain dead and anti-american thinking you’re actually american.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
Casey,
Very clever statement. I am brain dead and not really an American. Now I find out.
November 6th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
It’s a free country isn’t it?? Freedom of speech?? Ever heard of that?? Why do certain people claim to be patriotic, but hate people who say what they believe?? They claim you are anti-American for distrusting your president and government. You have to be a fool to trust this president, vice-president, and others in Washington. Wake up lapdogs !! The Dixie Chicks have the right to say whatever they want.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
John,
“The Dixie Chicks have the right to say whatever they want.”
Sure they do, but others have the right to disagree with them and to criticize them. It is pretty sad when we reach the point where criticizing some singers is said to be violating their freedom of speech.
Yes, I believe in the freedom of speech too - on both sides of an issue!
January 26th, 2008 at 1:47 am
It’s astounds me that a country (USA) that believes in free speech uses alternative methods, such as censorship (country radio), death threats, ‘patriotism’, and public humilation to silence government critics, just as did the old Soviet Union, although granted they did it with tanks.
Some Americans claim that Muslims hate them because of their freedom of speech, but then are terrorified when someone like Natalie uses it.
The fact is the US is such an insecure nation that it cannot stand criticism, in stark contrast to the courage and emotional balance of the Dixie Chicks, who didn’t back down, didn’t give up when their fan base turned on them, and are now looking pretty wise as we enter 2008 as witnesses to the disaster created by the Bush Administration in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Tommy
January 26th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
tommy,
“a country (USA) that believes in free speech uses alternative methods, such as censorship (country radio), death threats …”
Hmm, yes, death threats and censorship are standard procedure here in the US when you disagree with someone.
Actually, there is a constant barrage of back and forth criticism in the American public arena every day, and people don’t freak out about it. It is just the way it is in a demcracy.
Natalie Maines made the mistake of putting down the president on the eve of a war when the country was emotionally preparing to send hundreds of thousands of young men and women off to fight and perhaps die. Her remark had to have been the worst timing ever.
My post was about Maines saying mindless things like, “The entire country may disagree with me, but I don’t understand the necessity for patriotism. Why do you have to be a patriot? About what?”
Natalie Maines has the right to free speech, but others have the right to criticize her when she says something that they disagree with. Celebrities don’t get a free pass from criticism.
August 10th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I’m far from being a high school sophomore and I tend to agree w/ Maines . . . not all of us are proud of what this country’s become, nor do we feel the need to respect a man just because of his job title. Not to mention, the Chicks are patriots . . . dissent is the highest form of patriotism after all. They’re exercising their right to free speech and don’t give a damn what the small-minded folk thing . . . kudos to them.