Now we get to hear how the Dixie Chicks are validated in their hatred for President Bush because they won some awards last night.

The Dixie Chicks, who stirred up a hornet’s nest with a jibe at President Bush, won all five Grammys for which they were nominated on Sunday, including the coveted album of the year.

The victory marked a stunning validation for the female country music trio from Texas, almost four years after their dream run as the darlings of Nashville came to an abrupt end.

Yeah, they’ve validated that a group can see their fan base all but disappear with concerts cancelled for lack of interest and still gain industry recognition for purely political purposes. In the words of American Idol’s Randy Jackson, “Welcome to Hollywood, baby!”

“I think people are using their freedom of speech tonight with all of these awards,” Maines said.

By “people”, of course, she means the record excutives who nominated them and the Recording Academy members who voted for them.

Yes, the Hollywood elite are certainly using their freedom of speech… to push their political agenda through some halfwit entertainers.

UPDATE:
I will be on the BBC radio show called “World Have Your Say” between 12:30 PM - 1:00 PM Central time today. Click here to listen live.

UPDATE 2:
Many are emailing me asking how I can claim the Dixie Chicks aren’t as successful as they’re appearing to be. Here are some numbers to ponder:

Their cd “Wide Open Spaces” was released on January 27, 1998. It sold 12 million units and was certified RIAA Diamond.

Their cd “Fly” was released on August 31, 1999. It sold 10 million units and was certified RIAA Diamond.

Their latest cd, “Taking the Long Way” was released on May 23, 2006 and sold 1 million units in the first four weeks… but has only managed approximately 1 million since.

In 2000, their “Fly Tour” went to 90 cities with an average attendance of 12,000 per show and grossed over $46 million in ticket sales.

On March 7, 2003, they sold a record 867,000 tickets in a day and earned $62 million on tour, making it the top grossing country tour of the year.

But after March 10, 2003 (they had already sold out virtually every show of their 2003 world tour), when Natalie Maines told the London concert audience, “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas”, their cd sales plummeted and in 2006, their tour had to cancel multiple dates because of a lack of ticket sales.

When Harvey Weinstein’s company decides to fund a conservative documentary about illegal immigration, the media is eerily silent.

But let Harvey Weinstein’s company decide to fund a documentary about the Dixie Chicks and you’ll see headlines like, “Dixie Chicks documentary could be election issue“.

I’d love to see the statistics on how many Americans have replaced illegal immigration with the Dixie Chicks failed tour on their list of important election issues…

.
.
.
.
Cross-posted at Newsbusters

I feel a special bond with the Ditzie Chicks, considering it was their verbal diarrhea that prompted me to launch this site back in 2003. So it’s with great joy that I watch them try to spin the impact of their anti-Bush tirade into something positive for the group.

In response to having to cancel 14 cities on their tour for lack of ticket sales, the group had this to say:

The trio released a statement last week attributing the changes to attempts to “accommodate demand” and said more dates might be added next year.

Priceless.

Maybe it was just a clerical error, and somebody forgot to include “enormous lack of” between “accommodate” and “demand”.

Continuing their capitalism vs. censorship lesson, the Dixie Chicks are quickly finding out that industry-bloated record sales numbers don’t really reflect consumer interest.

From Reuters:

Initial ticket sales for the Dixie Chicks’ upcoming tour are far below expectations and several dates will likely be canceled or postoned.

Ticket counts for the 20-plus arena shows that went on sale last weekend were averaging 5,000-6,000 per show in major markets and less in secondaries, according to sources contacted by Billboard. Venue capacities on the tour generally top 15,000.
…
Despite those numbers, early ticket sales are clearly not meeting projections. The plug was pulled on public on-sales for shows in Indianapolis (August 23), Oklahoma City (September 26), Memphis (September 27) and Houston (September 30) because of tepid pre-sales in a national promotion with Target stores.

Maybe they should change the title of their new album from “Not Ready to Make Nice” to “Not Ready to Make Money”.

Back on March 13, 2003, this blog was born out of my desire to correct the record on the Dixie Chicks self-induced saga. Tired of calling in to all the talk radio shows about this topic, I finally ventured into the blogosphere with my very first post.

I find it amusing when the entertainers spout off whatever mantra is cool for the day and then complain when consumers start talking about boycotting their services (ACTING!) or products (items they endorse as celebrities). You see, somewhere down the line the concept of “free speech” has been confused with the economic concept of supply and demand. If you’re livelihood depends on something and you take actions (whether protected or not) that alienate a portion of that collective ’something’, you’ve got to expect a reduction in demand for your product. Look at it this way… do you see top executives of companies making public statements about politics? NO! Taking it a step further, do you hear business owners making personal attacks or snide comments about politicians or religious figures in public? NO! Why, you ask? Because they know that there are differing viewpoints in the world… a world which comprises their entire customer base… a world which does not care to hear their latest rant about foreign policy or their stance on global warming. They understand that while they too enjoy freedom of speech, the wise move is to shut up when it comes to hot topics. Sure, you say, they are afraid to voice their opinions…. I counter that it is intelligence, not fear that guides them. The entertainment industry for the most part has elevated many of these ‘activists’ to a financial position that boycotts of their goods and services may not completely destroy their way of life, and for that reason they have nothing to lose. But for those who are on their way up, or require continual support from the audience, it might be wise to shut the hell up…. unless of course the cost of their free speech is worth a reduction in lifestyle and livelihood.

The “right to free speech” is not being attacked. Stop the spinning. They have the right to say whatever they want (obviously) and we as the consumers, the people who can put money in their pockets or not, have the choice to stop purchasing their products and services. The beauty of capitalism.
…
This is not about freedom of speech, it’s about business. Supply and demand.

The only difference is this time next year, she might not have a world stage on which to spew her idiocy, she’ll be relegated back to a local bar or street corner… but her free speech rights will remain fully intact.

And here we are three years later and my point has been proven.

It appears the war U.S. country radio stations mounted against the politically outspoken Dixie Chicks has not abated in the least.

The band is promoting “Taking the Long Way,” its first album since Natalie Maines told a London audience in 2003 she was ashamed to be from the same state as U.S. President George Bush. The comment sparked a radio boycott of the group’s music.

Although the album hits stores Tuesday, the first two singles from the album are not getting widespread airplay, Billboard.com reported Monday.

The first single, “Not Ready to Make Nice,” only peaked at No. 36 on the Billboard Hot Country Songs chart and the second single, “Everybody Knows,” is moving downward after its peak at No. 48.

WKIS FM in Miami reported it pulled “Not Ready to Make Nice” due to listener complaints after only one week.

The program director at KUBL/KKAT in Salt Lake City told Billboard he was angered by its “self-indulgent and selfish lyrics.”

Neither the Chicks or their label, Columbia Records, would speak to Billboard for its article.

Looks like they waited a little too long to finally stop speaking. Welcome to the world of capitalism.

This is why I respect President Bush as much as I do. He tells it like it is. No matter whether you agree with him or his policies, you can always count on him standing by his word. In Washington, these days, that’s a rare guarantee to get. A big problem with Clinton is that you never really know what you’ll get, because he’s always testing the water before he commits himself. Maybe you agree with him today, but if he gets wind of a poll stating the opposite, he’ll flip faster than a truck stop pancake.

Back to President Bush. The Chixie Dicks once again proved what immature asses they are on television last night. Today, I read that Bush has made a comment regarding the Chicks, and instead of trying to argue it in my own words, I’m going to use Bush’s words, as they are exactly on point with my feelings.

Of the singing Texas trio, who have been outspoken critics of the U.S.-led war, Bush said, “The Dixie Chicks are free to speak their mind.”

At the same time, Bush added: “They shouldn’t have their feelings hurt just because some people don’t want to buy their records when they speak out. You know, freedom is a two-way street.”

and this, my friends, is what leaders are made of.

So Natalie Mains of the Dixie Chicks has finally given me inspiration to start this journey. I am tired of hearing the entertainment industry spouting their politics regardless of whether I agree with them or not. The media loves to swarm like sharks on every comment and the country further draws the dividing line down the middle. I’ve heard reports of Bush being called a baby killer, a nazi and more. But aren’t these the same people who support ABORTION? Who’s the baby killer?

The problem with the entertainment group publicizing their political viewpoints is that none of them represent “the American viewpoint” in whole.

You’ve got the Right: Ted Nugent, Fred Thompson, Pat Boone, Drew Carey, Dixie Carter, Charlie Daniels, Bo Derek, Charlton Heston, Toby Keith, Jackie Mason, Pat Sajak, Tom Selleck, Jane Seymour and Bruce Willis.

You’ve got the Left: Ed Asner, Alec Baldwin, George Clooney, Sheryl Crow, Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, Richard Gere, Tom Hanks, Michael Moore, Sean Penn, Rob Reiner, Susan Sarandon, Martin Sheen, Barbra Streisand.

Then you’ve got some insignificants somewhere on the fringe. But the point is that these folks are ENTERTAINERS. As Americans, they have every right to say what they please, but making a living depends on the consumers which, unless completely apathetic, will fall into one of the groups listed above. When they spout off about non-entertainment issues, they begin to alienate people in their customer base. They should expect some fallout to come from making public comments about an issue (whether politics or religion) that is deeply held by people.

I find it amusing when the entertainers spout off whatever mantra is cool for the day and then complain when consumers start talking about boycotting their services (ACTING!) or products (items they endorse as celebrities). You see, somewhere down the line the concept of “free speech” has been confused with the economic concept of supply and demand. If you’re livelihood depends on something and you take actions (whether protected or not) that alienate a portion of that collective ’something’, you’ve got to expect a reduction in demand for your product. Look at it this way… do you see top executives of companies making public statements about politics? NO! Taking it a step further, do you hear business owners making personal attacks or snide comments about politicians or religious figures in public? NO! Why, you ask? Because they know that there are differing viewpoints in the world… a world which comprises their entire customer base… a world which does not care to hear their latest rant about foreign policy or their stance on global warming. They understand that while they too enjoy freedom of speech, the wise move is to shut up when it comes to hot topics. Sure, you say, they are afraid to voice their opinions…. I counter that it is intelligence, not fear that guides them. The entertainment industry for the most part has elevated many of these ‘activists’ to a financial position that boycotts of their goods and services may not completely destroy their way of life, and for that reason they have nothing to lose. But for those who are on their way up, or require continual support from the audience, it might be wise to shut the hell up…. unless of course the cost of their free speech is worth a reduction in lifestyle and livelihood.

The “right to free speech” is not being attacked. Stop the spinning. They have the right to say whatever they want (obviously) and we as the consumers, the people who can put money in their pockets or not, have the choice to stop purchasing their products and services. The beauty of capitalism.

My favorite quote is, “You have no experience doing this, so shut up. You think what I do is so easy, you have no right to say anything about what I do until you’ve spent some time actually doing it.” This was not said by a republican in the current administration defending himself from a Leftist attack…. rather it was a quote from none other than George Clooney in response to a bad review he’d received for directing. Funny Mr. Clooney that it takes such a deep inward evaluation and hands on experience to direct a movie, but running the most powerful country in the world can be accomplished by someone like yourself, without a shred of experience or knowledge. Hypocrisy runs rampant again.

We all have opinions, but if my livelihood depended on the public, I’d try a little harder not to alienate an entire group.

This is not about freedom of speech, it’s about business. Supply and demand.

The only difference is this time next year, she might not have a world stage on which to spew her idiocy, she’ll be relegated back to a local bar or street corner… but her free speech rights will remain fully intact.