October 28, 2006
To date, I have mostly stayed out of the fray over the Dipsie Chicks poor choice of bashing President Bush while performing in England. Frankly, I thought it a poor choice but they were exercising their freedom of speech. They have that right and even though I disagree with them, support their rights also.
Had they just shut up and said nothing more, it all would have blown over, I feel. For whatever reason, they could not do that. Once they incensed their fan base by spitting (figuratively) on their values and trust, they just kept egging everything on, making more anti-war comments, bashing Bush more and further alienating their fans.
Then, to make matters even worse, after their sales and concerts fell off, they started complaining they were being denied their constitutional right to free speech, even further alienating their now former fans.
Our freedom of speech is granted us by the first amendment to our Constitution, which says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. “
Last I heard Congress or the Bush administration has not made any move restricting their right to speak out, even in opposition to them. So, who has the audacity to be violating the Dipsie Chicks rights?
Me and you, that’s who. Networks that refuse to play their records, concerts or newly released “documentary,” Shut Up and Sing,” title stolen from right wing radio host, Laura Ingraham. Are we really restricting their freedoms, though? HELL NO, we aren’t.
These spoiled little girls think they are impervious to their own actions. Sorry, but along with freedom of speech comes responsibility. In addition to being individuals, they are also a business with a responsibility to their fans, customers, if you will. As with any business, if you disappoint your customers, they stop buying your product. It’s that simple.
No other business I know of complains their rights are being violated when they run their customers off, except for the Dipsie Chicks.
Along with the release of this alleged “documentary,” wherein they claim to have been the “Top Selling Female Band of All Time,” they have placed a blog for others to comment, Shut Up and Post. What I find totally ironic there is that after I registered and made three comments, unlike either at this blog, FreeRepublic, or HotAir, right winged blog sites I also visit and make comments at, none of my comments appear right away, as yours do here or at the other sites I frequent.
Is it possible that while the Dipsie Chicks complain their freedom of speech is violated because fans don’t buy their garbage any longer, or because networks don’t give them air time and radio stations won’t play their songs, they actively restrict others freedom of speech on their blog site? Are they moderating comments there, while claiming they are moderated? Once again, the glaring hypocrisy of the leftist shines brightly for all to see.
Sorry girls, but you can’t have it both ways. If you expect to stay on top, after violating the trust of your fan base, but restrict others comments, you will remain the bimbos you have become noted as.
Fans have every right to purchase what they wish and not to purchase from those who offend them. That is not violating your freedoms, it is others exercising theirs.
Get over yourselves, girls, you really aren’t all that important.
UPDATE: A little over 3 hours, and comments showed up. Why the lag time, girls?
UPDATE: Apparently, someone realized something over there. Comments now are appearing immediately, as elsewhere. Still, why was it originally set up that way?
Yes, I realize none of the girls are sitting at a computer running this thing, but they did approve their name being used there. Makes me wonder.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Posted by Lew Waters at 1:32 PM