The Sound of Dissent in Dixie

When leader singer Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks spoke out against the Iraq war on March 10, 2003, she provoked a firestorm from the American right wing.

Speaking out against the war in Iraq, Maines told an audience in London that she was ashamed the President was from Texas.

Various right-wing activists, bloggers and media figures targetted the Dixie Chicks for nothing less than complete professional destruction.

Shut Up and Sing documents how, in a period of weeks, the Dixie Chicks went from being lucrative corporate shills to being branded as un-American or anti-American.

American country music radio stations fed the fire by caving under the pressure being exerted by far-right groups like Free Republic. By complying with the boycott -- refusing to play the Dixie Chicks' music and in some cases even organizing mass destructions of their CDs -- these radio stations emboldened these activists.

Had those radio stations not been as compliant with the de facto mass censorship it's likely that the campaign against the Dixie Chicks would have failed.

What all too often escapes scrutiny in the affair is the role of then-President George W Bush in the affair. As President of the United States Bush was obligated to defend the freedoms of American citizens regardless of whether they agreed with his war or not.

A conscientious leader would have defended the Dixie Chicks despite their criticism of him. A concientious leader understands the value of freedom of speech, and understands the value of dissent.

This being said, to describe Bush as a conscientious leader would be a mistake. This is an individual who strictly adhered to a specific ideological programme even after it became evident that this programme was failing. In his approach to policy Bush proved to be far too rigid to ever be described as conscientious. Not only Americans, but countless others, continue to suffer the consequences of his failed economic policies, in particular.

Bush may not have explicitly encouraged the sustained attack on the Dixie Chicks, but in failing to speak out against it, and speak supportively of their freedom of expression, he failed to live up to his responsibility as President of the United States of America.

Unsurprisingly, John McCain -- the man who very well could have been elected President in 2000 if not for Karl Rove's infamous "secret black baby" push-polling stunt -- seemed very Presidential when grilling radio executives over whether or not they were "networks" and whether or not politically-motivated programming decisions were being made.

The contrast with Bush's "they shouldn't have their feelings hurt" comments is both obvious and profound.

On a day when Americans are celebrating their hard-earned freedoms, it's important for people all over the world to remember precisely how tenuous and how costly exercising those rights can be, and remember that political leaders have a responsibility to uphold those rights.

Speaking of Not Suffering Fools...

KeVron gets a much-deserved spanking

The vaccilations of various left-wing commentators over the tasering of Andrew Meyer has apparently continued and unsurprisingly (considering the source) intersects with us here at the Nexus.

In a recent post at Canadian Cynic's blog, Pretty Shaved Ape (reportedly, also known as Lindsay Stewart, a Waterloo-area actor/waiter -- read: failed actor) has chosen to address a disagreement between Dr. Dawg and the ever-petulant and mindless KevRon.

To put it shortly, KevRon -- and if anyone doubts his overall objectability, he recently suggested we "tase Wanda Watkins and her grief" -- accuses Dawg of being a "phrawd". (Apparently, he isn't literate enough to know what letter "fraud" starts with.)

In a number of complaints lodged, predictably, at his hero's lair, KeVron complains about the larger implications of the Meyer incident for "liberals/progressives/Democrats":

"...Phrawd's confabulation puts progressives/liberals/democrats in the indefensible position of having to insist that sparky and his kind should be "tasered for running over his time at a campus meeting", to which, of course, none would ever agree..."

Naturally, there are a few problems with this statement. First off, KeVron is legitimately neither a liberal nor a progressive, although he may claim to be a Democrat so long as that remains merely an indicator of how one votes.

Secondly, while there are a few individuals who have used the Meyer tasering as a rhetorical weapon against the Democrats, it's also rather unfortunate that this isn't entirely unfair.

Simply put: what was John Kerry's reaction to the tasering? "Hey! Stop that!" would have been both simple, and reasonable. Instead, Kerry can audibly be heard in the background of the video continuing to speak to the audience as if Andrew Meyer wasn't being tased right before his eyes.

That's not the reaction one should expect from a man who could (many would probably agree should) have been president of the United States.

In all fairness, however, president George Bush remained quiet about the largely politically-motivated crucifixion of the Dixie Chicks, despite the fact that it happened over a longer period of time. Republicans are clearly no better in regards to defending people's freedom of speech.

Finally, one considers that KeVron himself has taken almost precisely the same stance that he decries in this particular statement, and one would wonder what to think, if they weren't aware of the fact that KeVron rarely thinks at all.

In the end, it's very unfortunate: Dr. Dawg, a legitimate progressive, has managed to make himself into an ideological enemy of the Hateful Left, as led (at least on this side of the 49th parallel) by Canadian Cynic, but definitely embodied in KeVron (who resides south of it).

What was his crime? Questioning the so-called "infinite wisdom" of Cynic and Martin Rayner.

And while Lindsay Stewart may be far from being the belle of the ball in regards to reasonable political discourse (consider the recent ambivalence over "weepy", "unimportant" Peter MacKay's recent Afghan ordeal, or that he (she?) shares a blog with a spectacularly psychologically unbalanced individual who recently, in print, wished death on another individual), one at least has to respect his (her?) ability to make a sound ethical judgement pertaining to the use of tasers.

That's a bit of wisdom he (she?) could stand to share with his (her?) blogging mate. Probably right in the midst of planning his (her?) next performance of Hamlet, which will probably be held in the walk-in freezer of the Wendy's he (she?) probably works at.

As for KeVron, one shouldn't worry much about him: the spanking will build some desperately-needed character.