Did I ever mention what a magazine whore I am? Because I am. On average, I subscribe to or buy 6 different magazines. Those are just the ones I buy on a regular basis. Some are respectable. Some are not. From the fluff is where I get my current topic. Rather, the fluff made me think on this again.

So, US magazine reported that apparently, Natalie Maines (The Dixie Chicks) and Toby Keith (some crapass country singer I don't care about) are feuding. I guess it started back in August when Maines slammed Keith for his song, Red, White and Blue (The Angry American). She stated that the song made country music sound ignorant. She later wore a T-shirt that with the initials F.U.T.K., which most speculate referred to Keith, but Maines insists stood for Freedom, Understanding, Tolerance and something else.

So, their verbal sparring continues.

Several things piss me off about this whole situation. The first, which I shall cover in depth later, is that Toby Keith essentially tells Maines and everyone who agrees with her that they are not Patriots, but they are Commie Heathens. Not only is that incredibly ignorant on so many levels, it's contrary to everything freedom stands for.

The next thing that irks me about this situation is that Toby Keith is playing martyr (the big, bad commie heathen verbally attacked me, oh no! save me, Jesus, save me!), when he is capitalizing off a massive tragedy. The song used to be called "The Angry American" and he wrote it as a tribute to his late father, who served in the Korean War. But now? It is called the Red, White and Blue and serves as a tribute to 9-11. What the hell? I'm sorry, but aren't you a bigger ass for changing your song title and its dedication after a terrorist attack and claiming it makes you patriotic?! Asshole.

If you wrote anything as a tribute, then you certainly do not need to hurry up and get it on the airwaves in order to make money off vulnerable people. Time will allow your words to be heard.

The third thing that bothers me is that Maines consistently backs down from her statements. She puts her foot in her mouth, then comes back and apologizes. Natalie? You have something to say? Fucking say it and be done with it. Do not turn around and claim you didn't mean it just because a few idiots are threatening to boycott you. Your concert already sold out and you are top of the charts. What do you care if 10 people refuse to attend the concert?

THIS is why I respect Michael Moore so much. He has unflinching honesty and does not really care whether the timing is "inappropriate" to some people. He does not believe that walking on eggshells solves problems. He believes that controversy is what gets people talking and more importantly, thinking. He is right.

More important than Keith and Maines both being less than respectable Americans are the regular, non-famous folk who claim to be proud to be an American. These are the same people who will beat another American when they hear anything negative about the president or war. They think that expressing disagreement is "inappropriate," given the current delicate state of our country. They think that if a person does not like the way things are run, that the person should move to Iraq (or, in the past, whoever out current enemy was: the Libyans, the Koreans, and the Afghanis). They should move there and see what it is like to live somewhere where they cannot freely express their opinion.

Back up. They expressed a disagreement, so they should move somewhere where they cannot express disagreement? How does that conclusion logically flow from the tenet again? Anyone else see the insane, illogical irony here?

These people, I am quite sure, have never read the Constitution, nor do they fully comprehend what it means to be an American. Being an American means that everyone can express their political beliefs, regardless of how many people like them. Being American means we do NOT have to fear the tyrannical majority. If one is a "true," "proud" American, they should be excited to support the notion that anyone, regardless of political affiliation, can express himself or herself. Some people missed the boat on this one.

See, the first amendment frees us from fearing a tyrannical government (note: the first amendment does NOT protect you from speech of private individuals, which is where many of these freedom mongers get confused) and frees us from oppression for our thoughts. The Founders further recognized that speech is most important during times of crisis. During times of stability, speech is just idle chatter. Speech becomes important, however, when an important issue arises and created a crisis.

Think of the Boston Tea Party. That was a time of crisis. That was when speaking out was important - when their voices needed to be heard and opinions needed to be made. Underlying free speech is its purpose. Its essential purpose is to educate the masses. But before one can educate, they must first get people talking. Without input from every class, and group, one only hears an incomplete version of the issue. The only way to counter that is to allow everyone a voice. Only then can people become fully informed and make an educated opinion. By telling people to leave the country for disagreeing, you are telling the world that educated opinions are not important and that only raw anger should determine the policies of this nation.

That is not what our Fathers had in mind. Don't you see, the first amendment is designed to compel thought, not SUPPRESS it. Suppress is just another way of saying oppress. Do you want to live in a country where you cannot freely express yourself? Where you cannot learn? Where you cannot reach an educated conclusion after digesting all the available facts?

The most prevalent statement I hear made by free speech advocates is the classic, "I do not support the KK, but I will defend their right to march until I die." I am one of those people. Why? Because when they march, people start talking. They start thinking. They start learning and they start passing on what they have learned. Through educated thought, we can change the world. Truth is not gleaned from silence and oppression, but from debate, and free thought.

I would advise anyone who truly believes that disliking Bush and his policies makes one anti-patriotic to go read the federalist papers. Read up on the ideas of Madison and Jefferson, in particular. For god's sake, do anything, but sit in your bubble. LEARN for yourself why our principles are what they are and why it is so important for people to dissent and be heard.

More Resources:

Essay about the First Amendment's purpose
The Federalist Papers