I don't think it really takes guts to criticize Bush. It's the norm nowadays. And it seems like their primary motivation was to get people off their backs, not because they really wanted to make a strong statement of protest.
I guess as one who has traveled abroad in the Bush era, I can really identify with these women - traveling with an American passport means being subjected constantly to the "Why? Why? Why?" of so many things perpertuated by Bush. They don't understand how anyone can support this guy, and by proxy as an American, it's believed that I do. Which is why the uproar surprises me, because it's basically just saying that American are not all of one mind or motivation, so stop generalizing. But as far as it being a stretch - we just had a post not far down about a U.S. soccer player daring to criticize Bush (reportedly), but that's a far cry from an entire team standing together in solidarity of an expression.
It's cool and hip to criticize Bush. Just as it was cool and hip to criticize Clinton, and almost every president in recent history. Personally, I feel like it takes as much guts to criticize politicians as it does to say you do or don't like toast.
But as far as it being a stretch - we just had a post not far down about a U.S. soccer player daring to criticize Bush (reportedly), but that's a far cry from an entire team standing together in solidarity of an expression.
Ok sort of understand where you were going with it.
Agree with elopingcamel that it doesn't take much courage to criticize.
Poor taste in my opinion to make the statement at this venue (Shanghai). Enjoy the moment, they just won the Bridge tourney (did I really just say that) and let it be. Then protest all they want with the money they won back here in the States. Protesting about Bush or Clinton etc. in another country seems a little like pandering.
Anyway, I personally can't stand athletes, competitors, entertainers, and musicians displaying politics DURING their job. Free speech is our country just save it for when you are not "working" or representing your job.
Sorry I'm out of date on this, but yesterday's computer would not allow me to post a comment.
I must strongly disagree with other commentators on US team reps needing to be quiet about any personal views.
This country professes to believe in diversity of folks and of opinions. We claim that a free and full flow of opinion and view is the best way to run a social and political system. If so, a US team ought not be expected to be either quiet or monolitic. No current administration embodies all of America.
If you are going to require folks who wish to represent the country in various events (sporting or otherwise competitive) to make a choice between representing themselves honestly or their country, somebody ought to make that clear in the terms of their contract or conditions of their participation beforehand, not after the fact.
These women did nothing at all wrong. When we refuse to allow folks to state who they didn't vote for (that is, after all, the only thing their sign said) in a genteel and lighthearted way just because they are representing Uncle Sam at the time, we might as well accept that we have become as repressive as the old Soviet regimes.
I'm probably way radical on this issue, but I'd say these women not only had a right to display their sign, they had a duty to do so and did us all a service with it by demonstrating that we pay more than lip service to diversity of opinion in this country. Even more controversially I suppose, I felt Tommy Smith and John Carlos had a similar duty and provided a similar service (despite what it cost them) at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City. Their statement was dignified, and non disruptive. It demeaned no one and focused attention on serious, important issues, as maybe would DaMarcus Beasley's statements on Katrina relief had they been actually reported.
These ladies are not in that category of protest, but they are fitting to get totally screwed for what they did do and that's bloody WRONG in the US of A. If you don't want to buy Dixie Chicks CD's or go to their concerts, that's fine, but nobody should have a right to tell them they can't work for a year as a result of making a "political" statement and I think that goes double when the perception and reputation of the country is at stake.
These ladies ought to get invited to the White House like many other successful US international teams have been and an END put to this sanction rubbish!
I just think its funny that a year away from a new presidential election that people still feel the need to publicly say they didn't vote for bush many, many years ago. How about displaying some support for an upcoming candidate or something other than the same old we didnt vote for bush so we are good americans line?
9 comments:
I don't think it really takes guts to criticize Bush. It's the norm nowadays. And it seems like their primary motivation was to get people off their backs, not because they really wanted to make a strong statement of protest.
A stretch, even for you.
Didn't know you could make a living playing bridge.
I guess as one who has traveled abroad in the Bush era, I can really identify with these women - traveling with an American passport means being subjected constantly to the "Why? Why? Why?" of so many things perpertuated by Bush. They don't understand how anyone can support this guy, and by proxy as an American, it's believed that I do. Which is why the uproar surprises me, because it's basically just saying that American are not all of one mind or motivation, so stop generalizing. But as far as it being a stretch - we just had a post not far down about a U.S. soccer player daring to criticize Bush (reportedly), but that's a far cry from an entire team standing together in solidarity of an expression.
It's cool and hip to criticize Bush. Just as it was cool and hip to criticize Clinton, and almost every president in recent history.
Personally, I feel like it takes as much guts to criticize politicians as it does to say you do or don't like toast.
But as far as it being a stretch - we just had a post not far down about a U.S. soccer player daring to criticize Bush (reportedly), but that's a far cry from an entire team standing together in solidarity of an expression.
Ok sort of understand where you were going with it.
Agree with elopingcamel that it doesn't take much courage to criticize.
Poor taste in my opinion to make the statement at this venue (Shanghai). Enjoy the moment, they just won the Bridge tourney (did I really just say that) and let it be. Then protest all they want with the money they won back here in the States. Protesting about Bush or Clinton etc. in another country seems a little like pandering.
Boy that was a "Bush League" play by them.
Anyway, I personally can't stand athletes, competitors, entertainers, and musicians displaying politics DURING their job. Free speech is our country just save it for when you are not "working" or representing your job.
Sorry I'm out of date on this, but yesterday's computer would not allow me to post a comment.
I must strongly disagree with other commentators on US team reps needing to be quiet about any personal views.
This country professes to believe in diversity of folks and of opinions. We claim that a free and full flow of opinion and view is the best way to run a social and political system. If so, a US team ought not be expected to be either quiet or monolitic. No current administration embodies all of America.
If you are going to require folks who wish to represent the country in various events (sporting or otherwise competitive) to make a choice between representing themselves honestly or their country, somebody ought to make that clear in the terms of their contract or conditions of their participation beforehand, not after the fact.
These women did nothing at all wrong. When we refuse to allow folks to state who they didn't vote for (that is, after all, the only thing their sign said) in a genteel and lighthearted way just because they are representing Uncle Sam at the time, we might as well accept that we have become as repressive as the old Soviet regimes.
I'm probably way radical on this issue, but I'd say these women not only had a right to display their sign, they had a duty to do so and did us all a service with it by demonstrating that we pay more than lip service to diversity of opinion in this country. Even more controversially I suppose, I felt Tommy Smith and John Carlos had a similar duty and provided a similar service (despite what it cost them) at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City. Their statement was dignified, and non disruptive. It demeaned no one and focused attention on serious, important issues, as maybe would DaMarcus Beasley's statements on Katrina relief had they been actually reported.
These ladies are not in that category of protest, but they are fitting to get totally screwed for what they did do and that's bloody WRONG in the US of A. If you don't want to buy Dixie Chicks CD's or go to their concerts, that's fine, but nobody should have a right to tell them they can't work for a year as a result of making a "political" statement and I think that goes double when the perception and reputation of the country is at stake.
These ladies ought to get invited to the White House like many other successful US international teams have been and an END put to this sanction rubbish!
I just think its funny that a year away from a new presidential election that people still feel the need to publicly say they didn't vote for bush many, many years ago. How about displaying some support for an upcoming candidate or something other than the same old we didnt vote for bush so we are good americans line?
Dear Bridge team, MOVE ON DOT ORG.
Post a Comment