Letters

Readers respond to Charles Taylor's essay on the Dixie Chicks' interview with Diane Sawyer.

May 5, 2003 | [Read "Chicks Against the Machine."]

Charles Taylor could not have been more on-the-money in his assessment of Diane Sawyer as a stand-in for every conservative who thinks that exercising the freedom to speak one's mind is a hanging offense. I would like to add one thing to his otherwise splendid analysis, however: Diane Sawyer spent a good part of the late '60s and early '70s in the employ of Richard Nixon. Even after he left office in disgrace, Sawyer continued her flacking and shilling. This just adds to the irony of that whole interview: Sitting there watching it, with my blood pressure rising, I could only think of the Fox channel, and their endless conservative prattle, followed by ads in which they label themselves as "fair and balanced." Moreover, when I voiced basically these same sentiments to the ABC Web site following the show, my e-mail was removed! I wrote ABC asking why, since in my own view, my words did not violate their rules, but I have received no answer.

-- Alice Lieberman

Charles Taylor's article could not have more concisely summed up what was one of the most important moments in the ongoing War of Bush Aggression. (Sorry if this offends some, but as William Safire noted, "vigorous vituperation is coming back").

I just wanted to point out what was a truly incredible moment that went unmentioned in the article:

When asked to imagine that the "President" were watching, what would she would like to say to him, Natalie, after mumbling "Let's hope not," settled on saying. "There's not enough time in your show."

Thank you Dixie Chicks for once more speaking your -- and our -- mind.

-- Josh Hehner

After reading Charles Taylor's article, I was still somewhat perplexed at how the Dixie Chicks' freedom of expression rights were trampled. Were they jailed? Exiled? Tortured? Physically intimidated in any way by the government or government officials?

I'm all for taking unpopular stances, but just because their former fans choose not to buy their music, I do not see how their "legal" or "constitutional" rights were in any way impinged, hence I find their "bravery" somewhat open to question.

-- Brian Asmus

In his precise vivisection of the furor around the Dixie Chicks, Charles Taylor wrote, "... I do not believe that a fascist takeover is imminent in America. That is an excuse to shy away from the work that needs to be done to defeat Bush and restore the civil liberties he has trashed."

I wish I had Mr. Taylor's optimism about the outcome, but I hugely appreciate his raising totalitarianism's specter. Very few writers outside of various fringes have been willing to write so plainly. It seems that being immoderate and passionate in sober-sided mainstream journalism is regarded as embarrassing, as having lost your head when all about you other heads are still coolly in place. It feels to many to be too damned alarmist to be riding through the streets shouting, "The Nazis are coming!"

But there comes a time when levelheaded citizens must indeed become alarmed. At this juncture in the American Experiment, alarm is nothing to be ashamed of.

Almost all commentary in liberal and centrist media has treated Bush's vile policies as merely an extreme example of Politics As Usual -- good ol' deal-trading, pork barrel, bully-pulpit ideological give-and-take. But this is Nothing Like Usual. Fundamental constitutional rights are being erased day by day, and the further division of rich and poor is blatantly promoted, almost to the point of no return.

We are not witnessing a particularly bad patch in U.S. civil affairs. We are witnessing something very close to a coup, and there are many reasons to believe that the Republican oligarchy could actually get away with it.

Carefully levelheaded commentary is very mature and sensible. But that is not what we need now. We need a lot of confrontations and accusations. We need stridency. We need impropriety and audacity. We need thousands of frightened and angry Paul Reveres, waking up the populace.

Despite Mr. Taylor's faith in the ballot box, if we are not frightened and strident, perhaps we do not fully appreciate the situation.

-- Katherine Collins

Great analysis of the Chicks' appearance on Diane Sawyer's show! I'm off now to buy my first country CD ever -- the Dixie Chicks' latest, whatever the hell it is.

-- Kim Green

Thank you, Salon, for continuing to publish the kind of material that actually engages rational thought, yet cannot find its way into mainstream media. I consider myself a liberal in the traditional definition of the word (I don't wear missile-shaped dildos to protest the war or equate Bush with Saddam), but I have found it difficult to find appealing voices outside of "The Daily Show" and your magazine. Mr. Taylor's insightful article about the Dixie Chicks -- along with Gary Kamiya's recent piece -- brings me comfort in knowing that there are people out there who have genuine empathy towards today's world events. Continue to have the boldness to bring the Fox News network's real enemy -- factual information -- to the forefront, so that us U.S. citizens can come to our own conclusions. And, as a side note, can there be any doubt that a viewpoint is thoroughly cogent once it has been condemned by Travis Tritt?

-- John Newberger

Next Page: Naked girls on magazine covers lend credibility to the Bush administration

• View blog reactions