Can anyone confirm the truth of what the Dixie Chicks said?

[AusGail]

I was watching an interview of the Dixie Chicks last Sunday. It related to the backlash when one of them said she was ashamed that Bush came from Texas. She said, because of that statement, the Red Cross refused a donation of one million dollars from them. Has anyone heard mention of that, and if so, has the Red Cross been reprimanded? The interview was given during their Australian tour.

[LA lady]

1. Wiki reports it

Also in 2003, the American Red Cross refused a 1 million dollar donation from the Dixie Chicks. The organization did not publicize the refusal, though; it was revealed by the Chicks themselves in a May 2006 interview on the Howard Stern Show on SIRIUS Satellite Radio. <2> A Red Cross spokesperson later said the decision was made because "the controversy made it impossible to associate with the Dixie Chicks."

[tandot]

5. Well, I guess that eliminates any future donations to the Red Cross

Blood or money

If they have so much money that they can refuse ONE MILLION DOLLAR ... they don't need my money anyway.

What an utter bullshit.

[goddess40]

39. I'm with you, but I gave up on the Red Cross after the 9/11 crap

where they HAD to give out all the money that came in, I questioned then as to what would happen when everyone that breathed that crap in would do. I was against the huge settlements that were given out, other crime victims just get shown the door.

[Lindacooks]

42. I don't like the Red Cross either.

In my small town, the United Way cut their funding by about 20% because of lower donations and they pulled the lifeguard training from the town.

Bunch of money-grubbers.

[tuvor]

6. Wow. How many people might the Red Cross save with a cool million?

If it meant MY life in the balance, I wouldn't care where the money came from.

[speedoo]

9. In that case, the Red Cross' RW idiocy makes it impossible for me..

to associate with them, including ever donating to them in the future.

Fucking idiots. That million bucks would have saved lives.

[aquart]

23. They stayed out of New Orleans, I heard

Because they wanted to encourage people to leave.

I hope that's a vicious exaggeration.

[focusfan]

45. Why was what she said so bad?

It was her right to express her feelings after all this still almost a free country.I can think of at least two other Texas presidents that wouldn`t make me to proud to be from Texas.

[Wonk]

2. Tried googling yet?

http://www.google.com/search?q=dixie+chicks+red+cross

Short answer: Red Cross turned the donation down, I don't think the Red Cross has been reprimanded (by who? other donors?) in any organized way for refusing the money.

[Nicole]

3. Yes, The Red Cross did refuse their donation

Because of the conditions the Dixie Chicks placed on the donation.

[AusGail]

17. What were the conditions that the Dixie Chicks put on the donation?

[question everything]

19. Red Cross Statement

But it's not as simple as that, responds national Red Cross spokesperson Julie Thurmond Whitmer in a prepared statement.

The band would have made the donation "only if the American Red Cross would embrace the band's summer tour," writes Ms. Whitmer, referring to the group's 2003 U.S. tour after the London incident.

"The Dixie Chicks controversy made it impossible for the American Red Cross to associate itself with the band because such association would have violated two of the founding principles of the organization: impartiality and neutrality...

"Should the Dixie Chicks like to make an unconditional financial donation to the American Red Cross, we will gladly accept it."

http://www.pe.com/sharedcontent/features/country2/05280...

[Shakespeare]

41. That doesn't make sense, and smells like bullshit on the RC's part..

What, exactly does the RC spokesperson mean by "embracing" the band's tour? The Red Cross isn't exactly a big concert sponsor, and I have a VERY difficult time believing the Dixie Chicks would put those kinds of strings on a donation, that they would ask for any kind of "endorsement" before giving.

I ain't buying it.

[Buzz Clik]

50. But you don't hesitate in believing that the Red Cross endorses Bush?

You are being very, very selective in your outrage. Or incredibly lazy.

[Shakespeare]

72. I don't know where you got that, but I've not said any such thing.

I suggest you withdraw that comment. As well as the insults.

[Nicole]

20. These conditions

In bold below:

But what bothers Ms. Maines the most, she says, is that the American Red Cross refused a $1 million donation from the Dixie Chicks in 2003.

"It has nothing to do with being taken off of the radio," says Ms. Maines, 31, by phone from New York. "It has to do with the absurdity of death threats and the absurdity of being so awful that people won't even touch you. That the Red Cross won't take a million-dollar check from you. How can the Red Cross turn away a million dollars for charity?"

But it's not as simple as that, responds national Red Cross spokesperson Julie Thurmond Whitmer in a prepared statement.

The band would have made the donation "only if the American Red Cross would embrace the band's summer tour," writes Ms. Whitmer, referring to the group's 2003 U.S. tour after the London incident.

"The Dixie Chicks controversy made it impossible for the American Red Cross to associate itself with the band because such association would have violated two of the founding principles of the organization: impartiality and neutrality...

"Should the Dixie Chicks like to make an unconditional financial donation to the American Red Cross, we will gladly accept it."

http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment/ci_3885041

While I do think all donations should be accepted, I can't fault the Red Cross for standing by their founding principles of impartiality and neutrality. Maybe that should be changed but until it is I can't argue with it, as long as it's applied universally.

[Alacrat]

26. How would the Red Cross embrace their tour?

it's not like they would be sponsoring them. I understand the neautrality stance, but I don't understand what embracing their tour means. Anyone know?

[Nicole]

28. I have no idea

what they meant by that.

[intheflow]

33. It sounds like they were asking RC to endorse their tour w/o money.

So the band would have a backdrop with the Red Cross logo or something. If that's so, I can't fault the RC for declining, either. It would be a sort of reverse endorsement (where the band paid, not was paid) and that could be seen to jeopardize the RC neutrality.

[PinkyisBlue]

31. It still doesn't explain what the conditions were.

I smell a fib, half-truth or lie, whatever you want to call it. The Dixie Chicks exposed the Red Cross's hypocrisy on their doctrine of "impartiality and neutrality". What do they mean by "embrace the band's summer tour?" Sounds like a bunch of right-wing BS.

[mmonk]

46. What in the sam hill does "embrace" mean?

Does that mean accept someone's donation who isn't a bush cult member or worshipper?

[cui bono]

18. yes, please tell....... n/t

[Nicole]

21. I did

in this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[cui bono]

30. Thanks. Funny that I couldn't read a post from 10:26 when it was 10:14 ;)

[LTR]

4. I guess they did

At several venues, demonstrations have been staged. In Little Rock, Arkansas, a few days earlier, a local radio station handed out anti-Chicks T-shirts. More ludicrously, the American Red Cross turned down the group's offer of a $1m donation from the tour proceeds because Bush is one of its patrons.

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/fridayreview/story/0,12102,1...

Those artists never faced the fallout the Dixie Chicks did. Even the nonpartisan American Red Cross wouldn't take their money. Red Cross spokeswoman Julie Whitmer says the organization declined the Chicks' donation three years ago because ''the controversy made it impossible to associate with the Dixie Chicks'' and would have ''violated'' the Red Cross' policy of ''impartiality'' and ``neutrality.''

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/14728090.htm

[tuvor]

13. bush is a Red Cross patron? Well, that must have made things tricky.

Must be a damn good patron if the RC felt like accepting the Chicks' money might mean less $$ from bush. (Who knows, maybe bush also has some well-heeled..."connections".)

Seriously, if that's true, I'd hate to be the person deciding not to accept the Dixie Chicks' money. A rock and a hard place.

[mmonk]

47. They are the ones not impartial.

They refused $1 million because the Chicks made a statement that they were ashamed of bush. If they were impartial, the statement wouldn't matter.

[karmaqueen]

7. She said it on Larry King.

I always give blood every 8 weeks or so and the last time they called I asked the girl about it.
She said that she has had several people ask about it and would get back to me. I have not heard anything yet. I don't want to not give blood because it is not the people's fault who need it but I am going to see if there is another way to give.

[agincourt]

8. Even the Red Cross was brown nosing ratshit,

Shameful how many wanted to play fetch for that crimminal in power.

[Oilwellian]

10. Yes, how dare we question....

WHY they wouldn't accept one million dollars that could have gone toward the people of Katrina.

[Nicole]

15. It was in 2003

Before Katrina.

[tandot]

11. Please recommend this thread ... more DUers have to see that

I didn't know that ... this is utterly disgusting

I'll spread the word to all of my friends...fucking Nazi bastards

How much good could they have done with one million dollar??? Are they fucking nuts???

[Nicole]

22. Please spread this too

The band would have made the donation "only if the American Red Cross would embrace the band's summer tour," writes Ms. Whitmer, referring to the group's 2003 U.S. tour after the London incident.

"The Dixie Chicks controversy made it impossible for the American Red Cross to associate itself with the band because such association would have violated two of the founding principles of the organization: impartiality and neutrality...

"Should the Dixie Chicks like to make an unconditional financial donation to the American Red Cross, we will gladly accept it."

http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment/ci_3885041

[Raster]

35. Sounds like you have a Chicks axe to grind. Personally, I'd like to see

what the RC calls "embracing". I don't buy it.

Here's a link for you:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Nicole]

55. Not at all

I've been a Dixie Chicks fan since the early 90's when they were four & playing street corners in Dallas for tip money.

I just think both sides of the story should be told. Don't you?


I have no axe to grind with the Chicks or the Red Cross.

[cwydro]

59. nice to see someone

who says this...it gets a little frustrating how easily WE start adopting THEIR tactics, ya know?

[Nicole]

64. Thanks

[Raster]

63. Not only should both sides be told, this ought to be fully investigated

by an impartial and unbiased party. I have seen the American Red Cross (ARC) lend their name to ALL KINDS of endeavors, so this was just a tad puzzling. My understanding is that the Chicks just wanted to be able to use the logo and mention it in ad copy, just like any other performer that made such a sizable donation would be allowed to do. Nowhere near the "embracing" that the ARC alleges.

From Wikipedia:

"Also in 2003, the American Red Cross refused a 1 million dollar donation from the Dixie Chicks. The organization did not publicize the refusal, though; it was revealed by the Chicks themselves in a May 2006 interview on the Howard Stern Show on SIRIUS Satellite Radio. <2> A Red Cross spokesperson later said the decision was made because "the controversy made it impossible to associate with the Dixie Chicks."

So now we've gone from "embrace" to "associate with."

Excuse me? It's the American Red Cross. It's for all Americans. Not just the ones that approve of bush*. And correct me if I'm wrong, but at the time of the donation refusal, wasn't Pickles was an honorary chairperson. Hmmm....

[Nicole]

65. I agree

Both sides should be told & it should be investigated.
I mentioned earlier in this thread, before I was accused of having an axe to grind, that I thought all donations should be accepted.

The Red Cross didn't go from "embrace" to "associate with". Both terms were used in the quote by the Red Cross spokesperson. Wikipedia doesn't show the whole quote.

From the Denver Post:
The band would have made the donation "only if the American Red Cross would embrace the band's summer tour," writes Ms. Whitmer, referring to the group's 2003 U.S. tour after the London incident.

"The Dixie Chicks controversy made it impossible for the American Red Cross to associate itself with the band because such association would have violated two of the founding principles of the organization: impartiality and neutrality...

"Should the Dixie Chicks like to make an unconditional financial donation to the American Red Cross, we will gladly accept it."

http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment/ci_3885041

[Raster]

66. Hold on. The Chicks did not ask the Red Cross to take a stand, only take

their money. Once again, what is this "embrace" stuff? The blatant snub was anything but impartial and neutral.

my apology for the axe comment.

[Nicole]

68. Holding on...

I posted last night I have no idea what they meant by embracing. I still don't. That's why I agreed with you about investigating this.

I would love to see the Red Cross define this embrace stuff. Or to see the Dixie Chicks come out & deny they asked them to embrace them. I would love nothing more than to hear The Dixie Chicks say their contribution was offered unconditionally & it was refused.


Thanks for the apology.

[Raster]

70. we lived in dallas at roughly the same time. me 80s through mid 90s.

I saw them years ago at Razzle Dazzle Dallas. I was blown away.

And yep, I want to hear more. Only I want it succinct and to the point. They better have a damned good reason for turning down one million dollars. I believe it will ultimately prove to be another facet of bushco* and friends pogrom against the Chicks for daring to do the unthinkable--openly deride bush*.

[Nicole]

71. I never lived in Dallas

but spent summers there with family for most of the 90's.

I saw the Dixie Chicks perform at The West End MarketPlace several times. I too was blown away. I thought their clothes were a little too cheesy though, they were more "cowgirl" back then. When Natalie joined them they dropped that part of the act.

I agree with your last paragraph 100%.

[poofer]

40. bigger donations

I think in my opinion that they would receive a LOT more if they refused this one from the outspoken Dixie Chicks. Repubs are in control of this organization anyway. Remember when Mrs Robert Dole was the head of it and retired when her hubby was running for office?

[AusGail]

12. In the past I have been a regular donor of the Red Cross,

both with blood and money. Unfortunately, since hearing that statement, my position has changed. I thought freedom of speech was one of the things Bush went to war for.

If the Red Cross is controlled by Bush and freedom of speech is not respected then they have seen my last donation. How many starving people have been denied because of their actions.

[Kagemusha]

14. The Red Cross has been pulling stuff like this for a while now

It's a real shame too, but this is emphatically not the first time the Red Cross has been a political adjunct of the Republican Party. Their work during Katrina was um, not to be copied, IMHO. Then there's the whole stockpiling of donated blood after 9/11.. just tons of issues.

Edit: On second thought, this is like with the whole Foley page scandal: if this is what brings people like you to see what they really are, after hoping for the best for so long, then I'm glad it's this straw that broke the camel's back. I'm no expert but there must be many worthy, less politically tilted organizations...

[katsy]

16. Isn't the red cross tax exempt?

grrrrrrrrr

[Critters2]

57. That's probably their excuse

Tax exempt non-profits can't endorse candidates, parties, or partisan positions. I'm guessing that's their excuse, but it wouldn't make sense. A donation is a donation, no matter who it comes from.

[snot]

24. Word is Red Cross Board was taken over by conservatives a while ago.

I came across a number of negative reports about the Red Cross while compiling info for the project on DU re- Katrina. The Red Cross was incredibly ineffective, to the point at times of hindering more than it helped. One employee reported that some years ago, it was taken over by conservatives -- I guess it was a cash cow, so it attracted their interest. After that there were massive layoffs, even though there was no real need for them, and this particular person's office was left with two people to do the work of 15.

The DU thread for the Katrina project is at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... . There's a ton of interesting info there of which a surprising number of DU'er's seem ignorant. Re- the Red Cross in particular, see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... .

[madrchsod]

25. didn`t libby dole work for them?

[nicknameless]

29. She was the President of the American Red Cross

from 1991 to 1999.

[DeSwiss]

27. Well, this argument about "embracing" the Dixie Chick's tours....

....seems to be at odds with the National Red Cross "National Celebrity Cabinet" initiative. That cabinet includes among others: Marcia Gay Harden, Drew Lachey, Russell Simmons, Susan Sarandon, Lindsay Lohan, Mandy Moore and Carson Kressley.

And it is directed and overseen by one Julie Whitmer, Director of Celebrity and Entertainment Outreach for the Red Cross. So here they to have lost their ambivalence about associating and embracing other celebrities in order to attract favorable publicity:

http://www.redcross.org/press/mediarel/me_pr/020221cele...

Not to mention the recently held Sprint Golf Tournament fundraiser that included a number of CEO's of major corporations that I'm almost certain are full of conservative Republicans:

http://www.redcross.org/article/0,1072,0_312_5655,00.ht...

[w4rma]

32. It's my understanding that the top execs at the Red Cross make *lots* of

money. Their salaries are huge, considering they are working for a charitable non-profit.

[B Calm]

34. Who's in charge of the Red Cross? What kind of salary does this

person make?

[LostinVA]

36. Who would reprimand theM? They can do what they want

The leadership of the ARC is totally Repubs, and they way they "use" their funds is often more than quesytionable...

[farmbo]

37. OK, ARC morans..."impartiality and neutrality" applies to YOUR giving

This "impartiality and neutrality" ruse is a huge smokescreen. This restriction applies to the ARC's own programs, not to their contributions. That is, they can't withhold RC aid to an area because the population is Republican or Democratic, black or white, Christian or Jewish.

They can-- and always have-- taken all legal contributions. They have taken huge donations from corporate ner'do wells like Enron and made no apology.

Face it, they refused the Dixie Chicks because Liddy Dole (R. NC & former CEO) called them and told them not to take it because of the RW boycott of the Chicks and possible embarrassment to the 2004 Bush Cheney campaign.

It was a calculated political decision that, in all likelihood, ended up costing innocent lives when Katrina hit.

[stella]

38. Yes, the red cross din`t want the money.

reprimanded? no.
I was in shock when I heard that the red cross refused to accept the money because the chicks insulted dimwit.

[BlueEyedSon]

43. Hello? Bush is NOT from Texas. He's a CT Yankee.

Jeb was born in Texas and has no accent.... how did that happen?

[Lex]

44. We don't give to Red Cross but moved our $$ to "Doctors Without Borders"

and I think our $$ is better utilized there.

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org /

[kath]

53. We also give to DWB - very good group. Also, after the tsunami we began

giving to CARE. I wanted to make sure we avoided the "aid" groups that have a religious agenda.

[Lisa]

56. they also asked donors for permission to re-direct funds ...

A lot of charities were taken by surprise by the volume of donations, after the tsunami. MSF/DWB has a plan in place (and I think they used it for previous disasters too) -- they notified donors that their facilities were already maxxed out and they were unable to use all the funds for the designated purpose, and provided a list of their other projects (Congo, Darfur, etc.) which desperately needed money. With that kind of honesty, I bet that most donors re-directed their money within the organization, rather than wanting it back.

Investigative reports, a year after the tsunami, showed how wise this was, because a great deal of aid to other organizations was still held up due to the backlog.

[Vidar]

62. Good choice.

[mnhtnbb]

69. I've done the same thing.

[AusGail]

73. "Doctors without borders" an excellent choice

My husband and I have both worked for, and donated to the Red Cross in the past. On the whole, I feel they do a very good job. However, since hearing about their refusal to accept a million dollar donation, we have also changed charities to "Doctors without borders" and "World society for protection of animals".

If a Red Cross collector came to my door asking for a donation, I would have to refuse them on principle. If they couldn't accept a million dollars from the Dixie Chicks for saying "They were ashamed that Bush came from Texas", then I must admit I have said a lot worse about that buffoon, so therefor they shouldn't accept my donation either.

[mmonk]

48. All this Dixie Chicks stuff just reminds me

that on my birthday coming up, I had tickets to their show in Greensboro that was cancelled because the radio stations refused to advertise the concert. It's my 50th and it was going to be special with a limo and such. I do hate the rightwing in this country. Yes, hate is the right word.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmonk]

51. Define embrace.

[Buzz Clik]

52. Look it up. Or, better yet, provide a quote of the Chicks denying it.

All this friggin' hysteria.

[mmonk]

54. The Google searches don't define it.

If it's so easy, where is an adequate definition of what that means or entails?

[Bridget Burke]

61. Well, the Red Cross "embraced" Tim McGraw....

WASHINGTON, Thursday, September 25, 2003 — Tim McGraw and the American Red Cross today announced that proceeds from the tour, “Tim McGraw and The Dance Hall Doctors’ ONE BAND SHOW” totaling $43,000 will be donated to the Red Cross chapters in cities along the band’s March – June tour. Funds were raised locally in each tour market from ticket sales and selected tour merchandise. The benefiting chapters will use the donation to promote awareness, emergency preparedness and disaster relief in their communities.

This donation comes at a time of serious need for the Red Cross. The Disaster Relief Fund, which enables the Red Cross to respond immediately to disasters nationwide providing shelter, food, water and comfort to victims, is at a critical low. The organization has spent more to provide relief in the past year than it has raised in donations.

http://www.redcross.org/pressrelease/0,1077,0_489_1668,...

The Red Cross has worked with celebrities for a long time. But it will only "embrace" the ones who haven't offended little Bushie.

[Gabi Hayes]

67. WTF are you doing accusing people here of being freepers????

and see post 63, everybody

note how this poster has trouble dealing with reality, and uses RNC tactics to make his point most disingenuously

from post 63:

From Wikipedia:

"Also in 2003, the American Red Cross refused a 1 million dollar donation from the Dixie Chicks. The organization did not publicize the refusal, though; it was revealed by the Chicks themselves in a May 2006 interview on the Howard Stern Show on SIRIUS Satellite Radio. <2> A Red Cross spokesperson later said the decision was made because "the controversy made it impossible to associate with the Dixie Chicks."

So now we've gone from "embrace" to "associate with."

what's the deal with some of these posters? they either can't read, or......

[liberal1973]

58. The Red Cross

''the controversy made it impossible to associate with the Dixie Chicks''

That statement by the Red Cross shows how much of a piece of crap the Red Cross are.
They are heavy top down. In other words the top execs earn alot of $. I will never give a cent to them. I enjoy giving to the Habitat for Humanity and NRDC (Natural Resource Defense Council).

[Generator]

60. This is truly stunning

A CHARITY turning away BUCKETS of money that can truly help people that are homeless, parentless..ect. because the person giving that money said something unkind about our great leader? Just some WORDS???????????? WHAT THE FUCK is this country, Communist or something??? The great leader..like he's Kim Jong Il.

Where is the scandal? Huh? I swear I'm living in an alternate dimension.

:
Well, I went back and read the embrace the tour part. GOD knows I wouldn't want to be a DU sheeple. So.. I think that means..the Dixie Chicks being able to have something saying they had a tie to the Red Cross on their tour. OF course that would have meant more $$ for the Red Cross but helping people isn't their goal, apparently. Politics is more important. About being "neutral",what a crock of shit. That means they couldn't take ANY money or link to anyone that supported the president or had "political" agendas. Which would be impossible in this country.

AND GOD forbid the RED CROSS came out as against WAR. Then you know, whoa they wouldn't have as much work. Sorry but I can't take this planet sometimes.