Rolling Stones "Sweet Neo Con"

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Val

Rock n' Roll Doggie
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Messages
3,875
Location
New York
Being a Stone fan from way back....if the Stones release a decent album, I always buy it. Same for the upcoming release.

Now with all the controversy with this new song hitting hard at the Neo-conservatives, I can tell you I only plan on buying it if the Stones LEAVE IT IN!
 
"You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite. You call yourself a patriot.
Well, I think you're full of shit!
How come you're so wrong, my sweet neo-con."
 
Aopalling lyrics....Mick Jagger is not a protest singer.......65 is a bit late to start getting interested in politics.

Having said that it is pissing off the Freepers which is mildly amusing....
 
financeguy said:
Aopalling lyrics....Mick Jagger is not a protest singer.......65 is a bit late to start getting interested in politics.

Having said that it is pissing off the Freepers which is mildly amusing....

And making the headlines, of course.
 
financeguy said:
Aopalling lyrics....Mick Jagger is not a protest singer.......65 is a bit late to start getting interested in politics.

Having said that it is pissing off the Freepers which is mildly amusing....

Mick Jagger is 62.
 
I'm all for sticking it to the neo-cons, but those lyrics are about as subtle as a sledgehammer! Oh, well, I guess the Stones never were exactly about subtlety.
 
Bad lyrics - on par with McCartney's appalling "Freedom".
 
It's never too late to become politically inolved. Good for Mick!

And a good tune would keep people humming, but in this case, the words will be the hook!
 
Thing is, how many people (not necessarily in here) who throw that word around can actually say what "neo-con" means? Another question-How long has it been since the Stones wrote a song that was hummable (is that a word?)
 
Ft. Worth Frog said:
Thing is, how many people (not necessarily in here) who throw that word around can actually say what "neo-con" means? Another question-How long has it been since the Stones wrote a song that was hummable (is that a word?)

I think that was probably "Blinded By Rainbows." :wink:

As for this song, I could care less really. Though, I usually don't like lyrics that are so direct and time-specific. But, as it was said earlier, if it has a good tune, I'll consider liking it.
 
Lots of opinions...I'm glad we're taking about this as I wish there was more talk about what is happeningingin politics...and I don't mean the kind of talk on FOX Smooze. That's arguing. We learn from listening to others share facts and ideas and opinions.
 
A_Wanderer said:
The real question is what can these seniors actually teach us.

Well they can teach us a lot about drugs. And Keef plays a mean guitar.

But on politics, feck all!

As I said, Jagger isn't a 'protest' singer, and 62 is a bit late to start to be one, IMO.
 
What protest songs did you like? I liked "For What It's Worth", "Long Time Gone", "Ohio."

Buffalo Springfield. CSNY!:up:
 
The Stones have some political songs, such as Street Fighting Man and Gimme Shleter, so its not like they're starting to write these kinds of songs now
 
ebmp said:
The Stones have some political songs, such as Street Fighting Man and Gimme Shleter, so its not like they're starting to write these kinds of songs now

Agreed. Also, they have always spoke their mind....ok, sometimes they were out of their minds..lol, IMO this isn't just an advertising stunt. It doesn't sound like Keith is so happy it made the media.

Look, I am just happy when a person with a loud voice speaks up for things I feel strongly about. Would I feel differently if I didn't agree? In all honesty, perhaps.
 
u2 use politics for marketing purposes? Did I understand you correctly? You must be mad... haven't you been listening?
 
Val said:
u2 use politics for marketing purposes? Did I understand you correctly? You must be mad... haven't you been listening?

Hmm, I think Rono was trying to say that we shouldn't just assume the motives of the Stones are to simply stur up controversy and sell albums when we know that other artists like U2 address politics because they are sincere. U2's integrity (I think) was not being called into question.
 
Back
Top Bottom