If he said he wouldn't get involved or speak out against either party and then he does then his motive is definitly brought into question, whether his view agrees with us or not. All entertainers are out to make money, I just think this way he exploits people who want to listen to someone bad mouth conservatives. So in other words the MUSIC itself doesn't matter it becomes 4 lines that sell records. So to me their business ethics are what I question.

I don't know. Hypocrits? I said I wouldn't post on political threads just the other day and here I am. Sometimes the situation/circumstances drive you to speak out. (well this will end up a political thread)

I do think it's a right/left thing. It shouldn't be but it is. In my view, it all comes down to, the right believing that the left, or to be clearer, those who don't support this war or God forbid this President, as unpatriotic, unsupportive Americans who have no right to express opposing views. I adamantly disagree with that, which is one reason why I choose my signature...one of my favorite quotes.


TIS

Godmother,

I honestly don't believe this is right vs left. I think they are doing what they need to do to make money, and I think it's very shady. It's all free publicity for them right now, especially to a younger generation (like myself) who would not buy this record if it wasn't for this.

I think they could have gone about it a better way, maybe by saying THEIR VIEW in a positive light rather than just saying conservatives or whoever they are saying it to is "full of shit" because then if they had a message it doesn't mean anything because have the side won't listen.

To TIS and TIS alone lol (ok you all can see it) I am WAY more conservative than Bush could ever dream, I see things that I don't like from his administration but I can say the good with the bad. Only from my point of view here I can't speak for anyone else but when all I hear is "Bush Bad, Bush sucks etc.." and saying NOTHING at all positive about him then the message is lost. Truthfully TIS do you hate EVERY single one of his policies? I don't think anyone can hate someone 100% So to me I get mad hearing people just say all negative things because it makes them sound uninformed and then I lose interest in what they have to say. That's why I get the attitude with some of people of just "shut up already" it has nothing to do with saying they don't have the right to express them etc.. for me it has to do with them having no credibility because they hate Bush so much that they pick at straws to bad mouth him.

p.s. thanks for the wine TIS

p.p.s. is this a mature debate?

Its good to see some new stuff by the stones

Back in 2004 Jagger, during the presidential race, was asked for his opinion about the current state of affairs with the war, and how he felt about the American government. He replied that he loved the American Government and would never speak out against either party because he made his fame and living from America and he loves the country. He said that he would not speak out against any President of America. He loved this country too much.

What Patriotic song has specifically pointed out a politcal party, poked fun at that party and created controversy?

How many times has the left, even here on these boards, claimed that name calling and bashing of their political views and/or party affiliation is both imature and unnecessary when expressing one's opinion about the other parties actions and/or beliefs?

Yet, right here in this thread, the same left who've claimed in past political debates that name calling at their party is uncalled for, are the same people who see nothing wrong with the writers of this song name calling and bashing of the conservative party.


Don Cardi

The censorious right went after the Dixie Chicks, and I have had to endure that God Awful Toby Keith for several years now. Thank God for the Stones.

P.S. All your righties, stop getting your panties in a wad.After all, its only rock and roll!

Again, I'm not getting twisted over the song itself, as I said and will repeat, they have every right to sing what they want. What bothered me is the contradictions on the part of Jagger. That's my issue with this.

My arguement was not about a party issue here, my point is that I really don't think that any of them could give a rats ass about their governmnt or mine. $$$ are the bottom line and they will do whatever needs to be done to make money selling records.

Don Cardi

As Americans, doesn't it bother you that people like the Stones come to our country, make tons and tons of money and then bash the government of our country? That is what bothers me the most.


DS

Yes it does DS and that's what get's my panties in a wad. Have they ever bashed their own government?

Not at all. That's what America is all about. Anyone can say whatever they want. Now if you went to North Korea and bashed their government you would end up shot. Thats the kind of system I really dislike.

I feel I can complain about anything I want, especially if it's in the range of film and music. I hate when people say things like this within music or movies, as if it's a blockade against you being able to say a thing that might be negative. A few minutes later someone says "It's their right to make that song," but apparently I lack the right to make a negative comment.

Are you gonna avoid Cardi's point again to make another patronizing remark to the "righties"?
---------------
Now here's my opinion before anyone starts pissing on me for the above. I don't disagree with songs because of a political message, however it doesn't stop me from discussing lyrics and such. NOFX's anti-Bush song is a horrible, stupid, and poorly written song. Green Day, while I'm not a big fan, did do good political songs. Just writing a political song doesn't free you from being criticized. I know people at school who listen to bands just because of their political stance in their music. Know what I call that? Stupid. I listen to a band based on how good their songs are, and writing any form of a political song these days seems to be a fad and easy way to get attention. Now for this thing about the Stones, I do think it's odd that they are neutral in political songs, and all of a sudden they come out with one during a time when it's becoming popular. It seems more like a publicity move for the Stones. From that bit Pat posted from the lyrics, it seems like a poorly unoriginal song.

*Waits for posers at school to get into The Stones because of one political song.

As a long time Stones fan, I have to say that I was a litle disappointed they were making another album and they were going to tour once again. Anyoe who saw them during their last tour realized they used all kinds of front bands, and horn sections, etc to disguise the fact that Mick Jagger can't sing any more, and that he gets winded after he dances for more than a minute.
I had hoped they would call it a career and hang it up.
What they have done with this song is pull off a huge publicity coup. They have all the lefties going out and singing their praises, and all the righties criticizing them. The result? No one is talking about them being washed up, and they are going to sell more CD's and downloads than they would have, and they will probably sell more tickets beause of this "controversy." In short they have made themselves relevant and the focus of attention. Someone said there is no such thing as bad publicity, and Mick Jagger, who may be inconsistent in what his political views are, has never been inconsistent in his ability to promote himself and his band.

What they have done with this song is pull off a huge publicity coup. They have all the lefties going out and singing their praises, and all the righties criticizing them. The result? No one is talking about them being washed up, and they are going to sell more CD's and downloads than they would have, and they will probably sell more tickets beause of this "controversy."

Exactly, along with the many bands that do political songs just for that reason, not because they have anything worth saying (such as NOFX). The Stones have passed their prime.

The Rolling Stones are a great band. If they want to change their opinions on whatever they want to change their opinion they have all the right in the world. They had given us greeat music and I think they deserve a little bit of respect just for that.

And thanks to Heavens that the Rolling Stones are on Tour. I want to take my fifteen year old nephew to see them. God only knows how long they will be around.

They have every right to change their opinion. But they don't have the right to take american money and then critize it.

DS

Actually, I think that the song doesn't bash any particular party, I think it is specifically aimed at President Bush. And while I don't like their choice of language, I will defend their right to say it.

DC, I understand your point. I just feel that because their stance is a critical one is the reason that people are upset. If they had agreed to stay neutral, and then recorded a song singing (no pun intended) their praise about Mr. Bush's great skills as a leader, then would there be such a controversy? Doubtful. That's MY point.

Ah yes Don Smitty, but I've criticized my government before, and I'm a natural American citizen. Does that make me a hypocrite?

DC, "What bothered me is the contradictions on the part of Jagger."

Really, you shouldn't let such things before you. As the Good Book says, turn the other cheek?

Besides, who'll remember this 5 years from now? Well, maybe one person here at BB.Net....

No, but then Michael Moore would make a "documentary" about how the Stones are in bed with Bush and the Saudis!


Don Cardi

DS they have the right to criticize US policies AND take money. No one is putting a gun to the heads of anyone who is buying concert tickets. I have a bigger problem with all those hawkers around ground zero making money on t shirts, etc, which is a shameless exploiation of 9/11. But still I think they have a right to be tasteless.

Exactly. First Amendment!

Besides Don Cardi, the First Amendment also allows you you the right to IGNORE someone's opinion as well, as my civics teacher once told me.

"Everyone is a minority"

You are a citizen, he's not. You miss the whole thing that I said. They come here FROM another country to make money and then bash our government and our president.

So what does your being a natural american citizen who criticises his own government have to do with a foriegner who makes money from you and I and then bashes our country?
The best part about this is that these guys will write a song bashing the president and the american government, and american people will buy this junk and make them rich off the bashing of their own country.


DS

Ah, but Don Smitty...what if say I had some, *ahem* back money that I failed to pay to the IRS, and I fled the country...then the UK took me in, because they wanted a piece of my money. Then I criticized Tony Blair on some issue regarding economics and football.

Does that make me a hypocrite?

As I've said over and over, if people are so concerned about hypocrites, why don't they permanently move to Washington D.C.? Really, you could make a living off the politicians there.

DS, with all due respect, and all honor, I believe you are missing the point. Neither the President nor the policies of our government are "The Country." The people of the United States are the Sovereign, not any individual or any policy. In other words bashing Bush and his policy is NOT the same thing as bashing "America."

Ok, fair point DT, so the question is are they talking about JUST Bush with those words, or are the making a reference to all the Americans who support the war and are conservative in their veiws? Does sweet sweet Neo Con refer to just Bush, or to the conservatives as a whole? Aren't conservatives part of this country?


But as a matter of personal feelings, I just do not respect a foreigner who makes a living in our country and then attacks the President, be it Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, whomever. My feeling is that a non citizen of this country who makes his or her living here and does not contribute to our system has not earned the right to bash our leaders. If they want that right then let them become citizens and pay taxes and pay into the country just like the rest of us hard working americans do everyday! That my personal feeling.


Don Cardi

While I can understand your feelings, this country was built on the sweat of foreigners who came here to be free. While I agree that Mick and gang were probably not being oppressed in the UK, they still should enjoy the same freedoms that we do.

I remember there was a Russian comedian who enjoyed some popularity in the 1980's, but his name escapes me. He did something in his routine that basically went like this:

"What's the big deal about American freedom of speech? So you can stand in the middle of Washington, DC and say 'The USA stinks!! President Reagan is an idiot!', and you won't be arrested. I can do the same thing in my country! I can stand in the middle of Moscow and say 'The USA stinks! President Reagan is an idiot!' and I won't be arrested there either."

That always put things in perspective for me, about the rights that we sometimes take for granted, and how we must defend them.

Yes, I agree 100% with you on that. Your grnadparents and my grandparents came to this country in search of a better life for them and their families. And what did they do when they got here? They came with their hands held up high and said " What do you need me to build? Where can I find some work?" And they honored this country for the remainder of their lives. They apprecited it.

However many, not all, of the foreigners that come here now come with their hands out in front of them asking " What can you give me?" and " How can I get this for free!"
No question that there are still many immigrants that come here and work hard, but there are too many that come here, work the system, get free education( while we have to pay for ours), send the money that they take from here back to their home country and then go back to their country after they can no longer suck anything else out of the system. You and I both now that this has become the practice of many immigrants that are coming into this country.


Don Cardi

While many people in my husband's corporation do just that, work here for X years as outsourced labor, take jobs away from people who worked there for 15 and 20 years, and then go back to live like kings in their own country, can you blame them? One of the things I did like about Kerry (and I was far from an ardent supporter) is that he recommended that companies pay penalties for outsourcing jobs. And I don't want to hear about where Heinz Ketchup is made.

The point is that we as American consumers keep supporting the companies that do this, then who is to blame? We know that Citibank has outsourced all their customer service to another country, we know that Dell has outsourced all their tech support to another country. Have Americans stopped buying Dells, or are we delighted that we can now get a computer for even less? Has anybody pulled their money from Citibank? Doubtful. As long as these companies keep getting richer, then who can blame them? And I think THAT's a huge problem. Nobody minded so much when we outsourced our manufacturing jobs because maybe they don't pay so well anyway, and how can we compete with Chinese labor that makes fifty cents a day, etc., but now that we've outsourced those $50-100,000 high-tech jobs, what are we doing about it?

I agree 99.9% with you Babe.

DC, I am not sure of this, but I think the Rolling Stones and their various enterprises are liable to pay income tax on money they make in this country.

Also, the declaration of independence says that the rights later enumerated (and as we libs are fond of pointing out there are un-enumerated rights too) by the Constitution are "inalieble" rights of "man." In other words according to the Founders the right to liberty is a human right, and not a right restricted to Americans only.

That said I agree with you up to a point. As someone who does a lot of travel to foreign countries, I am always mindful that I am there as a guest and I try to show the proper respect regarding their customs, language, etc. I would be very reluctant as an American to go to England and start criticizing Tony Blair for example.

But this IS Rock and Roll here, and Mick Jagger is damn good at getting publicity. He has already denied the song is aimed at anyone in particular, aand has coyly said that the "you" he refers to is a generic "you."

I am thinking it's pretty safe to assume that Jager doesn't "need" money. This leads me to believe this song is for publicity or an honest statement on the groups part as to how they feel. Could it be a little of both?

DC & DS and others I may have missed, if it were an American group/artist singing this song, it would be ok with you, even tho you might disagree? Is that what you're saying?? No foreigner can express a political opinion regarding America in a song? Does the freedom of speech just apply to Americans?

Also, as I pointed out earlier, doesn't England have a stake in this war/administration as well?? Why shouldn't they have the freedom to express their opinion in song, if they so desire?


TIS