These Rolling Stones Are Gathering Moss

It hasn't been so long ago that most protest songs were shrouded in other terms. A few jump to mind: 1. Alice's Restaurant: Arlo Guthrie 2. For What It's Worth: Buffalo Springfield. 3. Anything and everything Bruce Springsteen does 4. I hate protest music. Screw the rest of the list. So, etc......... and ad nauseam. Protest songs were a little like early Christian writing. Meanings were hidden, and only the faithful or those in the know understood the message. That type of innuendo and double meaning was the standard until recently. The way I see it, that trend has subsided over the last ten years, and gotten ugly in the last five. A great example of this is the idiot left doing what they can to undermine this country, and it is evident in groups like Green Day: American Idiot, George Michael with his last stab at relevancy showing Prime Minister Tony Blair as President Bush's monkey, The Dixie Chimps... I mean Chicks, any award show, or in easy listening music, like the Rolling Stones and their new CD: "Bigger Bang." Mick Jagger and crew have tossed one off (literally and figuratively) named: "Sweet Neo-con". If I could break off for a moment and talk about the reporter, and article I got the Stones information from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081000406_pf.html The Washington Post, or Compost as it is known by many, always say they publish honestly. Based on the story above, can someone explain the last sentence in the following paragraph? "The song is from the new album, "A Bigger Bang," set for release Sept. 6. There is no mention of Bush or Iraq. But it does refer to military contractor Haliburton, which was formerly run by Vice President Cheney and has been awarded key Iraq contracts, and the rising price of gasoline." So am I to understand from that poorly worded article Vice President Cheney and Haliburton are responsible for the increased cost of gas in America? It couldn't be from years of democratic blocks in getting more oil refineries built, could it? It couldn't be from years of democratic blocks of new drilling areas like the Alaska fields, could it? Or maybe it's not really from having 20+ different specialty gasolines for 20+ different areas of the country? Well, I guess it must be true if the Post wrote it. So, everybody blame Cheney. Anyway, back to the story: A few lines from the song include: "How come you're so wrong? My sweet neo-con, where's the money gone, in the Pentagon," goes one refrain. and, "It's liberty for all, democracy's our style, unless you are against us, then it's prison without trial." The song, whether Jagger admits it or not, is a jab at the president, his staff, and those of us who consider ourselves conservative in values and government. I admit I have not heard the song, and probably will not. Not because I would be offended in listening, but because I haven't seen the need to buy a Stones album (Yes when I bought it, it was a vinyl album) since Tattoo You in 1982. I guess I might catch it on one of the classic rock stations, but I rarely listen to regular channels any more. There are too many choices elsewhere: satellite, CD's, etc. Besides, it would be easy enough to find the Stones new CD online right now, download it for free, and burn it if I really wanted it. The Stones, while still talented, have lost their luster. Instead of aging gracefully, they parody themselves more with each tour and CD. Give it up Mick, Time is not on your side anymore.