Yeah, I think that the drums on Sweet Neo Con are really great and ferocious and create the rhythm and the spirit of the song.

Of course - the other basic elements - the typical Keith guitar and Mick`s angry voice touch our consciousness and send sharp chills directly in our brains! And - not to forget the harmonika which matches perfectly the song`s message.

Does anyone know what the other Stones think of the tune? I know Keith was a bit iffy about it, but he lives in the US and seems a bit more conservative in general. Mick gets paid to be edgy, so its expect.

The song is tripe regardless of what one thinks of it's "enlightened and progressive" message. A real clunker. Charlie was probably pissed he had to play on it at all.

drake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone know what the other Stones think of
> the tune? I know Keith was a bit iffy about it,
> but he lives in the US and seems a bit more
> conservative in general. Mick gets paid to be
> edgy, so its expect.

lol...Keith is the conservative one. I'm not sure...it might just be that he stays out of politics.

In fairness, they both get paid to be edgy, and Keith seems to take it more seriously. Mick seems very buttoned-up and prissy as of late. Nothing wrong with that though...he's still the man though.

I don`t agree with R and think this is the best piece of art in the album (my opinion, don`t want to argue). I like all of the songs i ABB, especially ONNYA, RJ, LIND, SOL, BOH, etc.

For instance, I find ONNYA carrying the spirit of the 70 - ies (it is close to Star @#$%&, Respectable, and Live With Me from 1969), Rough Justice remebers me of If You Can`t Rock Me and You Got Me Rocking, LIND and It Won`t Take Long To Foget You sound like the 90 - ies, Rain Fall Down - like the 80 - ies.

But Sweet Neo Con has no resemblance with any earlier Stone`s song - it has entirely new style (not only with the harmonika introduction). It is entirely fresh!!! I would even dare say - it is as new and fresh, as Jumping Jack Flash was in 1968.

R Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The song is tripe regardless of what one thinks of
> it's "enlightened and progressive" message. A real
> clunker. Charlie was probably pissed he had to
> play on it at all.

love it when the Bushies get upset!

Sweet neo con as fresh and new as Jumping Jack Flash!!! Are you serious Dobril?

That track was embarrasingly bad, how you can compare it as being fresh and inventive ala JJF you have got to be kidding me.

I don`t say that it is as good as JJF, but find it very new as a sound and resmbling no other Stone`s song. And find it very very nice, angry and aggressive - the best Rolling Stones` songs are exactly ferocious and reactionary. The Stones are most real when they are rebellious!

But don`t want to argue - it is pointless, everyone has his/ her own taste and opinion.

A terribly written track. Musically and lyrically.

love the music on there. great groove, great drumming, great harp. agree with the message but think the lyrics are a bit sophmoric. then again, Repblicans are not big on being subtle, so maybe it takes something overly obvious to get their attention. go, Bush bashers!

This song is great! And it really grows. Well played and produced. The only strange thing about this song is in the chorus. What was Mick thinking about when he did the backing vocals - totally out of tune...

Just wish Micky & the Boys had have made it a bit filthier...move deeper into that Undercover Of The Night territory....

ROCKMAN 0

I don't like the idea that Charlie came in later and over dubbed his drums on these album tracks (I know that couldn't be helped). You can tell it's not the band playing live in the studio, there's no spontaneity or live feel.

this song reminds me of Korn.

i like the intro very much, escpecially the harmonica....

< don't like the idea that Charlie came in later and over dubbed his drums on these album tracks>

Who told you that? I know they had worked out songs before Charlie joined them, but haven't read anywhere that he added the drum tracks to otherwise finished songs?

DP - I was under the impression Mick and Keith started recording while Charlie was having his treatment - he came in later to add the drums to their basic tracks and Ronnie added his parts later too. To me it doesn't sound like a band playing live in a room, but thats just an opinion.

If they did it that way it's indeed a strange way to record an album...

Dobril Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But Sweet Neo Con has no resemblance with any
> earlier Stone`s song - it has entirely new style
> (not only with the harmonika introduction). It is
> entirely fresh!!! I would even dare say - it is as
> new and fresh, as Jumping Jack Flash was in 1968.

That's not what anyone can call good judgement. Were you there in 1968 however?

The "music" on this track is mediocre at best, in my opinion it's plain crap. Another thing are the lyrics which are quite outstanding not only bashing Bush but being a real sting against the US Neo Conservatives. Maybe these are the most outspoken and explicit lyrics Mick ever wrote (even if you don't agree with him). So combined this may be considered as a political poem with a backbeat but I wouldn't rate it as a song. And it's far far away from Jumpin' Jack which is a hell of a groovve with its expressionistic and even surrealistic lyrics!

<Maybe these are the most outspoken and explicit lyrics Mick ever wrote>

There is a song called Highwire if I recall correctly "We sell them missiles, we sell them tanks..."

'NeoCon' would have been a standout.....on "Primitive Cool."

I don't think it was even intended for inclusion on ABB until they got a whiff of how much free publicity it would garner.

DandelionPowderman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> <Maybe these are the most outspoken and
> explicit lyrics Mick ever wrote>
>
> There is a song called Highwire if I recall
> correctly "We sell them missiles, we sell them
> tanks..."

Of course I know the song :-)

But when "Highwire" is stating facts "Sweet Neo Con" is getting explicit. Listen:

You lie to your people, and blame it on your war of course
You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite
You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of sh*t

etc etc

where's the money gone, in the Pentagon.
It's liberty for all, democracy's our style,
unless you are against us, then it's prison without trial.

Mick claimed, in Rolling Stone, that he did rhythm/drum tracks for the songs as a guide for Charlie to later overdub.

Karl

<You lie to your people, and blame it on your war of course
You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite
You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of sh*t

etc etc

where's the money gone, in the Pentagon.
It's liberty for all, democracy's our style,
unless you are against us, then it's prison without trial.>

Well, lots of people will also call this "facts"...

> Well, lots of people will also call this
> "facts"...

It's the same kind of "facts" as when I say Sir Paul Mc sucks big time. Other people call it explicit when I say @#$%&. and they even try to ban me from the board. As if words like c-o-c-k or s-h-i-t or c-u-n-t etc were never used by the guys about whom this board is all about. But good ole Bjornulf even made up the board so you can't even say @#$%& if you really mean it.

Well, even Powell admitted that someone (high up) in the camp lied to his own people.

"Unless you are against us": I think Mr. Bush said something about that... And there's a certain Guentamo (spelling?) base that Mr. Jagger referred to...

IMO, the lyrics covers reactions (Jagger's) to facts.

F.U.C. the Captain Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------
> Dobril Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > But Sweet Neo Con has no resemblance with
> any
> > earlier Stone`s song - it has entirely new
> style
> > (not only with the harmonika introduction).
> It is
> > entirely fresh!!! I would even dare say - it
> is as
> > new and fresh, as Jumping Jack Flash was in
> 1968.
>
> That's not what anyone can call good judgement.
> Were you there in 1968 however?
>
> The "music" on this track is mediocre at best, in
> my opinion it's plain crap. Another thing are the
> lyrics which are quite outstanding not only
> bashing Bush but being a real sting against the US
> Neo Conservatives. Maybe these are the most
> outspoken and explicit lyrics Mick ever wrote
> (even if you don't agree with him). So combined
> this may be considered as a political poem with a
> backbeat but I wouldn't rate it as a song. And
> it's far far away from Jumpin' Jack which is a
> hell of a groovve with its expressionistic and
> even surrealistic lyrics!
>


You are right about JJF, you are also right about the differences between JJF and SNC - both in the lyrics and the music.

And I say they resemble only in the fact that Sweet Neo Con sounds entirely fresh and new, like I`ve read about the way JJF sounded in 1968 (but I wasn`t even born yet , so I may be wrong). JJF is one of my favourite Stones` songs which guitars like razors penetrate our brains. Anyway.

I do think that Sweet Neo Con is a hell of song, it`s a potential hit and it`s great - at the same time simple and great as a musical performance and as lyrics. It can be the anthem of the new rebels nowadays against the hypocrisy of the real terrorists nowadays - Bush (Bulshit) and the rest scums from this dickhead American president`s clique, masking as neo con.

And I forgot to mention - there is something in the chorus in this song which sticks in your mind long after you`ve heard the song, it`s again the simple and great short guitar performance by Keith, and makes the song a potential hit.

The three of them - Mick, Keith and Charlie play really great in the song, and we can feel the real Stones there - angry and aggressive!!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-21 19:25 by Dobril.

This could have been a nice song if the lyrics wouldn't be so childish. I don't mind Jagger wanting to sing about Bush (or anyone else for that matter), but I expected it to be more mean, dirty, vilein (you get the drift).

Nice groove, but a bit simple, dull even. It surely wasn't worth all the attention it was given in the media before the release. Another set of lyrics and it could have been a decent b-side.

E.

" I do think that Sweet Neo Con is a hell of song, it`s a potential hit"

Phhht! LOL. Where? Radio Free Cindy Sheehan?

The lyrics are well written. I find them very ignorant, but they're catchy and amusing. The tune is, as others have pointed out, mediocre at best. I find it incredibly interesting that everytime this song is discussed people immediately go off on just how much they hate Bush. Its funny that most conservatives dont go to great lengths to discuss our disagreements with the lyrics. Maybe its due to all the hatred coming from the left? Sorry to tell you terrorists arent pacifists.