Well, now that I've messed up one post today, let's see if I can get this one, uh, straight. The Rolling Stones (one of my favorite bands) are accused of bashing Bush and Rice in a new song, "My Sweet Neo-Con." According to Drudge, here's the story and the lyrics:

JAGGER ROCKS BUSH, RICE: 'HOW COME YOU'RE SO WRONG, MY SWEET NEO-CON'

"You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite/ You call yourself a patriot. Well, I think your are full of sh*t!... How come you're so wrong, my sweet neo-con."

Ready to drop in the coming weeks, a new Bush-bashing tune from the ROLLING STONES: "Sweet Neo Con."

"It is direct," Mick Jagger says with a laugh to fresh editions of NEWSWEEK.

"Keith [Richards] said, 'It's not really metaphorical.' I think he's a bit worried because he lives in the U.S." Jagger explains. "But I don't."

The full lyric also mocks National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice.

Our last Secretary of State (Madeleine Albright) didn't merit all this attention. Nor did Haig, Shultz, Baker, Eagleburger, or Christopher. So why the fuss about Condoleeza Rice? And Bush was reelected less than a year ago, so it's not as if there's a presidential race or something.

Anyway, I can't find the exact reference to Condoleeza Rice in the song. Perhaps someone can clue me in.

For the Stones' part, their publicist denied that the song is about Bush:

Britain's New Musical Express publication, which calls itself "the world's biggest-selling rock weekly," reported last week that Sweet Neo-Con "is believed to be an attack on the politics of George Bush and the Republican administration." Various other publications have made similar reports, and the Rolling Stones Fan Club of Europe says Virgin Records has been telling people the song has "a political message about moralism in the White House."

Not so, says Stones publicist Fran Curtis. The song "is not about nor does it mention Bush or his administration." Curtis did not say what it is about, but no matter: It's Only Rock 'n Roll.

Several recent British accounts (and this Australian account) repeat essentially the same story as Drudge, but without any reference to Condoleeza Rice. Reading through the stories as carefully as I can, other than in the headline texts, I am at a loss to find any actual references to Bush at all by the Stones or the lyric. For the sake of argument, is it possible that the word "Neo-Con" might refer to a particular person other than Bush? Is Bush supposed to be the "sweet Neo-Con"? Is Rice? Or is it someone else?

The only specific Bush reference I could find was here, and I don't know how reliable it is:

The Rolling Stones are getting political on their new album, A Bigger Bang. Mick Jagger tells Newsweek that the new tune "Sweet Neo Con" is a dig at George W. Bush. With lyrics like "You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite/You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of s—t," Jagger says it is a direct attack on U.S. politics. He tells Newsweek, "Keith [Richards] said, 'It's not really metaphorical.' I think he's a bit worried because he lives in the U.S., but I don't."

I find it hard to believe it's just a coincidence that the Stones' upcoming tour starts August 21, and I know Mick Jagger is a pretty shrewd businessman. If I were him, I might backpedal a bit. Claim to have been "misunderstood" while basking in the publicity this is already generating.

(After all, his publicist has already laid the groundwork for him....)

UPDATE: Here at last is Newsweek (August 15) -- supposedly the source of the stories:

The Stones' new music sounds more spontaneous than most of their recent efforts, and Jagger sounds angrier than he has in years. Since the band's last studio album, Jagger has ended his 23-year relationship with wife Jerry Hall, and was taken to court over an illegitimate child he fathered with a Brazilian model, which may explain such lyrics as "Oh no! Not you again, f—-ing up my life/It was bad the first time around/Better take my own advice." But the most searing moment, on a song called "Sweet Neo Con," isn't personal but political. "You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite/You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of s—t." "It is direct," Jagger says with a laugh. "Keith said [he breaks into a dead-on Keith imitation], 'It's not really metaphorical.' I think he's a bit worried because he lives in the U.S." Jagger smiles. "But I don't."

The tension between Jagger and Richards—primarily, but not exclusively, creative—has always been at the heart of the Stones. Jagger the arty, natty cosmopolitan, Richards the scruffy blues purist and regular guy; Jagger dancing and prancing, Richards standing there with a cigarette dangling. Over the years, they've quarreled and reconciled, recorded solo albums and reunited, and neither has really thrived without the other. "Many times we wanted to kill each other," Richards says now, "or at least cause some serious damage.

What, no Bush? No Rice?

Is this soon to be a major misunderstanding?

MORE: Looking at the lyric again, it occurs to me that there are people I could honestly say that about who aren't George W. Bush, or Condoleeza Rice, or anyone in the Bush administration and who don't even support Bush. (I don't think I have to name names.)

AND MORE: Newsweek also notes that the concert is not yet sold out:

Want a ticket for this year's tour, which kicks off in Boston on Aug. 21? Hurry, it's almost sold out.

(I'm tempted to ask whether this is any way to promote a tour, but I've already made enough mistakes for one day, so I'll leave the temptation alone.)

UPDATE (08/10/05): My assessment of the situation seems to have been largely vindicated-- and by Mr. Jagger himself:

NEW YORK -- The Rolling Stones' upcoming album contains a song seemingly critical of President Bush, but Mick Jagger denies it's directed at him, according to the syndicated TV show "Extra."

"It is not really aimed at anyone," Jagger said on the entertainment-news show's Wednesday edition. "It's not aimed, personally aimed, at President Bush. It wouldn't be called 'Sweet Neo Con' if it was."

(Many people think I'm sweet.)

AFTERTHOUGHT: Has Mick Jagger betrayed his apparent former disdain for politics? Actually, considering that he long ago confessed to harboring a secret desire to become a Member of Parliament, an interest in politics at this stage of his life might not be as far fetched as it would seem. Add to that the fact that the much younger Tony Blair was called a "Mick Jagger wannabe" (by the Times, no less) and the intrigue grows.