FNC wants to know what YOU think —
Are the Rolling Stones ripping President Bush? Should the NFL continue to allow the band to represent the league?
E-mail us at email@example.com and jump into the debate.
Check out what FOX Fans are saying:
"I love the Rolling Stones, however, they need to stick to what they do best: rock and roll. I don't give a twit about Mick Jagger's opinion of politics, but on the other hand, he should not bad-mouth a country that has treated him so well. He should keep his opinions to himself and let us enjoy his music. He is totally wrong and perhaps is catering to the younger generation, or perhaps he just wants to get some extra publicity. Keep everyone talking about the Stones!" — Mike (Shelby, MI)
"As a musician and entertainer I want to be able to sing about anything or anyone I want. However, I realize that no one has to listen to it, buy it, or like it. No record company is required to sell it. No radio station is required to play it. As far as the Stones writing an anti-Bush song, they should have the freedom to do so and we as the general public have the freedom to plug our ears." — Marty
"The NFL is an American League. It's all about America! What does Mick Jagger and his political lyrics have to do with patriotic Americans? Absolutely nothing! Therefore, having the Rolling Stones perform for the NFL is only going to make the NFL look like a league of losers who support anti-American trash. I'm guessing the NFL will back away from this ridiculous arrangement right away." — Rene
"Are we getting so old and closed-minded that we have forgotten what rock musicians and other popular music makers do? Who cares if the Rolling Stones have written an anti-Bush tune? These senior citizens are still out there playing music, creating new vibes and spurring thought. If our artists can't speak freely and express themselves we are no kind of a democracy. Yes, the NFL should still use the music of the Stones. They are icons, and thank God they continue to grow. If we all agreed with every word of every song heard how would thoughts or discourse ever be provoked? Lighten up, folks. It's only rock and roll." — Kelly (Sacramento, CA)
"As an American soldier in the National Guard who just returned from Iraq in March of this year, I feel that Toby Keith would be a better person to represent the NFL. He respects what we do in the military and his songs and videos show it. The Rolling Stones can stay in Europe for all I care and I will never buy another one of their albums." — SSG Dawson (Colorado)
"They are old individually, their music is getting long in the tooth, they want money and they care about nobody except themselves. So they use carefully planned controversy as a tool to get what they want. Make Mick and Keith linemen for a day in the NFL and let the players express themselves using their instruments and talent. Chin music." — Brian
"This is what happens when you don't believe in the quality of your product; instead of focusing on a sporting event, they (NFL) apparently feel the need to attract viewers by substituting entertainment to fill the void left by their inability to promote or talk football. It's another example of misdirected marketing. I, for one, like my sports 'straight-up' - I'll attend a concert if I'm interested in music." — Richard J. (Wichita, KS)
"When the complaining starts, these celebrities always spin their actions. Jagger is trying to criticize without being held responsible for it. We have the right to let the NFL know we don't want to hear it. The NFL would be smart to listen to the majority's wishes, whichever way it goes. I want entertainment from entertainers, not political commentary." — David (Sacramento, CA)
"I don't have a problem with the Stones writing an anti-Bush administration song, freedom of speech is just that. What I have a problem with is the NFL, what were you guys thinking? Are times so bad you cant find an American singer/group to represent an American sport? I'm all for multi-nationalism, but American spirit is important as well."— Marc (Rosamond, CA)
"I'm surprised the old men are still making albums, but this is America, and with freedom of speech they are allowed to express their opinions. That is what makes the U.S.A. a great country. They would never have been able to get away with this in Iraq!" — Leonard (Los Angeles, CA)
"The Stones absolutely have the right to voice their opinion. That's exactly what we are fighting for. But the NFL has every right to send them packing for voicing a view they don't want to have associated with endorsing their product. That doesn't make the Stones wrong. Just means the NFL may choose to align themselves with entertainers that don't cost them a fan base. I support the war in Iraq 100%. But that doesn't mean I'm going to bash people that have a different opinion. This is a tough issue, and I understand both sides of the argument. I just hope everyone remembers the reason we can even have these type of discussions in a public forum is that our service men and women have fought for our freedoms around the world for centuries now." — Eric (Kent, WA)
"As much as I have enjoyed Mick Jagger’s music over the years, I have to admit that he is no mental giant and should keep his enormous mouth shut about politics. All of the liberal women who will be rejoicing in his attack on our President should reflect upon the lyrics in his hit record 'Under My Thumb.' The man is an idiot. I will never appreciate his music in the same manner again." — Don
"Too bad the Stones backed down. I think they didn't have to explain anything. Bush has done enough to bash himself. Look at his poll numbers. Regardless, it has people talking about the Stones and their new album." — Matt (Greensboro, NC)
"This isn't the first time a President has been ripped, nor will it be the last. Sure, the NFL could can the Stones. But if they're not careful they'll only have someone like Jim Nabors or Andy Williams to choose from!" — Mark (Camas, WA)
"Who care what the over the hill bunch of men think. Let them say whatever they want. Nobody is listening anyway." — Sharon (Chatsworth, GA)
"The Stones can say what they want, but I have the right to not attend, watch or listen to NFL Games, as long as the Stones represent the NFL in any way, shape or form. Looks like there goes the 2005 season." — Jay (Lake City, FL)
"The Rolling Stones are definitely ripping our president in their new song. Also, I do think the NFL should give them the boot. It is very disturbing that singers and movie stars have no respect for our leaders. Who truly cares what they think? I know that I don’t, and most of the people I know could care less. Let them do what they do best, entertain, and forget making political statements. I hope this song will hurt the Rolling Stones popularity." — Linda
"It is hard for me to understand what the big deal is. Name a period in our history when the president of our country was not criticized. Have you ever heard of the freedom of speech? By the way, I am not a fan of The Rolling Stones." — Bonnie (Louisville, KY)
"The NFL should not let the band continue to represent a league which proudly represents our country. The Rolling Stones are most certainly entitled to their opinion, and I respect that part of it. But they, along with a lot of other folks in this county, need to start understanding when you write or want to be heard, and then you should be able to take what comes with it. Or keep your opinion to yourself! And, come on, if you are going to say it, write it, sing it. Be MAN ENOUGH to tell the truth about it That is the part I do not respect at all." — Frank
"Why would the NFL get a old British rock band to represent them? How about Toby Keith? He played football and he's all American. Is the NFL foreign owned? I just don't get it. The old Rolling Stones (that have looked dead for years) are not worthy of the dirt below President Bush's feet." — Carol (Texas)
"Whether the song is anti-Bush or not is irrelevant. When did free speech become a crime? So, anyone who disagrees with Bush and his policies are considered wrong? What does supporting the policies of this administration have to do with representing the NFL? I though our soldiers were dying to bring freedom to Iraq. Do we need to call them home to defend our freedom here?" — Tom (Pasadena, CA)
"These old farts ought to be playing at the nursing home dance. Who listens to a rocker's or Hollywood star's opinion anyway?" — Ken
"Please feel free to tell Jagger that I am only one person but I will not buy the newest Stones CD nor will I pay for any concert or ‘pay-per-view’ that may be released. I’m only one EX-fan but just how many of us EX fans are there? He ‘s too rich to care! We are just little people in comparison." — Dana
"Who needs an old 60's hippie rocker still stuck back there singing for the NFL? The NFL can do better than a Bush bashing, brain dead hippie." — Kathy
"Does Mick Jagger live in the United States? Is he an American citizen? Does he pay taxes here? Quite frankly, who cares what Mick Jagger thinks of the Bush administration’s policies and the war in Iraq? He’s a rock star, not an expert on foreign policy. Keep on rocking Mick and leave the foreign policy up to the experts." — Jill (Margate, FL)
"Who cares what a weird, aging, British, 60's rock and roll singer has to say about U.S. politics or why they are associating with American Football? Let's protest them buy not buying their album and not watching the games." — Scott (Racine, WI)
"The song is certainly critical of the Bush administration's Iraq policies, and of the entire neo-conservative philosophy that infects his administration. The Stones are to be congratulated. The question is not whether the NFL should keep the Stones, but whether America should keep this neo-con president for the remainder of his term." — Randy (Plano, TX)
Discover FOX News Channel's Internet Magazine!
Click over here.