Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...345678910111213...LastNext
Current Page: 8 of 181
Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 1, 2013 22:59

Indeed!

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Deluxtone ()
Date: October 1, 2013 23:09

Quote
michaelsavage
"Challenged the audience" -- hee hee hee hee . Broke down barriers. Hee hee hee hee.I kinda thought that was the likes Of Elvis. Hee hee hee.

Face it, they were popular because your Mom could like them. Its really is a simple formula to follow boys and girls.

And so the Stones were popular because your ma couldn't like them? It's a simple formula to follow.

Ask your mother michaelsavage ......

Your Mother Should Know. Hee hee hee hee.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 1, 2013 23:13

For some people, unfortunately, 1+1 = 3. No matter how easy you offer it up, they can't seem to understand. Which is totally fine.

Stones #1

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Deltics ()
Date: October 1, 2013 23:15

Quote
Deluxtone
Quote
michaelsavage
"Challenged the audience" -- hee hee hee hee . Broke down barriers. Hee hee hee hee.I kinda thought that was the likes Of Elvis. Hee hee hee.

Face it, they were popular because your Mom could like them. Its really is a simple formula to follow boys and girls.

And so the Stones were popular because your ma couldn't like them? It's a simple formula to follow.

Ask your mother michaelsavage ......

Your Mother Should Know. Hee hee hee hee.




"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 1, 2013 23:54

Cool picture

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GumbootCloggeroo ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:18

Quote
michaelsavage
For some people, unfortunately, 1+1 = 3. No matter how easy you offer it up, they can't seem to understand. Which is totally fine.
I understand. I just don't understand how it is that you come to your understanding. It's one thing to say Stones are #1, Beatles are crap. Fine, your opinion. Music is subjective. But when the foundation and reasons for your argument that Beatles are crap is crap in and of itself then I fail to understand. "Beatles are soft pop/boy band. They are safe. Mom liked them". Is this some sort of stubborn Republican Obama is a Muslim way of thinking?

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:30

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
Quote
michaelsavage
For some people, unfortunately, 1+1 = 3. No matter how easy you offer it up, they can't seem to understand. Which is totally fine.
I understand. I just don't understand how it is that you come to your understanding. It's one thing to say Stones are #1, Beatles are crap. Fine, your opinion. Music is subjective. But when the foundation and reasons for your argument that Beatles are crap is crap in and of itself then I fail to understand. "Beatles are soft pop/boy band. They are safe. Mom liked them". Is this some sort of stubborn Republican Obama is a Muslim way of thinking?

I like how you slipped a little politico in their gumboot...very deft! unfortunately this can only lead to a downward spiral of CAPITAL LETTERS, expletives iphone ! and hurt feelings whereby the thread is finally closed and becomes just another digital carcass on the information superhighway.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:35

Typical of the "left". Tghey cannot resists Poor kiddies

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:42

Quote
michaelsavage
Typical of the "left". Tghey cannot resists Poor kiddies

what kind of sick right-wing word is Tghey?

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:43

Spelling is overrated

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:46

Such a sweet neocon.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:51

So if you think the Beatels were vastly overrated you are a neocon. Hmmm. That's logical. Of course the political bashing started with the Mr. Lefty on this site. Go figure.

I think the Stones are great

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:53

Quote
michaelsavage
Spelling is overrated

that's such a savage point of view Michael.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:54

Thanks very much!

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 2, 2013 00:56

I aim to please

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 2, 2013 01:00

Quote
michaelsavage
So if you think the Beatels were vastly overrated you are a neocon. Hmmm. That's logical. Of course the political bashing started with the Mr. Lefty on this site. Go figure.

I think the Stones are great

No, I didn't say that, you did. I was merely pointing out one of their songs, which you seem not to have heard. It's on A Bigger Bang.

Look, if you don't like The Beatles, that's one thing. But if you don't understand the vastness of their influence and the changes they brought about in the music business, then you're just willfully ignorant. And if you still don't understand it the obvious even after it's spelled out for you, then it's just stupidity.

Here, let Neil Diamond explain it for you. Diamond was a Tin Pan Alley writer until The Beatles came along and changed the status of the songwriter in popular music:

Diamond never encountered the Beatles personally. But he did witness their impact on Tin Pan Alley.

'I remember I was still in the Brill Building when they arrived in the US. All the staff writers gathered around and listened to this new group from England that was all the rave and all the talk.

'I thought: “OK, they’re pretty good.” We thought maybe it was just like a teenage sensation because the kids were going crazy over the Beatles. But they did change the way the music business was done in the United States, no question about it.’
The shock waves of the Fab Four’s invasion of the US, he says, were profound.

'First of all, the writing of Lennon and McCartney signalled the emancipation of the songwriter, who had always been the low man on the totem pole. Paid the least. Least respected. Least recognised. But suddenly the songwriter was on a par with the big stars – these guys could not only write but they could sing as well.’

So began the end of the Tin Pan Alley era. 'People realised it wasn’t necessary to have somebody own your copyright to your songs and bring them around to try to get other people to record them,’ says Diamond, who has hung on to the copyright of all his songs since.

Full article at: [www.telegraph.co.uk]

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 2, 2013 01:03

Tsk tsk. So many delicate personas. Again, your opinion - which you of course are entitled to and I hope you enjoy all of your Beatle records -- and Neil Diamond's.

Many believe they were grossly overrated. What for God's sake is wrong with that. (Can I say "God" here?). Peace out and Go Stones.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 2, 2013 01:24

Quote
michaelsavage
Tsk tsk. So many delicate personas. Again, your opinion - which you of course are entitled to and I hope you enjoy all of your Beatle records -- and Neil Diamond's.

Many believe they were grossly overrated. What for God's sake is wrong with that. (Can I say "God" here?). Peace out and Go Stones.

I can see you're obviously immune to fact. Maybe it was too much reading for you. If you ever meet Keith Richards, ask him, he'll tell you--but he might be hanging out with Macca when you see him.

Enjoy life, and keep on truckin' trollin'....


Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GumbootCloggeroo ()
Date: October 2, 2013 01:35

Quote
michaelsavage
Typical of the "left". Tghey cannot resists Poor kiddies
How do you know I'm left wing? Maybe I'm a moderate centrist. Maybe I'm a social and fiscal conservative. Maybe I'm even a Republican but not an extreme right wing Republican and I'm embarrassed about how some have hijacked the party? Is this a "us vs. them" mentality that you have? Anyone that disagrees with you or anyone that calls you out and challenges your way of thinking is a socialist left winger? P.S. I type these words not in a fit of rage or anger so please, don't feel threatened by me.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-02 01:42 by GumbootCloggeroo.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GumbootCloggeroo ()
Date: October 2, 2013 01:38

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
Quote
michaelsavage
For some people, unfortunately, 1+1 = 3. No matter how easy you offer it up, they can't seem to understand. Which is totally fine.
I understand. I just don't understand how it is that you come to your understanding. It's one thing to say Stones are #1, Beatles are crap. Fine, your opinion. Music is subjective. But when the foundation and reasons for your argument that Beatles are crap is crap in and of itself then I fail to understand. "Beatles are soft pop/boy band. They are safe. Mom liked them". Is this some sort of stubborn Republican Obama is a Muslim way of thinking?

I like how you slipped a little politico in their gumboot...very deft! unfortunately this can only lead to a downward spiral of CAPITAL LETTERS, expletives iphone ! and hurt feelings whereby the thread is finally closed and becomes just another digital carcass on the information superhighway.
I'm sorry for typing political words. I'll stop.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GumbootCloggeroo ()
Date: October 2, 2013 01:52

Quote
michaelsavage
Tsk tsk. So many delicate personas. Again, your opinion - which you of course are entitled to and I hope you enjoy all of your Beatle records -- and Neil Diamond's.

Many believe they were grossly overrated. What for God's sake is wrong with that. (Can I say "God" here?). Peace out and Go Stones.
You have every right to say The Beatles suck or are overrated. Go ahead. I, for one, am not offended or crying because my persona is delicate. What bugs me is WHY you think they are crap. What if some ignorant person said to you "The Stones suck and are boring because all their songs sound so repetitive. Same ol' open G riffing. Blah Blah Blah". Wouldn't you want to defend The Stones and say "no no, they do more than just that. They play all kinds of music!".

Doesn't that make sense to you, mickscarey?

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: shadooby ()
Date: October 2, 2013 02:07

Quote
ryanpow
How about the Beatles and the Stones vs. Ditka?

Ditka's grandma 77...Beatles and da Stones 2.

(grandma gets sacked in da end zone)

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GumbootCloggeroo ()
Date: October 2, 2013 02:11


Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: shadooby ()
Date: October 2, 2013 02:15

I'm OK, I just choked onna pork chap!...Or was dat a brat worst?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-02 02:19 by shadooby.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 2, 2013 05:01

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
Quote
michaelsavage
For some people, unfortunately, 1+1 = 3. No matter how easy you offer it up, they can't seem to understand. Which is totally fine.
I understand. I just don't understand how it is that you come to your understanding. It's one thing to say Stones are #1, Beatles are crap. Fine, your opinion. Music is subjective. But when the foundation and reasons for your argument that Beatles are crap is crap in and of itself then I fail to understand. "Beatles are soft pop/boy band. They are safe. Mom liked them". Is this some sort of stubborn Republican Obama is a Muslim way of thinking?

I like how you slipped a little politico in their gumboot...very deft! unfortunately this can only lead to a downward spiral of CAPITAL LETTERS, expletives iphone ! and hurt feelings whereby the thread is finally closed and becomes just another digital carcass on the information superhighway.
I'm sorry for typing political words. I'll stop.

no need to apologize, I'm just havin' atcha!

.
Posted by: Max'sKansasCity ()
Date: October 2, 2013 06:03

.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-02 06:06 by Max'sKansasCity.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GumbootCloggeroo ()
Date: October 2, 2013 06:34

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
Quote
michaelsavage
For some people, unfortunately, 1+1 = 3. No matter how easy you offer it up, they can't seem to understand. Which is totally fine.
I understand. I just don't understand how it is that you come to your understanding. It's one thing to say Stones are #1, Beatles are crap. Fine, your opinion. Music is subjective. But when the foundation and reasons for your argument that Beatles are crap is crap in and of itself then I fail to understand. "Beatles are soft pop/boy band. They are safe. Mom liked them". Is this some sort of stubborn Republican Obama is a Muslim way of thinking?

I like how you slipped a little politico in their gumboot...very deft! unfortunately this can only lead to a downward spiral of CAPITAL LETTERS, expletives iphone ! and hurt feelings whereby the thread is finally closed and becomes just another digital carcass on the information superhighway.
I'm sorry for typing political words. I'll stop.

no need to apologize, I'm just havin' atcha!
Hey I'm Canadian, we apologize about everything smiling smiley

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Deluxtone ()
Date: October 2, 2013 10:04

Deltics is right ofcourse.

It seems to be feeding time at the troll zoo.

And the thread started with a simple mention of a book - albeit one with a contentious title........-
........ which has resulted in contentiousness and a troll feeding frenzy on the ether-net.

How about a thread entitled 'Compare and contrast the Beatles and the stones in a respectful and dignified manner'

Another thread called 'the worldview of michaelsavage - its breadth of vision, its merits and its limitations.

And another thread for another guy (i'll have to go back and find his 'name') JumpingJackofLantern (he needs our pity - we'd all have problems if our parents had christened us that) and his detractors.

Infact what is needed is a Tell Me for people wishing to discuss/argue with genuine integrity and another kind of Tell Me ........ a Troll Tell Me.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-02 10:13 by Deluxtone.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: October 2, 2013 14:42

You got to troll me... keep on trollin'...

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Stoneage ()
Date: October 2, 2013 15:34


Goto Page: PreviousFirst...345678910111213...LastNext
Current Page: 8 of 181


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 436
Record Number of Users: 189 on August 24, 2021 20:10
Record Number of Guests: 4101 on December 24, 2020 10:57

Previous page Next page First page IORR home