Pacer wrote:Not"if" he did hit women, he admitted it in an interview.
And he was cruel to people sometimes just for fun.
Yeah, that Lennon, someone to look up to.
Because he did wear those intellectual glasses.
Nasty.
Pacer wrote:Not"if" he did hit women, he admitted it in an interview.
And he was cruel to people sometimes just for fun.
Yeah, that Lennon, someone to look up to.
Because he did wear those intellectual glasses.
Pacer wrote:I used to like the Beatles, without besides one CD,ever buying their records.
But since someone on the other forum (also the nowadays press in general) shoved them, and especially Lennon,down my throat as musically and as a person superior to anyone including Elvis...i get a bad feeling in my stomach every time the Beatles or Lennon get raved about (and every time they get mentioned they rave about them, although they cut Crap too)
Since these days everything he or them sang is praised as a godgiven present.
Pfffff....
And yes,lennon singing "imagine no possession, I wonder if you can..."from his Dakota home where he owned/bought 5 apartments .....what a hypocrite.
Mountain Mist wrote:Pacer wrote:Elvis is getting smashed for his pills and labeled as a "drug adicct" mostly and overlooking his artistic contribution and Lennon and the Beatles get a free pass for LSD (yeah, cool and groovy in the 60s) and John Lennon being on heroin in the 70s until the end of his life...but no one in the press mentioning that.
Give me a break.
And "mean Mr. Mustard" is "funny"and when Elvis sings "ito eats" he gets a put down.
Some double standard going on there.
Fuck those fake elicist opinions which are based on beein ' hypocrite.
*-)
LOL
Plus Lennon hit women (if true). Love to be made to think Thank you.
I must have picked up on the condescending vibes, when the Beatles were interviewed, of which I watched in the last ten years, I was disgusted with the attitude towards Elvis, along with the "hidden" jibes.
LOL
Thinking of the baby's first word in that movie. LOL
Mojo Filter wrote:Mountain Mist wrote:Pacer wrote:Elvis is getting smashed for his pills and labeled as a "drug adicct" mostly and overlooking his artistic contribution and Lennon and the Beatles get a free pass for LSD (yeah, cool and groovy in the 60s) and John Lennon being on heroin in the 70s until the end of his life...but no one in the press mentioning that.
Give me a break.
And "mean Mr. Mustard" is "funny"and when Elvis sings "ito eats" he gets a put down.
Some double standard going on there.
Fuck those fake elicist opinions which are based on beein ' hypocrite.
*-)
LOL
Plus Lennon hit women (if true). Love to be made to think Thank you.
I must have picked up on the condescending vibes, when the Beatles were interviewed, of which I watched in the last ten years, I was disgusted with the attitude towards Elvis, along with the "hidden" jibes.
LOL
Thinking of the baby's first word in that movie. LOL
What condescending vibes did you pick up regarding their attitude towards Elvis?
Not once have i heard either of the four Beatles say a bad word about Elvis, they may have given their opinion about his music in the 60s and 70s, but they have never really slagged him off as such. In fact, musically (50s)they were great admires of him.
Bob TCB wrote:Mojo Filter wrote:Mountain Mist wrote:Pacer wrote:Elvis is getting smashed for his pills and labeled as a "drug adicct" mostly and overlooking his artistic contribution and Lennon and the Beatles get a free pass for LSD (yeah, cool and groovy in the 60s) and John Lennon being on heroin in the 70s until the end of his life...but no one in the press mentioning that.
Give me a break.
And "mean Mr. Mustard" is "funny"and when Elvis sings "ito eats" he gets a put down.
Some double standard going on there.
Fuck those fake elicist opinions which are based on beein ' hypocrite.
*-)
LOL
Plus Lennon hit women (if true). Love to be made to think Thank you.
I must have picked up on the condescending vibes, when the Beatles were interviewed, of which I watched in the last ten years, I was disgusted with the attitude towards Elvis, along with the "hidden" jibes.
LOL
Thinking of the baby's first word in that movie. LOL
What condescending vibes did you pick up regarding their attitude towards Elvis?
Not once have i heard either of the four Beatles say a bad word about Elvis, they may have given their opinion about his music in the 60s and 70s, but they have never really slagged him off as such. In fact, musically (50s)they were great admires of him.
Both John Lennon and George Harrison are on record criticizing Elvis in terms of doing less rock, or music that they would have preferred to hear him do. However, in the case of Harrison not liking Elvis at Madison Square Garden, Elvis had done all the rock n roll stuff on previous live albums. By 1972, Elvis was doing more ballads in his Las Vegas act. The songs being recorded were supposed to be songs not yet put on record. The Beatles could change, but Elvis had to stay the same?
Anyway, Elvis could have criticized Lennon's nude album cover, Yoko Ono's cat screaming voice or George Harrison's Indian music.
Mojo Filter wrote:Bob TCB wrote:Mojo Filter wrote:Mountain Mist wrote:Pacer wrote:Elvis is getting smashed for his pills and labeled as a "drug adicct" mostly and overlooking his artistic contribution and Lennon and the Beatles get a free pass for LSD (yeah, cool and groovy in the 60s) and John Lennon being on heroin in the 70s until the end of his life...but no one in the press mentioning that.
Give me a break.
And "mean Mr. Mustard" is "funny"and when Elvis sings "ito eats" he gets a put down.
Some double standard going on there.
Fuck those fake elicist opinions which are based on beein ' hypocrite.
*-)
LOL
Plus Lennon hit women (if true). Love to be made to think Thank you.
I must have picked up on the condescending vibes, when the Beatles were interviewed, of which I watched in the last ten years, I was disgusted with the attitude towards Elvis, along with the "hidden" jibes.
LOL
Thinking of the baby's first word in that movie. LOL
What condescending vibes did you pick up regarding their attitude towards Elvis?
Not once have i heard either of the four Beatles say a bad word about Elvis, they may have given their opinion about his music in the 60s and 70s, but they have never really slagged him off as such. In fact, musically (50s)they were great admires of him.
Both John Lennon and George Harrison are on record criticizing Elvis in terms of doing less rock, or music that they would have preferred to hear him do. However, in the case of Harrison not liking Elvis at Madison Square Garden, Elvis had done all the rock n roll stuff on previous live albums. By 1972, Elvis was doing more ballads in his Las Vegas act. The songs being recorded were supposed to be songs not yet put on record. The Beatles could change, but Elvis had to stay the same?
Anyway, Elvis could have criticized Lennon's nude album cover, Yoko Ono's cat screaming voice or George Harrison's Indian music.
That's just their opinion about Elvis' music and I'm sure that's other musicians opinion too. Very few musicians were impressed with what Elvis was doing in the 60s and 70s, but then neither were some of the fans, me included. Elvis recorded a lot of shit during those decades, more so than the other Beatles - whether as a group or solo artist.
But slagging the two off is a pointless exercise, especially when someone is trying to score points from one to the other. And then bringing Yoko Ono's singing into the conversation (terrible I know) but it's a silly comparison and bares nothing to what Elvis was doing.
Mojo Filter wrote:Bob TCB wrote:Mojo Filter wrote:Mountain Mist wrote:Pacer wrote:Elvis is getting smashed for his pills and labeled as a "drug adicct" mostly and overlooking his artistic contribution and Lennon and the Beatles get a free pass for LSD (yeah, cool and groovy in the 60s) and John Lennon being on heroin in the 70s until the end of his life...but no one in the press mentioning that.
Give me a break.
And "mean Mr. Mustard" is "funny"and when Elvis sings "ito eats" he gets a put down.
Some double standard going on there.
Fuck those fake elicist opinions which are based on beein ' hypocrite.
*-)
LOL
Plus Lennon hit women (if true). Love to be made to think Thank you.
I must have picked up on the condescending vibes, when the Beatles were interviewed, of which I watched in the last ten years, I was disgusted with the attitude towards Elvis, along with the "hidden" jibes.
LOL
Thinking of the baby's first word in that movie. LOL
What condescending vibes did you pick up regarding their attitude towards Elvis?
Not once have i heard either of the four Beatles say a bad word about Elvis, they may have given their opinion about his music in the 60s and 70s, but they have never really slagged him off as such. In fact, musically (50s)they were great admires of him.
Both John Lennon and George Harrison are on record criticizing Elvis in terms of doing less rock, or music that they would have preferred to hear him do. However, in the case of Harrison not liking Elvis at Madison Square Garden, Elvis had done all the rock n roll stuff on previous live albums. By 1972, Elvis was doing more ballads in his Las Vegas act. The songs being recorded were supposed to be songs not yet put on record. The Beatles could change, but Elvis had to stay the same?
Anyway, Elvis could have criticized Lennon's nude album cover, Yoko Ono's cat screaming voice or George Harrison's Indian music.
That's just their opinion about Elvis' music and I'm sure that's other musicians opinion too. Very few musicians were impressed with what Elvis was doing in the 60s and 70s, but then neither were some of the fans, me included. Elvis recorded a lot of shit during those decades, more so than the other Beatles - whether as a group or solo artist.
But slagging the two off is a pointless exercise, especially when someone is trying to score points from one to the other. And then bringing Yoko Ono's singing into the conversation (terrible I know) but it's a silly comparison and bares nothing to what Elvis was doing.
Mister Moon wrote:It's so easy to show negativity towards Yoko.
I have always thought it was a brave move from John to marry a woman who was seven years his senior and did not exactly fit Western culture standards.
He could have married any 20 year old blondie, like any average rock star, and he would probably have been blessed by everybody.
Oh well.
Mister Moon wrote:It's so easy to show negativity towards Yoko.
I have always thought it was a brave move from John to marry a woman who was seven years his senior and did not exactly fit Western culture standards.
He could have married any 20 year old blondie, like any average rock star, and he would probably have been blessed by everybody.
Oh well.
John Yoko.jpg
Mountain Mist wrote:Mojo Filter wrote:Bob TCB wrote:Mojo Filter wrote:Mountain Mist wrote:Pacer wrote:Elvis is getting smashed for his pills and labeled as a "drug adicct" mostly and overlooking his artistic contribution and Lennon and the Beatles get a free pass for LSD (yeah, cool and groovy in the 60s) and John Lennon being on heroin in the 70s until the end of his life...but no one in the press mentioning that.
Give me a break.
And "mean Mr. Mustard" is "funny"and when Elvis sings "ito eats" he gets a put down.
Some double standard going on there.
Fuck those fake elicist opinions which are based on beein ' hypocrite.
*-)
LOL
Plus Lennon hit women (if true). Love to be made to think Thank you.
I must have picked up on the condescending vibes, when the Beatles were interviewed, of which I watched in the last ten years, I was disgusted with the attitude towards Elvis, along with the "hidden" jibes.
LOL
Thinking of the baby's first word in that movie. LOL
What condescending vibes did you pick up regarding their attitude towards Elvis?
Not once have i heard either of the four Beatles say a bad word about Elvis, they may have given their opinion about his music in the 60s and 70s, but they have never really slagged him off as such. In fact, musically (50s)they were great admires of him.
Both John Lennon and George Harrison are on record criticizing Elvis in terms of doing less rock, or music that they would have preferred to hear him do. However, in the case of Harrison not liking Elvis at Madison Square Garden, Elvis had done all the rock n roll stuff on previous live albums. By 1972, Elvis was doing more ballads in his Las Vegas act. The songs being recorded were supposed to be songs not yet put on record. The Beatles could change, but Elvis had to stay the same?
Anyway, Elvis could have criticized Lennon's nude album cover, Yoko Ono's cat screaming voice or George Harrison's Indian music.
That's just their opinion about Elvis' music and I'm sure that's other musicians opinion too. Very few musicians were impressed with what Elvis was doing in the 60s and 70s, but then neither were some of the fans, me included. Elvis recorded a lot of shit during those decades, more so than the other Beatles - whether as a group or solo artist.
But slagging the two off is a pointless exercise, especially when someone is trying to score points from one to the other. And then bringing Yoko Ono's singing into the conversation (terrible I know) but it's a silly comparison and bares nothing to what Elvis was doing.
Everyone goes off topic, it is a conversation, and if you are going to correct people, choose other people, too, instead of me, continuously, subtley, following me around.
Go pick on someone who enjoys it, I do not, I am asking you again, to please leave me alone. I do not care if it is a public forum, I do not want to interact with you any further. Thank you.
Mister Moon wrote:It's so easy to show negativity towards Yoko.
I have always thought it was a brave move from John to marry a woman who was seven years his senior and did not exactly fit Western culture standards.
He could have married any 20 year old blondie, like any average rock star, and he would probably have been blessed by everybody.
Oh well.
John Yoko.jpg
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 72 guests