There's not a single Beatles song I really like, and I downright couldn't/can't stand John Lennon.
And dry wine is a perfectly good waste of a grape.
Interesting Friday pm post. How old are you?
Love me don't?
Maybe large doses of a schedule 1 substance would help.
My other Sig is a Steyr...
Or mothers little helper:
from the abyss
Oh, I've said it before and been mercilessly criticized for my opinion. I've never cared for them or their bubble-gum crap tunes. The ONLY song that is even remotely tolerable, and only with a snootfull of booze in a crowded bar, is Revolution. Other than that, you can have them. I don't care how many groups they supposedly inspired, or what "musical geniuses" they supposedly were. I vehemently disagree with both assertions.
They suck. And so does, by the way, all wine. Not just the dry stuff.
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy." Winston Churchill
Finally, a little reason.
I'll jump in with the rest of the early crowd and say I find neither the Beatles nor dry wine particularly enjoyable.
Haven't indulged in alcohol for many years now, but back in the day I was a Jack Daniels guy anyway, though a little wine in mixed company never hurt.
America, Land of the Free - because of the Brave
OK someone agrees with you. How about a reason for you? You also singled out Lennon, and ignored my simple question.
I liked the early Beatles. Later on: Not so much
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
The "mainstream media" is no more mainstream than leftists are liberals.
|Fire for effect|
Well, I personally prefer dry red wine to other wines. And I also have enjoyed much of the Beatles music. Not all, but much. So, there.
"Ride to the sound of the big guns."
Because they weren't original. Their music was banal. Even their name was a near plagiarization of the band "The Crickets."
As far as Lennon, he was a woman abusing, child abusing, drug abusing, adultering, absentee father, and a hack of a guitarist who was mainly relegated to playing simple rhythms and had a mediocre, at best, voice. He promoted the Black Panthers, contributed nothing to the cause of world-peace except some lame lines and some photo-ops, and practiced none of the "love" he preached.
Oh, and I'm 52.
So, there. The Beatles sucked. And dry wine tastes like dirty dish water. The only dry red wine out there that is named properly is "Kitchen Sink," and I'm sure it's because it tastes like a stale, dry, dirty kitchen sink.
OK thanks for taking the time to respond. I was unsure as to whether it was your politics, musical taste or something else.
There were those that preferred Pat Boone to Elvis, and the Rolling Stones to the Beatles. I have lots of original Stones LP in Mono no less, and have seen them twice in concert, but not since the mid 1980s.
Oh, and I do not drink wine of any type.
And they tried too hard.
Cannot agree with that. I am older than you. Everybody looked like that back then. Look at Sly and the Family Stone or the exciting series, Mod Squad. LOL
|On the DL|
Aw, come on. Dry wine isn't really that bad.
A mind is a terrible thing.
Here it is for you. Funky outfits??
Vtail, drink some while listening to Beatles music. It's like a double dose of syrup of ipecac.
ZSMICAEL, cool black folks can pull that off.
|On the DL|
Why in the world would I want to do that?
A mind is a terrible thing.
I have a couple other thoughts about why you dont like the Beatles. Your birth year. You were no doubt subjected to Baby Boomers cramming their music and thoughts down your throat all during your growing up. Your parents may have been big Beatles fans. I don't know, I could be wrong. That was not the music you listened to during your teenage years. A different time, a different place.
I will leave the wine thing alone.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4 5|