Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Badger

I go with what Lemmy said:

“The Beatles were hard men. Brian Epstein cleaned them up for mass consumption, but they were anything but sissies. They were from Liverpool, which is like Hamburg or Norfolk, Virginia – a hard, sea-farin’ town, all these dockers and sailors around all the time who would beat the piss out of you if you so much as winked at them. Ringo’s from the Dingle, which is like the f___ing Bronx.”

The Rolling Stones were the mummy’s boys – they were all college students from the outskirts of London. They went to starve in London, but it was by choice, to give themselves some sort of aura of disrespectability. I did like the Stones, but they were never anywhere near the Beatles – not for humor, not for originality, not for songs, not for presentation. All they had was Mick Jagger dancing about. Fair enough, the Stones made great records, but they were always s__t on stage, whereas the Beatles were the gear.”


44 posted on 02/26/2025 1:04:29 PM PST by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dfwgator

That isn’t true at all. Lennon was the wealthiest of them. Starr was from the poorest family, with Harrison a little above that.


68 posted on 02/26/2025 1:12:15 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson