Posted on 02/20/2006 11:14:38 AM PST by smoothsailing
Of course nothing about being a celebration of decadence and trash lives.
The Stones are total sell outs- not to mention frightening looking.
The Stones should change their name to "The Old Junkies".
"Political Satirist Chris Davis "
The satire was a bit thick, eh. There's no need to satirize the Rolling Stones any longer, they've been Ready-Made satire since the 80's.
Looking at their pictures,not being a groupie type of guy,I wouldnt rcognize them from an average type of individual other than scary,and my sixth sense would kick in.If I were to pass them on the street,I would more than likely have my hand on something with the safety off!Really,I used to enjoy their music,but dementia,disease,senility kind of ruined it for me.Americans paid a large portion of their sucess and thats the thanks you get.Knighted by the Queen?Must be something like an oscar or something.
OK, color me confused. This is satire, did they or did they not bash Bush?
What is a Rolling Stone is it the remains of the stones from the sack of a pig? These are pig faced anti-American Nazi scum who should be barred from the United States as terrorist.
So Mick, take your $Billion out of the US Stock Market! Oh that's right your a Limocrite! How many soldiers died to fly your sorry voice down there?
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Is the article bogus? I know that the Stones did give a concert in Brazil.
The article was satire. The Rio "event" didn't happen.
They might have given a concert, but the author of the article was making a point about wacko libs supposedly demonstrating for peace while killing themselves. The author took extreme liberties with the facts for satirical purposes. I sincerely doubt Jagger knows how to adlib in Portuguese.
What do you think of the [Rolling] Stones today?Lennon: I think it's a lot of hype, you know. I like "Honky Tonk Woman" and I think Mick's a joke, with all that fag dancing, I always did. I enjoy him, you know, I'll go and see his films and all probably, like everybody else, but really, I think it's a joke.
Do you see him much now?
Lennon: No, I never do see him. We saw a bit of each other when Allen was first coming in. I think Mick got jealous, but I was always very respectful about Mick and the Stones. But he said a lot of sort of tarty things about the Beatles, which I am hurt by, because, you know, I can knock the Beatles, but don't let Mick Jagger knock them. Because I would like to just list what we did and what the Stones did two months after, on every f*ckin' album and every f*ckin' thing we did. And Mick does exactly the same -- he imitates us. And I would like one of you f*ckin' underground people to point it out. You know Satanic Majesties is Pepper. "We Love You", man, it's the most f*ckin' bullsh*t, that's "All You Need Is Love". I resent the implication that the Stones are like revolutionairies and that the Beatles weren't. If they were or are, the Beatles really were too. They are not in the same class, music-wise or power-wise, never were.
55 posts, most with utterly pedestrian, predictable comments (Hey! Depends, Wheelchairs, HA, HA, HA!) and only two (3?) noting this piece is supposed to be a satire. I'll note that it's lame satire too, as it's not inspired by anything the Rolling Stones have previously said or done ("Sweet Neo-con", ain't enough.) Lame...
Its a joke people.
On the other hand, as a life long STones fan that has seen them a few times, it is time to pack it in boys.
Rod Stewart and Aerosmith are proving that it is better to fade away than it is to burn out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.