YOU SUCK PAUL McCartney
Aldolfo

Seattle, WA

#46 Jul 1, 2013
Annasophia Robb FO Real wrote:
<quoted text>Because, Paul McCartney Is SUCH AN ARROGANT LOSER WHO IS SO ANNOYING AND FULL OF HIMSELF!!!!!!!!!!
I LOVE JULIO IGLESIAS. I ESPECIALLLY LOVE HIS AND DIANA ROSS' Hit Song ALL OF YOU FROM 1984. That Song PUTS ME IN A GREAT MOOD.
LISTEN TO IT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =adskxpEecIoXX
JULIO IS A BETTER ENTERTAINER THAN PAUL.
WOULDN'T YOU AGREE?
Julio Igleass are you kidding? He sucks bigtime.Julio nowhere near the entertainer that Mccartney is.
Arturo

Seattle, WA

#47 Jul 1, 2013
Annasophia Robb FO Real wrote:
<quoted text>I Think John Lennon Had A Much Better Career Too.
BTW Do You Like JULIO IGLESIAS? Because I Love His Song ALL OF YOU FROM 1984. He Sang This Duet With Diana Ross.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =adskxpEecIoXX
This Song Puts Me In A Good Mood. Paul Is Overrated Though.
That daffy song sounds like Englebert Humperdink to me.
Annonomys

Rome, PA

#48 Jul 20, 2013
There was this one guy named
Elmer Deninger 1913-1967. He and his wife
Orilla 1905-1991 lived on RR#2 Box 145 Factoryville, Pennsylvania For a long time. They had a Farm There. Elmer did not like the Beatles. He called them "Blood Suckers." Every time Elmer would kill or a critter he didn't like he'd say "DIE PAUL McCARTNEY." Elmer loved listening to FRANK SINATRA. He also loved listening to The Kingston Trio's Tijuana Jail Song. From 1958. He was such a nice guy though. He and Orilla never had any children. Orilla was very nice too.
Here's the Tijuana Jail Song.

ENJOY. Because Elmer sure did.
Annasophia Robb FO Real

Rome, PA

#49 Jul 22, 2013
Annonomys wrote:
There was this one guy named
Elmer Deninger 1913-1967. He and his wife
Orilla 1905-1991 lived on RR#2 Box 145 Factoryville, Pennsylvania For a long time. They had a Farm There. Elmer did not like the Beatles. He called them "Blood Suckers." Every time Elmer would kill or hit a critter he didn't like he'd say "DIE PAUL McCARTNEY." Elmer loved listening to FRANK SINATRA. He also loved listening to The Kingston Trio's Tijuana Jail Song. From 1958. He was such a nice guy though. He and Orilla never had any children. Orilla was very nice too.
Here's the Tijuana Jail Song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =udZLAMMPkcUXX
ENJOY. Because Elmer sure did.
It's Such A SHAME THAT THE DENINGERS ARE NOT ALIVE ANYMORE. I WISHED I COULD HAVE MET THEM.
LOL About Elmer When He Would Kill Or Hit A Critter He Would Say "DIE PAUL McCARTNEY." I Also LOL About Elmer Calling The Beatles "Blood Suckers." I'm Sure Orilla Was Very Kind Too.
I Would Have Enjoyed Spending Time With The Dear Sweet Deningers.
I Also Love The Tijuana Jail Song By The Kingston Trio. WOW From 1958 Too.
Mr Authority

Seattle, WA

#50 Jul 22, 2013
Annasophia Robb FO Real wrote:
<quoted text>It's Such A SHAME THAT THE DENINGERS ARE NOT ALIVE ANYMORE. I WISHED I COULD HAVE MET THEM.
LOL About Elmer When He Would Kill Or Hit A Critter He Would Say "DIE PAUL McCARTNEY." I Also LOL About Elmer Calling The Beatles "Blood Suckers." I'm Sure Orilla Was Very Kind Too.
I Would Have Enjoyed Spending Time With The Dear Sweet Deningers.
I Also Love The Tijuana Jail Song By The Kingston Trio. WOW From 1958 Too.
You're such a dufus you probably like Hang down your head Tom Dooley too.Nobody has heard of the hillbilly Deningers.
Annonomys

Rome, PA

#51 Jul 23, 2013
Here are some more songs that Elmer 1913-1967 & Orilla Deininger 1905-1991 Of RR#2 Box 145 Factoryville PA Loved To Listen To.
Can Anyone Explain By The Ames Brothers -1950

I Wanna Love You By The Ames Brothers- 1952
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Monique By Frank Sinatra- 1940 Something
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
When Elmer Hit Or Killed A Critter He Yelled
"DIE PAUL McCARTNEY." HA HA HA.
Chris

United States

#53 Jul 24, 2013
Annonomys wrote:
Here are some more songs that Elmer 1913-1967 & Orilla Deininger 1905-1991 Of RR#2 Box 145 Factoryville PA Loved To Listen To.
Can Anyone Explain By The Ames Brothers -1950
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =snyad3hZCjUXX
I Wanna Love You By The Ames Brothers- 1952
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Monique By Frank Sinatra- 1940 Something
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
When Elmer Hit Or Killed A Critter He Yelled
"DIE PAUL McCARTNEY." HA HA HA.
Nobody cares about all the horrible music you like. And as long as you continue to insult Sir Paul McCartney, we won't even give your crappy music a chance. Honestly, you sound like a kid with your childish comments. So I will treat you like a kid, so that means tonite after dinner you will straight to bed with no dessert.
Gilbo

Bothell, WA

#54 Jul 24, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>Nobody cares about all the horrible music you like. And as long as you continue to insult Sir Paul McCartney, we won't even give your crappy music a chance. Honestly, you sound like a kid with your childish comments. So I will treat you like a kid, so that means tonite after dinner you will straight to bed with no dessert.
That's telling him Chris. This fisheyed fool insults Mccartney but his taste in music is really Lame. Probably a Justin Bieber fan.
Chris

United States

#55 Jul 24, 2013
Gilbo wrote:
<quoted text>That's telling him Chris. This fisheyed fool insults Mccartney but his taste in music is really Lame. Probably a Justin Bieber fan.
JHe doesn't sound like he knows what good music is, so he probably is a Bieber fan. LOL
Gilbo

Seattle, WA

#56 Jul 24, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>JHe doesn't sound like he knows what good music is, so he probably is a Bieber fan. LOL
Yep he listens to Lady Gaga and Justin Timberlake but puts super talented Sir Paul down. Shows what an ignoramus he is.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#57 Jul 25, 2013
Annasophia Robb FO Real wrote:
<quoted text>Because, Paul McCartney Is SUCH AN ARROGANT LOSER WHO IS SO ANNOYING AND FULL OF HIMSELF!!!!!!!!!!
I LOVE JULIO IGLESIAS. I ESPECIALLLY LOVE HIS AND DIANA ROSS' Hit Song ALL OF YOU FROM 1984. That Song PUTS ME IN A GREAT MOOD.
LISTEN TO IT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =adskxpEecIoXX
JULIO IS A BETTER ENTERTAINER THAN PAUL.
WOULDN'T YOU AGREE?
Paul McCartney just happened to be the most popular ex Beatle in the seventies with his new band, Wings. Radio played him and he was mostly successful in that decade because he knew what people wanted to hear in the hit single format. Even though his albums never quite reached the level of The Beatles best work, Paul did write some catchy tunes that fit right in pop/rock radio. It doesn't make him better than other artists. He was Paul McCartney and that is why he was hugely successful. Of course, that didn't mean that his entire input was great but it has been collected on the excellent two disc set, "Wingspan"

Dude, Julio Iglesias sang with Willie Nelson on "All The Girls I've Loved Before" and I haven't heard him played anywhere since. Apples and oranges, man.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#58 Jul 26, 2013
Of course, everybody can have an opinion and if they happen not to like what they read, they tend to insult. Since The Beatles always had positive media attention, they get praised for how great they were. Yet, there has always been bands and performers who did great music but had very little coverage in the press. It seems that people should put things in perspective. Paul McCartney is always going to think he was the best singer/songwriter and musician of all-time. Why? It is because some people patting him on the back and telling him how great he is for the past fifty years. That and the power of what has been claimed and written about. But in reality, Paul McCartney hasn't done a classic tune in forty years. Deep inside, I think he knows that but why should he admit to it when he doesn't have to? He still commands big bucks because he does Beatles songs live on stage. He would never sell out if he just did his Wings and solo stuff. Paul gives people what they want to hear. Ringo Starr does live concerts also but he is not as celebrated as Paul McCartney is. I think it is normal for fans of The Beatles to want to support Paul. As long as the money keeps pouring in, McCartney will keep doing it. It is holding on to the past but to many, The Beatles will live forever. Not many have achieved that. The Rolling Stones do that also. They will keep going until they can not do it anymore.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#60 Jul 26, 2013
Elmer wrote:
<quoted text>It's better to burn out than fade away.
But because Paul McCartney has lost his voice, some are not going to be so kind on the criticism, while others will continue to blindly praise him because he is an ex Beatle. I'm sure Paul knows that his voice is shot. But it is just within the last couple of years. Other rock singers like Steven Tyler, David Lee Roth, Robert Plant all losing their singing abilities because they are aging. And they are still younger than Paul. However, Mick Jagger still sounds the same. Perhaps, Paul McCartney should consider retirement. I mean, he has billions to enjoy the rest of his life in comfort. I don't understand why he would put himself under the spotlight when he doesn't have to. The money is good but it is not everything. There comes a time when an artist should pack it in. Enjoy their successful life as a senior citizen. I would even say that to The Rolling Stones. They look ridiculous. The Beatles will never actually fade away if they have the "Love" show in Las Vegas and Beatle vault material Paul could be helping unearth. There are other more worthy projects he could be involved with.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#62 Jul 26, 2013
Elmer wrote:
<quoted text>He played Seattle last Friday and what I hear people that went saying Paul was great and he even did a few songs with the surviving members of Nirvana. At 71 he still does sound ok but of course not as good as he did at 40. Give him a break at 71 he still puts on a good show.few can do that.He enjoys what he does Octo so why shouldn't he be allowed to keep doing like Ringo?
I'm surprised Paul and Ringo have their own gigs...

Seriously, the concert tickets are way overpriced. The only people who can afford to go are well to do or wealthy. That turns me off. McCartney is like a big greedy corporation. It is not what rock n roll should be all about. Judging by his recent performances, I'd certainly be disappointed if I spent all that money for a show that wasn't up to par. But money talks...
Chris

United States

#64 Jul 27, 2013
Elmer wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah I didn't go because you are right tickets were very high and I didn't want the hassle of paying 40 bucks to park and be with 45 thousand people. Ringo is good because he has different all stars on each tour and his ticket prices are more reasonable plus he plays smaller venues which I like.He enjoys playing a lot and it shows when he is performing. Paul is working on another album but I'm not sure if it will be any good or not. He hasn't done outstanding since Venus and Mars or Band on the Run. Memory almost full wasn't a very good record in my opinion.I hated the most recent stuff that sounded like Tony Bennett. My valentine wasn't my choice of music. You may be right if he didn't do Beatle songs he might not be able to sell out. He can still sing some of the old Beatle songs pretty good for an old guy.
Ill admit some his more recent stuff isn't good, although their are a few gems. But saying he hasn't done any good albums since Wings is ludicrous. In the 80s he had some good albums with Tug of War being the best. In the 90s he did Flowers in the Dirt?which was good & Flaming Pie which was one his best ever. And he could definitely sell out even if he didn't do a lot of Beatles songs. He didn't do that many back in the 70s with Wings & he still sold out. And when he returned to touring back in the early 90s, only about a third of the show were Beatle tunes. He reluctantly started doing more Beatle songs, because his promotor talked him into it &i it's what his fans wanted. So don't try to make it sound like he's only doing for the money.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#65 Jul 27, 2013
Elmer wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah I didn't go because you are right tickets were very high and I didn't want the hassle of paying 40 bucks to park and be with 45 thousand people. Ringo is good because he has different all stars on each tour and his ticket prices are more reasonable plus he plays smaller venues which I like.He enjoys playing a lot and it shows when he is performing. Paul is working on another album but I'm not sure if it will be any good or not. He hasn't done outstanding since Venus and Mars or Band on the Run. Memory almost full wasn't a very good record in my opinion.I hated the most recent stuff that sounded like Tony Bennett. My valentine wasn't my choice of music. You may be right if he didn't do Beatle songs he might not be able to sell out. He can still sing some of the old Beatle songs pretty good for an old guy.
The biggest concert I've ever been to is The Stones in Boston at the start of their 2005 tour. I paid a hundred bucks. It was a lot of fun because the fans were friendly and everyone had a great time. But the concert wasn't all that great because The Stones seemed tired, just going through the motions. In the middle of the show, The Stones moved to a smaller stage in the audience but instead of doing the blues, they did their disco set. Bathroom break for me. I'm just disappointed how much the concert tickets have skyrocketed in recent years for big time acts.

I didn't much care for McCartney's "My Valentine" either but it the song was still better than his Nirvana number. It just didn't work. I'm not sure where Paul McCartney can go at this point in his career. I wish that he would step up to the plate and comb the Apple vaults for some unusual Beatle releases because that is what I believe people want. For example: The Stones double disc rerelease of "Exile On Main Street" with bonus studio outtakes from the sessions. It was well worth getting. The Stones seem to be aware that people want to hear expanded stuff from their legendary peak years. I would think Paul and Ringo would want to work with Yoko and George's estate to get some extras out for fans.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#66 Jul 27, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>Ill admit some his more recent stuff isn't good, although their are a few gems. But saying he hasn't done any good albums since Wings is ludicrous. In the 80s he had some good albums with Tug of War being the best. In the 90s he did Flowers in the Dirt?which was good & Flaming Pie which was one his best ever. And he could definitely sell out even if he didn't do a lot of Beatles songs. He didn't do that many back in the 70s with Wings & he still sold out. And when he returned to touring back in the early 90s, only about a third of the show were Beatle tunes. He reluctantly started doing more Beatle songs, because his promotor talked him into it &i it's what his fans wanted. So don't try to make it sound like he's only doing for the money.
"Tug Of War" was a decent album and even the soundtrack from "Give My Regards To Broad Street" was a decent album in the mid eighties.
But it is very difficult for Paul at this stage to top The Beatles because Wings never could. Granted, Wings made a few classics but the albums were spotty at best. I have Wings Greatest on vinyl and was disappointed with the "All The Best" CD because the sound quality was horrible. "Wingspan" corrected the problem though. It has pretty much all the best songs Paul McCartney has done. Paul has a few great Wings hits that people still want to hear live but it would be foolish not to do a healthy dose of Beatle tunes. Fans expect them for such high ticket prices. Today, big name artists command that to make up for the lost of CD sales.
Chris

United States

#67 Jul 27, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
"Tug Of War" was a decent album and even the soundtrack from "Give My Regards To Broad Street" was a decent album in the mid eighties.
But it is very difficult for Paul at this stage to top The Beatles because Wings never could. Granted, Wings made a few classics but the albums were spotty at best. I have Wings Greatest on vinyl and was disappointed with the "All The Best" CD because the sound quality was horrible. "Wingspan" corrected the problem though. It has pretty much all the best songs Paul McCartney has done. Paul has a few great Wings hits that people still want to hear live but it would be foolish not to do a healthy dose of Beatle tunes. Fans expect them for such high ticket prices. Today, big name artists command that to make up for the lost of CD sales.
I know Paul with & without Wings could never top what he did with the Beatles. But I do think he has enough good songs, that he could still sell out arenas without doing a lot of Beatles songs. He proved it back in the 70s with Wings. He wanted to prove he could do it on his own, without relying on his Beatles legacy. And I think he succeed. He's one of the few performere out there who can do whatever he wants, & people will still love him.
Octopus

Albany, NY

#68 Jul 27, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>I know Paul with & without Wings could never top what he did with the Beatles. But I do think he has enough good songs, that he could still sell out arenas without doing a lot of Beatles songs. He proved it back in the 70s with Wings. He wanted to prove he could do it on his own, without relying on his Beatles legacy. And I think he succeed. He's one of the few performere out there who can do whatever he wants, & people will still love him.
I would have to disagree with you there.

If Paul wasn't playing Beatles tunes, he'd be playing clubs.

Most people want to hear The Beatles rather than Wings stuff.

The Beatles had stronger material and a larger catalog of hits.

I think Paul knows that and can take advantage of his Beatle legacy.

That is why he can still command a $400 ticket price and get it.

And that is why Ozzy is playing with Black Sabbath again.

They can make more money together as a band unit than apart.

It is no longer the eighties. People want to hear the original classics done as close as possible by the established artist.

That is nothing to be ashamed of, you know.
Annasophia Robb FO Real

Springville, PA

#69 Aug 6, 2013
You Know Who Else Is Better Than PAUL FUCKCARTNEY?
DURAN DURAN Hungry Like The Wolf From The Year 1982. I Love To Sing Along To This Wonderful Song.
As KOJACK SAYS "MUSIC TO MY EARS."
Why Don't You Listen To This Wonderful 1982 Hit.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Beatles Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
For your eyes only (Feb '15) 15 hr Little monster 42
The Beatles Are Overrated (Jul '09) May 25 Greg 1,079
News Michael Jackson: Your number one music icon (Aug '10) May 19 Spotted Wee 137
News Rihanna Ties Michael Jackson On The List Of Car... May 18 Burning Love 2
News You can't always get what you want, but maybe a... Apr '16 Amused Octopus 1
News Beatles Albums, Ranked Worst to Best (Jun '15) Apr '16 JJJ 2
News Paul McCartney's concert 'the heaviest show on ... Apr '16 King Prince 4
More from around the web