930 Forums

=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 12:27:00 pm

Title: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 12:27:00 pm
can someone please tell me to NEVER watch that crap ever again.  i want 3 hours of my life back.  The White Stripes performance was maybe the only highlight.
 
   I was so mad after it was over, that i went and downloaded some music to feel better about what the music industry did to me.
 
   and Radiohead won a grammy  :)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bombay Chutney on February 09, 2004, 12:40:00 pm
I watched all 3 hours for the first time since I was a kid.  It was pretty bad.  White Stripes were great.  I thought Robert Randolph was probably the best performer of the night.  Foo Fighters with Chick Corea were also pretty good.  I was actually pretty impressed with Christina Aguilwhatever during her performance.  She actually had clothes on, which forced you to pay attention to her voice, which was damn nice.  Then she came up to accept an award with her tits practically falling out, which caused her to lose what little respect she had just earned.
 
 How funny was it when Celine Dion's microphone and ear monitor didn't work?   I'll bet she's still yelling at someone about that.
 
 And it's always a treat to see Bootsy.   :)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bags on February 09, 2004, 12:44:00 pm
Actually, I enjoyed more of the show than I thought I would.  I haven't watched the grammies in about 6, 7 years because it has SO little to do with music I (or anyone I know) listen to.  
 
 But this year, I was home and too sleepy to do much else (after a long, busy, great weekend in NY); I kept hearing about that Clash tribute last year that was supposedly really cool; Foo Fighters were performing; and, I love the Outkast album and figured they'd dominate.
 
 -  I loved the opening with Prince and Beyonce.  Don't care that she was there in particular (though her dress was cool), but they did three Prince classics, and he was on it.  A cool opening I didn't expect.
 
 - Foo Fighters with Chick Corea....'nuff said.
 
 - Outkast was good, Justin Timberlake was interesting to me (he IS trying to be the white, seeing Stevie Wonder which I found funny and a little endearing), Sting did "Roxanne" and any Police song on t.v. is a good Police song.  Plus he wore a skirt, which I found a hoot 'cuz it really looked like a skirt, not a kilt.
 
 - The whole R&B, rap, funk explosion thing was cool, and I'm glad they're paying tribute to the whole genre, as it certainly dominates music today.
 
 - Beatles tribute band was really lame (Dave Matthews -- eewww, some country guy, Sting and another guy I can't remember).  President's Award to the band on the 40th anniversary of their US invasion, with Harrison and Lennon widows, was pretty good because they didn't do a whole hokey, long video montage or some shit.  The widows and Ringo and Paul saying thanks.  Classy.  Ono a bit odd, but was moved by the plea for peace.  Can't fault her for that.
 
 - I like that the show was really dedicated to so many musical performances, many of which interestingly paired artists with one another.  At least that makes them performances you'll never see anywhere else.
 
 Hey, no one is more surprised than I that I didn't hate the telecast.  Maybe I'm just getting old.     :p
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bags on February 09, 2004, 12:49:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Skeeter:
 [QB] How funny was it when Celine Dion's microphone and ear monitor didn't work?   I'll bet she's still yelling at someone about that.
 QB]
Forgot about that!  Awesome -- though would have been better if her mike had never come on.  
 
 Also, White Stripes were fine; exactly the same performance I just saw at GW...  He really can make that guitar scream, though, can't he?
 
 I don't like the way Aguilera has to make every lyric bounce around across fifteen notes over three octaves.  I just hate that kind of vocal.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 12:50:00 pm
Robert Randolph did kick some ass now that you mention it.
 
 
 i wont ever watch the grammy's again.  unless i get invited to go.
 
 the Junos are much better.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: mankie on February 09, 2004, 01:10:00 pm
So did anyone other than that hippity hoppity garbage and, "your 15 minutes are over, please leave by the nearest exit" Coldplay win anything?
 
 We rented Johnny English, which was disapointing but still better than the gammies I know.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 01:11:00 pm
this was the first grammies i'd seen in awhile as well. and here is what we learned from them...
 
 downloading music and nipples are naughty.
 
 prince still has it, and george clinton not so much.  sarah mclachlan's favorite zep album was "the song remains the same". and there is still a bit of spark in earth wind and fire.
 
 someone needs to point out to Justin "Pat Boone wannabie" Timberlake. that corey feldmen, vanilla ice and jason kay have tagged as has beens.  All that was missing last night was the goofy hat and digererdoo.
 
 the beatles tribute was poorly executed.  vince gill good choice, pharrell williams (of the neptunes) showed they were thinking outside the box. but come on was Sting the only bass player available? and just how crappy is Dave Matthews voice.  Where was Jon Brion or Jason Falkner...
 
 the only remotely political comment was made by a brit...
 
 lastly the "hott" kiwi presenter was keith urban who is a country bumpkin
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Celeste on February 09, 2004, 01:13:00 pm
I only watched intermittently...the Dungeonmaster guy on Dateline was much more interesting trash TV fare...however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise...that Beatles tribute was heinous...and Celine... I agree about her and once her mic was working I had to turn it off...I caught another part of it where Beyonce was singing about "dangerous love" in some kind of picture frame set that was kinda cheesy, but the lyrics to the song were interesting to me...and Alicia Keyes doing the Luther song was aw-ight, if you like that...
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 01:23:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mankie:
  So did anyone other than that hippity hoppity garbage and, "your 15 minutes are over, please leave by the nearest exit" Coldplay win anything?
 
 We rented Johnny English, which was disapointing but still better than the gammies I know.
Coldplay won best freakin record of the year or something.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Random Citizen on February 09, 2004, 01:25:00 pm
*perk*
 
 Ooh, he is hot, short, but I wouldn't kick him out of bed.  :D  
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
 lastly the "hott" kiwi presenter was keith urban who is a country bumpkin
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bombay Chutney on February 09, 2004, 01:26:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
 
 prince still has it, and george clinton not so much.  
 
I was real disappointed by this.  I was hoping P-Funk would come out and tear the roof off the place and put all these rappers and crummy "contemporary r&b" folks in their place.  But they didn't.  EW&F was definitely much better.  So much for "Let's Take It To The Stage".
 
 Prince still rocks though.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 01:26:00 pm
and just so you know
 
 the winner for Best Enigineered Album Non-Classical was Nigel Godrich for Hail To The Thief
 
 
 i doubt that made the telecast, tho  ;)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 01:29:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Random Citizen:
  *perk*
 
 Ooh, he is hot, short, but I wouldn't kick him out of bed.   :D  
 
   
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
 lastly the "hott" kiwi presenter was keith urban who is a country bumpkin
[/b]
kosmette missed his name when he was announced and was very curious as to who he was   :D
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 01:32:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
 however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise
its really only a matter of time until Jack White is considered one of the best guitarists around.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 01:36:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
 however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise
its really only a matter of time until Jack White is considered one of the best guitarists around. [/b]
i wasn't paying close attention, but others have pointed out that jack's voice was in real rough shape last night.  and i do believe that white stripes now have three members in the band with two female backup singers   ;)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: brennser on February 09, 2004, 01:39:00 pm
Quote
the beatles tribute was poorly executed. vince gill good choice, pharrell williams (of the neptunes) showed they were thinking outside the box. but come on was Sting the only bass player available? and just how crappy is Dave Matthews voice. Where was Jon Brion or Jason Falkner...  
or greg dulli, or thurston moore, or dave grohl (ok he was there).....anyone remember when these guys covered a bunch of Beatles songs for the movie Backbeat - they were great
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 01:42:00 pm
MILF alert... JT's mom
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bags on February 09, 2004, 01:42:00 pm
Now THIS should have been on the telecast....
 
 Best Rock Album
 (Vocal or Instrumental. Includes Hard Rock and Metal.)
 
 One By One
 Foo Fighters
 [RCA/Roswell Records]
 
 Other wins I like:
 
 Best Rock Song
 (A Songwriter(s) Award. Includes Rock, Hard Rock & Metal songs. For Song Eligibility Guidelines see Category #3. (Artist names appear in parenthesis.) Singles or Tracks only.)
 
 Seven Nation Army
 Jack White, songwriter (The White Stripes)
 Track from: Elephant
 
 ********************************
 Best Alternative Music Album
 (Vocal or Instrumental.)
 
 Elephant
 The White Stripes
 [V2/ThirdMan Records]
 ******************************
 Best Spoken Word Album
 (Narrated/dramatized books include authors' names in parenthesis for identification.)
 
 Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair And Balanced Look At The Right (Al Franken)
 Al Franken
 [HighBridge Audio]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bombay Chutney on February 09, 2004, 01:42:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by brennser:
  anyone remember when these guys covered a bunch of Beatles songs for the movie Backbeat - they were great
I never saw that movie, but they did a great job with the soundtrack.  Great stuff.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 01:50:00 pm
The same can be said for Ricky Skaggs' mandolin playing.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
 however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise
its really only a matter of time until Jack White is considered one of the best guitarists around. [/b]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: mankie on February 09, 2004, 02:04:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
  MILF alert... JT's mom
NOW you've got my attention...pics pics pics!!!
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 02:18:00 pm
ain't it grand that Evanescence won the grammies kiss of death award "best new artist"... joining the likes of sheena easton, milli vanilli
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 02:25:00 pm
And Shelby Lynne and Norah Jones...both of whom are doing quite well.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
  ain't it grand that Evanescence won the grammies kiss of death award "best new artist"... joining the likes of sheena easton, milli vanilli
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: ggw on February 09, 2004, 02:35:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  And Shelby Lynne and Norah Jones...both of whom are doing quite well.
 
Norah Jones hasn't released anything other than the album she won the award for.
 
 Shelby Lynne??  I had to look her up.
 
 Yeah, she's doing great.  Her last album peaked at #165.  Wow.  She's really taking the world by storm.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 02:46:00 pm
the new norah comes out tomorrow just in time for valentines day giving... it will be interesting to see what it does sales wise.  
 
 the best new artist grammy has a reputation of being a career killer,  men at work anyone?  but there are cases where it doesn't completely kill 'em off i.e. sade
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 02:58:00 pm
Still big enough to be playing a $25 show at the 9:30 club within the last six months.
 
    Just because someone doesn't have huge mainstream success OR you cloistered little indie world doesn't mean that they don't have a solid, loyal fanbase or much critical acclaim.
 
    I'll bet you'd have to look up half of the bands that sell out the 9:30 Club.
 
 
 [/qb][/QUOTE]Norah Jones hasn't released anything other than the album she won the award for.
 
 Shelby Lynne??  I had to look her up.
 
  [/QB][/QUOTE]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bags on February 09, 2004, 03:07:00 pm
Posted on Sun, Feb. 23, 2003  
 The State.com
 
 Best New Artist? It could be a curse
 
 Damien McCaffery got it right in the current issue of Vibe.
 
 In a piece titled "The Grammy Whammy," the associate editor went back in time and dissected the list of "best new artist" Grammy winners to determine whether the award was a blessing or a curse for the recipient.
 
 Here's how McCaffery rated 10 former winners:
 
 1990: Mariah Carey beat the Black Crowes, Kentucky Headhunters, Lisa Stanfield and Wilson Phillips. McCaffery's verdict: Blessing. "Carey's next nine records went platinum," he wrote.
 
 1991: Memphis-based singer John Cohn beat Boyz II Men, C+C Music Factory, Color Me Badd and Seal. The verdict: Curse. "Cohn came from nowhere, grabbed the BNA and rapidly returned to nowhere."
 
 1992: Hip-hop group Arrested Development beat Billy Ray Cyrus, Sophie B. Hawkins, Kris Kross and Jon Secada. The verdict: Curse. Their debut, "â??'3 years, 5 Months, and 2 Days in the Life of â??.â??.â??.' predicted the duration of our tolerance," McCaffery wrote.
 
 1993: R&B singer Toni Braxton beat Belly, Blind Melon, Digable Planets and SWV. The verdict: Blessing. "After her self-titled debut, Braxton kept scoring with progressively sexier, cattier songs."
 
 1994: Sheryl Crow beat Ace of Base, Counting Crows, Crash Test Dummies and Green Day. The verdict: Blessing. "Her follow-up (albums) sold well."
 
 1995: S.C. pop-rock band Hootie and the Blowfish beat Brandy, Alanis Morissette, Joan Osborne and Shania Twain. The verdict: Curse. "After their 14-times platinum debut, 'Cracked Rear View,' album sales in '96, '98 and 2000 proved we were hootied out."
 
 1996: Country singer Leann Rimes beat Garbage, Jewel, No Doubt, and the Tony Rich Project. The verdict: Blessing. "Rimes hit it big at 14 with 'Blue.' Two follow-ups also went multiplatinum."
 
 1997: Pop singer Paula Cole beat Fiona Apple, Erykah Badu, Hanson and Puff Daddy. The verdict: Curse. "The swift demise of her 1999 CD answered the question 'Where Have All the Cowboys Gone?' By then, we were gettin' freaky with Barenaked Ladies."
 
 1998: Lauryn Hill beat Backstreet Boys, Andrea Bocelli, Dixie Chicks and Natalie Imbruglia. The verdict: Blessing and Curse. "Hill's solo debut was a critical and commercial hit, but the stress of representing for all conscious sisters who look hot got to her."
 
 1999: Pop diva Christina Aguilera beat Macy Gray, Kid Rock, Britney Spears and Susan Tedeschi. The verdict: Blessing. "Shockingly, judges chose the 'Teen Sexpot Who Could Actually Sing.'â??"
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: ggw on February 09, 2004, 03:12:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
 Just because someone doesn't have huge mainstream success OR you cloistered little indie world doesn't mean that they don't have a solid, loyal fanbase or much critical acclaim.
 
And Sheena Easton has a loyal fanbase and sells out shows in Branson, Vegas and Atlantic City on a regular basis.
 
 The point was that the New Artist Award has the reputation of auguring a downfall from mainstream success.
 
 Dumbass.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Joymonster on February 09, 2004, 03:14:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  Still big enough to be playing a $25 show at the 9:30 club within the last six months.
 
    Just because someone doesn't have huge mainstream success OR you cloistered little indie world doesn't mean that they don't have a solid, loyal fanbase or much critical acclaim.
 
    I'll bet you'd have to look up half of the bands that sell out the 9:30 Club.
 
 
 
Norah Jones hasn't released anything other than the album she won the award for.
 
 Shelby Lynne??  I had to look her up.
 
  [/QB][/QUOTE] [/QB][/QUOTE]
 
 I've seen Shelby Lynne twice at the 9:30. Neither gigs were sell-outs. PLENTY of walking room, actually.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 03:20:00 pm
which is what can be hoped for with regards to Evanescence.  any guess on to what year they hit jaxx?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: ggw on February 09, 2004, 03:20:00 pm
1959 â?? Bobby Darin
 1960 â?? Bob Newhart
 1961 â?? Peter Nero
 1962 â?? Robert Goulet
 1963 â?? Ward Swingle
 1964 â?? The Beatles
 1965 â?? Tom Jones
 1967 â?? Bobbie Gentry
 1968 â?? Jose Feliciano
 1969 â?? Crosby, Stills & Nash
 1970 â?? The Carpenters
 1971 â?? Carly Simon
 1972 â?? America
 1973 â?? Bette Midler
 1974 â?? Marvin Hamlisch
 1975 â?? Natalie Cole
 1976 â?? Starland Vocal Band
 1977 â?? Debby Boone
 1978 â?? Taste of Honey
 1979 â?? Rickie Lee Jones
 1980 â?? Christopher Cross
 1981 â?? Sheena Easton
 1982 â?? Men At Work
 1983 â?? Culture Club
 1984 â?? Cyndi Lauper
 1985 â?? Sade
 1986 â?? Bruce Hornsby & The Range
 1987 â?? Jody Watley
 1988 â?? Tracy Chapman
 1989 â?? Milli Vanilli
 1990 â?? Mariah Carey
 1991 â?? Marc Cohn
 1992 â?? Arrested Development
 1993 â?? Toni Braxton
 1994 â?? Sheryl Crow
 1995 â?? Hootie & The Blowfish
 1996 â?? LeAnn Rimes
 1997 â?? Paula Cole
 1998 â?? Lauryn Hill
 1999 â?? Christina Aguilera
 2000 â?? Shelby Lynne
 2001 â?? Alicia Keys
 2002 â?? Norah Jones
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Celeste on February 09, 2004, 03:23:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
 however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise
its really only a matter of time until Jack White is considered one of the best guitarists around. [/b]
around where?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 03:24:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
   
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
 however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise
its really only a matter of time until Jack White is considered one of the best guitarists around. [/b]
around where? [/b]
your ass. hopefully, that should be big enough eh?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 03:31:00 pm
You are a sizist prick, and you need to apologize immediately. On this board, we don't make fun of people based on skin color, sex, or body size.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
   
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
     
Quote
Originally posted by Celeste:
 however I did catch the White Stripes which I found to be horrible noise
its really only a matter of time until Jack White is considered one of the best guitarists around. [/b]
around where? [/b]
your ass. hopefully, that should be big enough eh? [/b]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: keithstg on February 09, 2004, 03:36:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
 [QB] You are a sizist prick, and you need to apologize immediately. On this board, we don't make fun of people based on skin color, sex, or body size.
 
Quote

 Ha ha ha. Proof that no matter how dim the bulb, most of the time they eventually turn on.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: ggw on February 09, 2004, 03:41:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  You are a sizist prick, and you need to apologize immediately. On this board, we don't make fun of people based on skin color, sex, or body size.
 
There's a difference between flaming a flamer and an unprovoked flame of a non-regular poster using the board to post an issue pertaining to the club - a distinction that is probably lost on someone of your limited mental capacity.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 03:46:00 pm
In other words, it's more ok to mock people you know than people you don't know. Brilliant.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  You are a sizist prick, and you need to apologize immediately. On this board, we don't make fun of people based on skin color, sex, or body size.
 
There's a difference between flaming a flamer and an unprovoked flame of a non-regular poster using the board to post an issue pertaining to the club - a distinction that is probably lost on someone of your limited mental capacity. [/b]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 03:51:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  You are a sizist prick, and you need to apologize immediately. On this board, we don't make fun of people based on skin color, sex, or body size.
 
<img src="http://www.art-galleries-schubert.com.au/www/richard_bell/graphics/I_not_sorry_big.jpg" alt=" - " />
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: ggw on February 09, 2004, 03:52:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  In other words, it's more ok to mock people you know than people you don't know. Brilliant.
 
In other words, it's acceptable to give it back to someone who dishes it out.  It's not so acceptable to make an unprovoked insult of somebody who is using the forum for a legitimate purpose.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 03:53:00 pm
the distinguished gentlemen from maryland yawns and considers the fluff in his navel...
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 03:55:00 pm
And before this escalates into some kind of war, let me just say my my comments to Sonick were meant to be sarcastic, not serious.
 
    He can call my wife a fatass all he wants. In spite of that, I've yet to meet anyone who posts on this board who has an ass that's anywhere near as nice as hers. I'll bet if Sonick ever meets her, he might even agree.  :)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 03:56:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
 I'll bet if Sonick ever meets her, he might even agree.   :)  
then quit getting all pissy-pants
 
  she made a smart ass comment to me, i made one back.  neither were very clever.  end of story.
 
   and i would bet my ass is ALMOST as nice as hers.  ask markie, he likes it.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 09, 2004, 03:58:00 pm
Where was Celeste dishing it out? Seems to me all she said was she didn't think much of Jack White's playing.
 
    If you can find a thread where Celeste personally insulted Sonick with him having first insulted either her or myself (and if she did, I'm sure you can), then I stand corrected.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  In other words, it's more ok to mock people you know than people you don't know. Brilliant.
 
In other words, it's acceptable to give it back to someone who dishes it out.  It's not so acceptable to make an unprovoked insult of somebody who is using the forum for a legitimate purpose. [/b]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 04:07:00 pm
here you go rhett:
   <img src="http://www.blogdriverswaltz.com/archive/archives/BooHoo-thumb.jpg" alt=" - " />
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Celeste on February 09, 2004, 04:22:00 pm
I am a lucky girl to have a man that comes to the defense of my ass. He knows what side his bread is buttered on, that's for sure.
 
 No tears from me, though. I have numerous flaws, but my ass is not one of them.
 
 I'm sorry, I just didn't find anything at all special about the Stripes performance last night, or Jack White's playing in particular.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 04:31:00 pm
i propose that to simplify our busy lives we set up a list of responses and questions and just type the corresponding number when need be i.e.
 
 instead of having to type.
 
 you flaming ignoramus xxxx is the best band in the world and you suck.
 
 all that would be required to type is: 2 radiohead
 
 or
 
 when are tickets to my favorite band in the whole world xxxx going on sale.
 
 1 the darkness
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Celeste on February 09, 2004, 04:33:00 pm
yeah...talk to the site developer about that...could be interesting...
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 04:35:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
  i propose that to simplify our busy lives we set up a list of responses and questions and just type the corresponding number when need be i.e.
 
 instead of having to type.
 
 you flaming ignoramus xxxx is the best band in the world and you suck.
 
 all that would be required to type is: 2 radiohead
 
 or
 
 when are tickets to my favorite band in the whole world xxxx going on sale.
 
 1 the darkness
can we make Radiohead 1 please?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 04:36:00 pm
decoder rings available with 10 ovaltine proofs of purchase
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: on February 09, 2004, 04:40:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
  .
 
 you flaming ignoramus xxxx is the best band in the world and you suck.
 
 all that would be required to type is: 2 radiohead
 
 
FYI:  It should read YOU ARE SUCK.
 
 Thanks.  BTW, when are you gonna book them? (http://www.lilgnr.com/)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: kosmo vinyl on February 09, 2004, 04:42:00 pm
the lineup for xxxx festival is yyyy
 
 3a kosmo's universal love 3b  the shazam, cheap trick, splitsville, pixies, ash, the coral, foo fighters, the detroit cobras, i'm bored with this
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: SalParadise on February 09, 2004, 04:50:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
  can someone please tell me to NEVER watch that crap ever again.  i want 3 hours of my life back.  The White Stripes performance was maybe the only highlight.
 
   I was so mad after it was over, that i went and downloaded some music to feel better about what the music industry did to me.
 
   and Radiohead won a grammy   :)  
you'll probably make this same post next year.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: on February 09, 2004, 04:55:00 pm
<img src="http://www.jonbounds.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/private/brownstripes.jpg" alt=" - " />
  The Brown Stripes?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 09, 2004, 05:12:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by SalParadise:
   
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
  can someone please tell me to NEVER watch that crap ever again.  i want 3 hours of my life back.  The White Stripes performance was maybe the only highlight.
 
   I was so mad after it was over, that i went and downloaded some music to feel better about what the music industry did to me.
 
   and Radiohead won a grammy    :)  
you'll probably make this same post next year. [/b]
doubt it.  I have never watched the grammy's until this year.  and i certainly wont again.  I am not a TV guy in the first place, it just so happened the awards fell on NHL All-Star weekend  ;)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: on February 09, 2004, 05:24:00 pm
<img src="http://daronmalakian.net/b3ta/blackstripes.jpg" alt=" - " />
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: SalParadise on February 09, 2004, 05:28:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by SalParadise:
   
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
  can someone please tell me to NEVER watch that crap ever again.  i want 3 hours of my life back.  The White Stripes performance was maybe the only highlight.
 
   I was so mad after it was over, that i went and downloaded some music to feel better about what the music industry did to me.
 
   and Radiohead won a grammy     :)    
you'll probably make this same post next year. [/b]
doubt it.  I have never watched the grammy's until this year.  and i certainly wont again.  I am not a TV guy in the first place, it just so happened the awards fell on NHL All-Star weekend   ;)  [/b]
ok.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: flawd101 on February 09, 2004, 05:40:00 pm
outkast was the only decent thing....if Christina Aguwhatthefuck didnt have a head that whould be good.....i wonder when she will realize she had the dress on backwards...shwing
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: on February 09, 2004, 05:43:00 pm
Don't forget this hi-lite
 
   <img src="http://www.alistairgray.co.uk/images/random/thombjork.jpg" alt=" - " />
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: on February 09, 2004, 07:25:00 pm
<img src="http://www.nomoralfibre.co.uk/images/b3ta/fatstripes.jpg" alt=" - " />
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Random Citizen on February 10, 2004, 09:46:00 am
:D  [/QB][/QUOTE]
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Bags on February 10, 2004, 11:33:00 am
<img src="http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/02/10/arts/10GRAM.184.jpg" alt=" - " />
 
 At the after parties....beauty and the beast?  Dumb and dumber?  Ho and....ho on drugs and past her prime?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: on February 10, 2004, 11:42:00 am
<img src="http://www.home.zonnet.nl/de_vries579/john-wayne-gacy/gacy0005.jpg" alt=" - " />
   <img src="http://www.gweilodiaries.com/archives/Murderer.bmp" alt=" - " />
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: mankie on February 10, 2004, 11:47:00 am
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
 [/b]
and i would bet my ass is ALMOST as nice as hers.  ask markie, he likes it. [/QB]
I bet your arse can't even come close to Celeste's arse.....I'd like to come close to Celeste's arse though I must admit.  ;)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: markie on February 10, 2004, 12:14:00 pm
Why must we objectivise people, especially loved ones, to just body parts?
 
 Sonick, I am sure all of you is lovely, apart from the silly goatee.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer on February 10, 2004, 12:26:00 pm
Does this mean there will be no more board references to Samantha's lovely breasts?
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by mark e smith:
  Why must we objectivise people, especially loved ones, to just body parts?
 
 Sonick, I am sure all of you is lovely, apart from the silly goatee.
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: markie on February 10, 2004, 12:29:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rutherford J. Balls:
  Does this mean there will be no more board references to Samantha's lovely breasts?
 
  [Sonick, I am sure all of you is lovely, apart from the silly goatee.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
 
 I was being sarcastic, wasn't it obvious? (who do I sound like now?)
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: mankie on February 10, 2004, 03:28:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mark e smith:
  Why must we objectivise people, especially loved ones, to just body parts?
 
 Sonick, I am sure all of you is lovely, apart from the silly goatee.
But doesn't it tickle your balls and add to the experience?
Title: Re: grammy awards
Post by: sonickteam2 on February 10, 2004, 03:56:00 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mankie:
   
Quote
Originally posted by mark e smith:
  Why must we objectivise people, especially loved ones, to just body parts?
 
 Sonick, I am sure all of you is lovely, apart from the silly goatee.
But doesn't it tickle your balls and add to the experience? [/b]
you mean his "ball"
 
 i thought you knew?