- Jun 19, 2003
- 23,448
- 40
- 91
I think the Beatles are awesome, however my friends says that The Rolling Stones are a lot better. What do you think?
Originally posted by: ELP
Beatles.
It is an insult to compare them to the Rolling Stones.
Originally posted by: compudog
Different classification IMHO. Tough one to actually say who is better. There are more Stones alive than Beatles? Does that make the Stones better? I think both bands will live on.
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
The question of whether Keith Richards is technically "alive" could be a good subject for someone's doctoral thesis.
I'd say Beatles. I'm not a big fan, but I think they were much more influential than the Stones.
Originally posted by: lowfatbaconboy
yea don't think you can compare them.............(bad analogy but whatever)
its like comparing some great pop singer and some great rock singer......doesn't work so well
yeah, but John couldnt prevent the actions of Mark David Chapman (the deranged fan who shot and killed John Lennon). and cancer got George Harrison.Originally posted by: compudog
LOL! But there ar still more Stones alive than Beatles.
Originally posted by: compudog
Different classification IMHO. Tough one to actually say who is better. There are more Stones alive than Beatles? Does that make the Stones better? I think both bands will live on.
Originally posted by: hdeck
they both suck. it's like choosing between aids and cancer.