ReflectedLight Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 i rarely read the ny trash but i was having a cup of coffee at work and was flicking through the paper. top 40 rejects of the rock and roll hall of garbage had rush at # 33. the article was written by a clueless jim farber. #33 rush "they may never live down that first awful decade before they got their act together (circa"tom sawyer"). even so, they're too proggy for hof tastes." first awful decade???the 70's? some of the other hof rejects mentioned were the flying burrito brothers, hard rocking linda ronstadt, chic, and the b-52's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theredtamasrule Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 If La Villa = awful then f**k the HOF, that writer and the whole lot of 'em. If loving Rush is wrong, I don't wanna be right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillerInstinct Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 AFTK & Hemispheres awful = Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted March 15, 2010 Author Share Posted March 15, 2010 here's the article. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/m...ll_of_fame.html if you haven't figured it out yet, journalism is dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Krinkle Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Mar 15 2010, 12:28 PM) #33 rush "they may never live down that first awful decade before they got their act together (circa"tom sawyer"). even so, they're too proggy for hof tastes." HA! Too proggy for the HOF!! Gotta laugh at that one. Ever had a listen to Genesis records from the band's beginning through around 1980? Give me a break. FVCK the RRHOF once and for all. Look. Even Alex Lifeson himself has said that the band dosen't (my embellishment here) give a rats ass about the RRHOF. Either should you or anyone else here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khan Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Dr. John ahead of ?????? Holy shit this guy is a total http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/KublaKhan/idiot.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanadoo Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 moving pictures= trash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankad89 Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Some people will simply never understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakesideMaiden Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 wow...apparently 2112 was awful... The 2112 that went platinum 3 F'N TIMES....right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzy85 Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 I've never held the RRHOF as any kind of musical standard I adhere to. Never. I don't even know who has made it on the list. I'm sure the Beatles and the Stones are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MULTIPLIED REACTION Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 The NY Times is a rag of a paper. Who cares what they think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 LOL. f*ckin AWFUL THAT SPIRIT OF RADIO SONG THEY PLAY ON THE RADIO EVERY WEEK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted March 15, 2010 Author Share Posted March 15, 2010 QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 02:49 PM) The NY Times is a rag of a paper. Who cares what they think. it was actually the daily news but they are all rags. i wouldn't waste 50cents buying any of the papers. the only newspaper i like on occasion is salt water fishing. i need to know where they are bitin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MULTIPLIED REACTION Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Mar 15 2010, 03:10 PM) QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 02:49 PM) The NY Times is a rag of a paper. Who cares what they think. it was actually the daily news but they are all rags. i wouldn't waste 50cents buying any of the papers. the only newspaper i like on occasion is salt water fishing. i need to know where they are bitin'. Oops, my bad. But they both suck, just like the Boston Globe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanadoo Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 03:50 PM) QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Mar 15 2010, 03:10 PM) QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 02:49 PM) The NY Times is a rag of a paper. Who cares what they think. it was actually the daily news but they are all rags. i wouldn't waste 50cents buying any of the papers. the only newspaper i like on occasion is salt water fishing. i need to know where they are bitin'. Oops, my bad. But they both suck, just like the Boston Globe. agreed minus the sports section Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MULTIPLIED REACTION Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 QUOTE (Zanadoo @ Mar 15 2010, 03:53 PM) QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 03:50 PM) QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Mar 15 2010, 03:10 PM) QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 02:49 PM) The NY Times is a rag of a paper. Who cares what they think. it was actually the daily news but they are all rags. i wouldn't waste 50cents buying any of the papers. the only newspaper i like on occasion is salt water fishing. i need to know where they are bitin'. Oops, my bad. But they both suck, just like the Boston Globe. agreed minus the sports section Even that is getting bad. I miss the old guys like Will McDonough and Leigh Montville. Hated them dumping Jackie Mac. Shaughnessey is horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mara Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 QUOTE (ozzy85 @ Mar 15 2010, 03:18 PM) I've never held the RRHOF as any kind of musical standard I adhere to. Never. I don't even know who has made it on the list. I'm sure the Beatles and the Stones are. Yup. The RRHOF is irrelevant in my world. Here's an example of how out of touch those guys are. The inductions are tonight, and Genesis is one of the very deserving bands getting in. Now, Peter Gabriel can't make it because he is promoting a new album. Phil Collins has had health problems (arthritis, I think) that precludes his being able to play. There are, IMO, few bands around who could really pay Genesis proper honors by performing some of their songs at such an occasion. Really, I think they ought to just leave it. So who gets tapped to play Genesis? Phish. Yeah. 'Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen of Megadon Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 just read this myself and I flipped open my laptop in utter disbelief..."that first awful decade" Of course, my fellow Rushians got to it already hey Jim Farber!... get over that! hmph! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanadoo Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 04:03 PM) QUOTE (Zanadoo @ Mar 15 2010, 03:53 PM) QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 03:50 PM) QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Mar 15 2010, 03:10 PM) QUOTE (MULTIPLIED REACTION @ Mar 15 2010, 02:49 PM) The NY Times is a rag of a paper. Who cares what they think. it was actually the daily news but they are all rags. i wouldn't waste 50cents buying any of the papers. the only newspaper i like on occasion is salt water fishing. i need to know where they are bitin'. Oops, my bad. But they both suck, just like the Boston Globe. agreed minus the sports section Even that is getting bad. I miss the old guys like Will McDonough and Leigh Montville. Hated them dumping Jackie Mac. Shaughnessey is horrible. Can't believe they dropped Jackie Mac. Awful move, she's one of those women in sports who actually knows what she's talking about. ahem....espn...ahem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of a Rider Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Mar 15 2010, 01:28 PM) "they may never live down that first awful decade before they got their act together (circa"tom sawyer"). even so, they're too proggy for hof tastes." That they were proggy is irrelevant. It is simply called the "Rock and Roll Hall of Fame", not, "The Rock and Roll Styles-That-We-Like Hall of Fame." Bands and performers are inducted based on their talents and the impact they had on rock and roll history. Rush has had a major impact on the rock music world and what's more, the pencil necks at the RRHOF know this. But for whatever reason, they choose to ignore it. This guy's a f*cking moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 QUOTE (Ghost of a Rider @ Mar 15 2010, 09:12 PM) "The Rock and Roll Styles-That-We-Like Hall of Fame." That's precisely what it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyBlaze Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Screw all that can't recognize & appreciate Rush's contributions to the world of rock music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GernTheFish Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 A couple bands didn't even make the article: Yes and Jethro Tull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
librarian Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Farber should have stopped writing about music at least 20 years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Cocky Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Rush is worthy of their OWN Hall Of Fame. It should be built in either Cleveland or Toronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.