(Untitled)

May 03, 2006 00:57

Rolling Stone only gave Surprise 3.5 stars!! Fuck 'em..I'm sure it deserves that extra half! DIXIE CHICKS, 4 STARS...MY ASS!!!

Leave a comment

earlgreyboy May 3 2006, 17:39:51 UTC
If only you spent your time reading Foregin Policy instead of Rolling Stone. The only reason I ever cracked a Rolling Stone open was because I was bored in the SEHS library. I assure you that FP is much more entertaining.

Reply

aaron_the_emo May 3 2006, 20:21:52 UTC
I agree, actually. Well, these days Rolling Stone is sort of interesting for its political polemics - but not for reviews of anything, god forbid.

Reply

earlgreyboy May 3 2006, 22:05:51 UTC
Admittedly, I haven't opened a Rolling Stone in long enough to have read any of these political commentaries you allude to. I might just have to do so.

Reply

aaron_the_emo May 3 2006, 22:40:05 UTC
They generally tend toward the pop politics side of the spectrum, but there is occasionally decent investigative journalism. I doubt you'll be too shocked that there's a generally liberal slant to the proceedings.

Reply

earlgreyboy May 3 2006, 22:08:16 UTC
Playboy magazine, which I generally do like, does occasionally have some dubious reviews. My roomate was shocked to death (even though he doesn't own any music, much like yours) that they picked "Hollaback Girl" as the best song (not just pop, but all catagories) for 2005. Although, it was very catchy!

Reply

aaron_the_emo May 3 2006, 22:40:44 UTC
See, my roommate would not recognize "Hollaback Girl." Or, probably, the name Gwen Stefani. No radio for him.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up