Tit For Tat

[jonesingjay]

Comments

[itsnotmymind]

I thought I'd heard that the McCartney children didn't have a nanny. Hmm. Now, where did I hear that?

[jonesingjay]

I don't know. Where did you hear that?

[itsnotmymind]

I can't remember!

[goldenground]

Paul said it. I remember reading the quote but the gist of it was Paul talking about what a wonderful mother Linda was and that she was very hands on with the kids and insisted that they would not go the nanny route

[jonesingjay]

I guess when a few more McCartney's came along they thought it was a good idea for Linda to have some help around the home.

[parlance]

The "tit for tat" headline - is that in reference to the not-so-complimentary story about Linda involving Rose?

[jonesingjay]

nope

[mollybeakers]

Well... shit... I guess the only way he could successfully block the stuff being in the auction would be to accuse them of being in possession of stolen goods, right??

Not nice.

If a shitty ol' tooth can be put up for sale, a few bits of McCartney clothing sold to benefit this woman's grandchildren seems no big deal to me.

But... I dunno. ??

JB

[jonesingjay]

This can't possibly be the first time something like this has happened. So, I wonder if these items have some significance to Paul or if he's just become incredibly litigious in his Golden Years.

[mollybeakers]

Well, if nothing else, it lends wonderful provenance for the items. Mccartney has apparently demanded the items be returned.

If the family manages to retain them, they'll be worth even more with Paul's acknowledgement that they actually belonged to him.

It all seems a bit off, and posthumously accusing Rose of theft seems a little harsh to me. ??

JB

[jonesingjay]

If these do eventually go up on the auction block (and I hope they do), Paul trying to get these things back will raise the price, I think. Bidders might be of the mind, if Paul was so anxious to get these things back I must have them for myself!

I think he should just let it go, and let the family do what they will with it. I mean -- if they had kept it in the family he wouldn't have thought twice about any of these items. So, what's the big deal now?

[goldenground]

I really don't see what the big deal is. I mean, what's a few measley scrap of clothes to Paul? and if it benefits this woman's grandchildren. A woman who apparently the McCartney family was fond of. Unless she really did steal it and Paul's miffed?? I don't know. Who knows why people do what they do, I still can't understand why Ringo won't sign autographs lol

[jonesingjay]

Yeah, it seems rather pedestrian. A few clothing items. A scrap of paper with meaningless lyrics written onto it. Why not let these people have their payday? I mean -- he obviously wasn't thinking about this for 30 years. So, what's the bit whoop?