runner_70 + happystar/Mr. Right (I know, right?) sitting in a tree...

Fake news as fake as "lamebird is a good singer'

He is "magnificient" and "spectacular"



.
.
.
Only when it comes to destroy songs and mocking queen......

[QUOTE] [b]happystar wrote:[/b]

One day Lambert will take over the world and we will all be entitled to free eye liner & lipstick from out local tranny stores lol[/QUOTE]

What, rather than Freddie taking over the world in 1973 and everyone being entitled to the same free cosmetics.

[QUOTE] [b]happystar wrote:[/b]

Vocal Harmony In 1973 David Bowie wore more make up than anyone! Freddie had barely taken the top of his eyeliner by then![/QUOTE]

Yeah, and many others. And if you care to look at the back cover of the first Queen album it's plain to see Freddie was part of that scene as much as anyone.

There are people today, not just Lanbert who use makeup so why the taking over the world and free eye liner comment.

I was just replying to your idiotic comment.

Stop judging others by your own short comings or sad one dimensional life.

I've just pulled you up for miss quoting me on another thread. If that bothers you so much you shouldn't have done it, should you!

We can see who uses foul language and snarky comments and seems to be a nasty piece of work and it isn't Vocal Harmony!

Thank you snifflese, but I'm afraid pointing out the glaringly obvious won't be obvious to the person you're pointing it out too!

Unfortunately, I would have to agree. We have several of those here on the boards!

That is what you don't get, Happy. No one ever said that Queen with Freddie was not sheer perfection. I don't recall anyone saying that. People say QAL is really good. How does their being really good take away from Queen's former perfection? That is the part I don't get. You, Runner, and Icy are just bonkers about anything nice said about Adam/QAL. That in no way takes away from the original Queen. We are talking two different entities now. It is as if liking QAL means you are stomping on Queen's legacy and that just isn't the case. You can love, love old Queen and really appreciate what QAL is doing in the here and now and anything they do now, does not take away from the lustre of what Queen was. I don't know how to say it any better than that, but I hope you get my poing.

If you think Queen died in 1991, why do you continue to post in a Queen forum?

I’m starting to feel sorry for Rami Malek because now HE has begun to get the nasty flak from some Queen fans that HE isn’t perfect enough to portray Freddie in the biopic movie.

It proves one thing to me — each one of us who are born into this world are so unique that no one else can copy or duplicate us!

I think that is a pretty amazing thing to ponder!

[QUOTE] [b]SweetCaroline wrote:[/b]

If you think Queen died in 1991, why do you continue to post in a Queen forum?


[/QUOTE]

I know this question was not for me but I have to say this. With that question you say that Queen and Queen+ are the same.
But Queen that existed until 1991 and Queen + are two different things. Queen with Freddie, John, Brian and Roger and their music are original and eternal. I believe that most of people from Queen forum still posting because of that.
When someone says "Band Queen", for most people first comes to mind Freddie, not Adam Lambert or Paul Rodgers. It's the fact.

Would Adam be able to sing Bohemian Rhapsody on tours if Freddie didn't wrote it? Or Another One Bites The Dust if John didn't wrote? That's the point.
[/QUOTE]

I think the second point would be, why bother to post in the QAL thread, if you guys are only on board with Queen before 1991? I have no problem with anyone not liking QAL and it makes perfect sense to me. Some folks only love the original and as I said, no problem. But why make it a point to post here with snarky, nasty comments? That is the part I can't wrap my head around. I do think it keeps follks who enjoy QAL from posting. It isn't worth the flak you get and there can never be a good discussion about anything. I also don't understand why that question means Queen and QAL are the same? Obviously no one thinks that or there wouldn't be a Queen Plus thread! Making them the same is only in the mind of the Queen fans and that is where the problem lies.

Yes and let us not forget, nappystar's first post here on his return after his Gerry layoff was a post in the Queen+ section telling everyone that AL was a ladyboy who couldn't sing.

[QUOTE] [b]snifflese wrote:[/b]

That is what you don't get, Happy. No one ever said that Queen with Freddie was not sheer perfection. I don't recall anyone saying that. People say QAL is really good. How does their being really good take away from Queen's former perfection? That is the part I don't get. You, Runner, and Icy are just bonkers about anything nice said about Adam/QAL. That in no way takes away from the original Queen. We are talking two different entities now. It is as if liking QAL means you are stomping on Queen's legacy and that just isn't the case. You can love, love old Queen and really appreciate what QAL is doing in the here and now and anything they do now, does not take away from the lustre of what Queen was. I don't know how to say it any better than that, but I hope you get my poing.[/QUOTE]

Why drag my name into this when I haven't even posted in this thread?
I have stated I like AL singing Save Me. It remains my favorite Queen song he has sang. You think that is throwing a bone.

Save me, save me, save me, save me! LOLOL