Quoted from beatleslover2

I think John because he did it for a reason, he tried to bring world peace.

Now this is just bullshit.

I want you to list all of Johns songs that were about world peace and get back to us.

"Look everyone, i'm John Lennon and i'm going to advertise for world peace because it benefits my image. I hope you all forgot that I was a drug addict, womanizer, and piss poor father, but now at least everybody thinks that i'm some god bearing man because I wrote 'Give Peace A Chance' and 'Imagine'"

Time to look at the real person in my opinion. Nobodys perfect, but people need to quit looking at john like he was.

Quoted from tkitna

Time to look at the real person in my opinion.

Mine too, but I think John was quite sincere about most of what he did, and so far as his peace campaign went he used his celebrity to promote something he considered worthwhile. Depending on your point of view, lying in bed in front of TV cameras to make a pitch for the end of a war was either breathtakingly fatuous or a purposefully absurd way of drawing the media's (and our) attention to the subject: I take the latter position myself; John got far more mileage out of his "bed-ins" than any number of marches or standard press conferences would have gotten him.

The rubbishy myth that's been built around John since his death makes it difficult to see him clearly and positively invites debunking and accusations of hypocrisy or worse. But for me John was just a guy in an extraordinary position trying to make sense of himself and the world around him, and whatever was foolish or discreditable about the man was no more than the usual muck that accrues to everyone else as well.

Quoted from jjs

People like that put down Paul because HE HAD THE BETTER SOLO CAREER. MORE PEOPLE WANTED TO HEAR HIS SONGS, AND MORE PEOPLE WANTED TO SEE HIS SHOWS, and they can't stand it.

Come on, jj, the debate is over.  You're making no new points. If you plan to keep posting on this, then at least answer the questions I've posed to you in previous posts.  Your posts are akin to a kid plugging his ears and shouting "I can't hear you, I can't hear you!"

This one sentence which I've quoted is chock-full of your distortions, which you're clinging to like a lifejacket.

* "HE HAD THE BETTER SOLO CAREER."  Commercially, yes. But not artistically he didn't.  (And no one here is putting Paul down, either.)

* "MORE PEOPLE WANTED TO HEAR HIS SONGS."  Just your weird, baseless speculation.  Who are all these people that loathe John Lennon as much as you do?

* "MORE PEOPLE WANTED TO SEE HIS SHOWS."  Again, you're inventing a fact that just fits your opinion.  John wasn't big on touring, remember?  And don't give me some crap about "Everyone hated Yoko and they wouldn't see John because they were afraid of her."  People weren't thrilled with Linda's voice either, but they attended the shows.

* "AND THEY CAN'T STAND IT."  Who can't stand it?  What Beatle fan is offended by Paul's success?  I'd love to see the guy play in concert, and maybe I will if he comes around again, which he might.  I couldn't call myself a real Beatle fan if I held Paul in the contempt you hold John.  It's obvious that you can't stand that anyone has the nerve to prefer someone other than Paul. It's just opinion, dude.

Quoted from Mr. Mustard

* "HE HAD THE BETTER SOLO CAREER."  Commercially, yes. But not artistically he didn't.  (And no one here is putting Paul down, either.)

You state this as almost fact. I think Paul had an artistically superior solo career and thats without putting John down.

You've no idea the enjoyment and constant amusement this thread has given me over the last couple of weeks. Well done everyone, you've made a happy man very old!

I see Paul's in the lead then. Who'd of thought it, eh?

I think artistically Paul should be very proud of at least 70% of his back catalogue .
He's managed to produce a brilliant album per decade and at least a further 50 songs of artistic merit .
Thats not too say it's any better than either John or George's back catalogue , all three have produced different but still outstanding work .
When you are able to compose a song like "Blackbird" and almost 40 years later equal it with a song like "Jenny Wren" , i know i'm in the presence of a truely gifted artist .

Agree BlueMeanie very entertaining , i just hope jjs and Mr Mustard kiss and make up i do so like a happy ending

Quoted from DaveRam

Agree BlueMeanie very entertaining , i just hope jjs and Mr Mustard kiss and make up i do so like a happy ending

And spoil all the fun?

Quoted from BlueMeanie

And spoil all the fun?

How much more blood , snot , and tears do you want BlueMeanie ? the poor buggers have got no skin left on their knuckles .

Quoted from DaveRam

How much more blood , snot , and tears do you want BlueMeanie ? the poor buggers have got no skin left on their knuckles .

A fight to the death is the only honourable solution. I want to see ego's torn apart; reputations broken in two. My god, I haven't given out a warning in months. What is the world coming too!!

And just for the record, the question was 'Who's solo career do you like best?'. No mention of it having to be a Beatle. So I'm going for Richard Thompson!

Harihead, I love your post very much! All this is wisely put.  
We are all Beatles` fans and we do love them, though some of them appeal to you more than the others. It`s normal to have different views, to argue, but the argument should be decent, devoid of hatred and insults.
And what concerns the question, who is better, Paul or John - it has always been a dilemma. Even Tom Cruise featured it in the film Vanilla Sky. And there, the question was: who do you like more? You see, opinion again. Cause when we deal with art, music, cinema we can`t measure them in grams - it`s a matter of taste. Some people like classical music, some prefer country, some die for rock. Which is better? No answer. It`s a matter of taste, of preference. And no chart position can buy you love, like - money can`t buy you love.
You write that some people put Paul down, ignore those miserables and do not copy their behaviour (as you do), no true Beatle fan will do it. Never: even if you take me up the Eiffel Tower, or on a world cruise, or pour money on me, never will I do it. So how can you do it? That is the question. You`re actually not a crazy person. And now, please, leave Ringo alone.

Sorry, by YOU I meant jjs.

Quoted from tkitna

I think Paul had an artistically superior solo career and thats without putting John down.

You are absolutely correct.  Why? because that is your preference.

I prefer John. That's factual enough for me.

Glad to be entertaining for y'all!

I was just throwing the old bait and hook out there MM. I realize everything being mentioned is just opinion.

Actually, theres probably not much more to be said about this subject. Seems like all the name calling and beatle bashing is just about done. Oh well.

I thought you might be messing with me!