gnrfan2007
-
Posts
562 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Events
Posts posted by gnrfan2007
-
-
and yet, slash is called the "sell out" for performing with cypress hill.
Umm ... Axl promoting an unknown rap band is not the same as Slash whoring with any artist or CEO willing to pay him.
NWA wasn't "unknown". You gotta get out of your cave. They're the ones Axl wanted instead of Skid Row to be on tour in 1991
So you disputing Dr. Dre too?
Dre couldn’t believe it when he first saw Guns N’ Roses 1991 promo for hit song You Could Be Mine – because he and his bandmates were still struggling to make a living and had no idea their music had a white audience.Dre says, "The biggest shock was when we saw Axl Rose in the video with the N.W.A. hat. "We were like, ‘What the f**k?’ We were still selling records out of our car."
The point Dr.Dre was making is this ... you haven't made it until white people - the 75-80% majority of the USA population at the time - buy your stuff.
So until the majority of white people accept your music, you ain't raking the millions and you ain't famous yet, and nobody in the mainstream record or entertainment industry will give a poop about you.
You bet, to the majority of white people, NWA was nothing to them at the time.
No, Dre meant that as his "whoah, this is where I am now" moment. He never said no one heard of them.
Pay attention what Dr. Dre is saying. Dre had no idea WHITE PEOPLE cared about their music until he saw Axl Rose sporting NWA gear.
And until WHITE people give a poop about your music, you haven't made it. That's just the [racist] reality we live in.
-
NWA = Unknown Rap Band?
WTF?
So you disputing Dr. Dre that NWA was unknown at that time?
The biggest shock was when we saw Axl Rose in the video with the N.W.A. hat. “We were like, ‘What the f**k?’ We were still selling records out of our car.NWA = Unknown Rap Band?
WTF?
That was the most stupid comment I've read since I registered in this forum.
Are you calling Dr. Dre stupid?
The biggest shock was when we saw Axl Rose in the video with the N.W.A. hat. “We were like, ‘What the f**k?’ We were still selling records out of our car.Maybe it was this video that made GnR cool with rappers:
Or perhaps it was this video where MJ gets mad at Slash:
Oh, nothing makes you look cooler than blow smoke and air to lift your hair and clothes up on stage!
-
and yet, slash is called the "sell out" for performing with cypress hill.
Umm ... Axl promoting an unknown rap band is not the same as Slash whoring with any artist or CEO willing to pay him.
-
Why is the rapper on the left wearing a Guns N' Roses shirt? I doubt he even likes Guns. I'm glad he's endorsing GnR though.
Here's a little history lesson: http://www.feelnumb.com/2010/01/15/dr-dre-was-shocked-when-axl-rose-wore-nwa-hat-in-video/
The biggest shock was when we saw Axl Rose in the video with the N.W.A. hat. “We were like, ‘What the f**k?’ We were still selling records out of our car.We thought we were so badass, Then N.W.A. came out rapping about this world where you walk out of your house and you get shot. It was just so clear what stupid little white-boy poseurs we were. It was like, ‘All right, we can give up the act.’ If you’re talking about which lifestyle is more hard-core, the one where you get shot always wins.Axl made rap cool to white boys before there was Vanilla Ice and Eminem. Rappers respect him for that.
-
1. If Slash finally apologizes for all his bashing of Axl through the years and for lying to the fans about why the old band broke up, then offer Slash another chance to guest on 3-4 songs of a new GnR record ... just like how Axl tried to reach out to Slash for the CD record but Slash refused.
2. If Slash continues to be BIG HEADED and spread lies to make himself look cool (as Marc Canter described him) ... continue to profit from touring and releasing BluRays/DVDs and other merchandise to force the record company to cave in and renegotiate a new contract with GnR.
If the record company still refuses to re-negotiate a new contract (and do their part to promote a new GnR record) ... GnR can do what they did with CD 1 ... and leak new tracks to the fans.
-
Can somebody in Slash's YES camp please tell him it's not 1987 anymore?
Time to change the look! Why can't the guy get a hair cut or change his hair due like every other '80s rocker has?
And he needs to stop sporting his GnR "gimmick" ... I thought he said he was done with GnR and no more top hat?
Please ... no more "character" or "gimmick" looks to sell yourself Slash. You're too old for that stuff now!
LMAO
-
Well I see with you logcial reasoning has well run its course. I never said I hated Axl , still making shit up man
Well I see with you logical reasoning has well run its course. I never said I hated Slash, still making poop up man!
Silly cherry nose picker! LOL
-
It is when you put into context with all the things Slash has said and done, that it makes you wonder why out of the drummers in the worlds did Slash *purposely* hire Josh Freese?!
Jesus you hate Slash so much you are just making random shit up. You are obsessed with the dude lol
Carry on
Jesus you hate Axl so much you are just making random poop up. You are obsessed with the dude lol
Carry on ... you cherry nose picker! LOL
-
You tell me who is the one still bitter, angry, and playing mind games with Axl.
Yes because Slash playing with someone who worked with GNR over 10 years ago is a "mind game"
No, you cherry nose picker! LOL
If you state it like you did in one sentence, well then of course it doesn't look like Slash is still bitter and angry and still trying to mind fawk with Axl.
It is when you put into context with all the things Slash has said and done, that it makes you wonder why out of the drummers in the worlds did Slash *purposely* hire Josh Freese?!
Let me put it back into context again for you:
So just like Slash refused to help Axl with CD ... just like Slash tried to show up to those Vegas gigs ... just like Slash showed up drunk to Axl's house begging for his old job back when he was still running his VR outfit with Scott Weiland ... just like Slash would always be claiming to know when CD was to be released ... just like Slash with the Guitar Hero controversy ... just like Slash bashed Axl for wanting to be alternative rock like Pearl Jam but yet Slash has hired more alternative rock musicians for his bands than Axl has ...
And I'll add another one: just like Slash accused Axl of breaking up the "real" band and starting "new" band ...
That "new" GnR had Josh Freese in it ... but now Slash is cool with having the drummer of the "fake" GnR band in his band ... LMAO
Marc Canter was right about Slash.
-
Nobody can deny Freese's ability as a drummer but he is also a careerist drummer that lacks loyalty. It's difficult to fathom how he could enter a project like Chinese Democracy for a year, understand the politics behind it, and yet work with Slash ten years down the line.
If anything Josh is loyal to the thing that matters most: music. He is loyal to music so much that him playing with other people transcends silly 10 year grudges that he was not even personally involved in...
Get it right people: Slash wanted and hired Josh Freese
So just like Slash refused to help Axl with CD ... just like Slash tried to show up to those Vegas gigs ... just like Slash showed up drunk to Axl's house begging for his old job back when he was still running his VR outfit with Scott Weiland ... just like Slash would always be claiming to know when CD was to be released ... just like Slash with the Guitar Hero controversy ... just like Slash bashed Axl for wanting to be alternative rock like Pearl Jam but yet Slash has hired more alternative rock musicians for his bands than Axl has ...
Slash went out and hired Josh Freese.
You tell me who is the one still bitter, angry, and playing mind games with Axl. HINT: The guy who on Letterman admitted to being bitter and angry towards Axl for a very long time
-
Clearly 1993. Grunge/Nirvana killed GN'R. They went from the número uno to forgotten irrelevant bloated has beens. It must have been a very bitter pill.
Ironically, I believe the public would now accept them reclaiming their status ....... Because they are deserving.
If you wanted a timeline, then [old] GnR decline began somewhere between January 1992 and June 1992.
January 1992: Nirvana's "Nevermind" displaced Michael Jackson's Dangerous at number one on the Billboard album charts, and also topped the charts in numerous other countries. The month Nevermind reached number one, Billboard proclaimed, "Nirvana is that rare band that has everything: critical acclaim, industry respect, pop radio appeal, and a rock-solid college/alternative base."
June 1992: Pearl Jam's "Ten" hit number 8 on the Billboard album charts. "Ten" would then surpass Nirvana's "Nevermind" in sales by 1993.
June 6 1992: GnR's PPV Paris Concert Show. The last major GnR event.
Pearl Jam and Nirvana would became the new kings of rock n' roll. Critics would declare Pearl Jam as the rock n' roll band of the '90s.
[old] GnR had become irrevelant, as '80s rock had finally been killed off. People jumped off the GnR bandwagon and hopped on to the alternative rock band wagon.
You could not openly admit you were an [old] GnR fan because you would face ridicule and/or getting your ass kicked!
If you were truly objective, you could admit that GnR's hard-rock sound ... paled in comparison to what the grunge bands were doing. Slash's "Joe Perry rip-off" sound had become cheezy.
This is what GnR today has to contend with. They have to prove themselves again. They have to make it cool again to be GnR fans ... to get all the closet GnR fans out. They have to kick azz and piss on all those alternative rock and new rock bands that pissed on them in the '90s and today.
So its funny when you get Slasholes blaming Axl and CD for GnR's decline. [old] GnR declined began in 1992!
-
CD sucks because it doesn't sound like 1987 nor does it sound like a Slash album.
Now had Axl just fronted Snakepit, GnR would have reclaimed its throne from Nirvana and Pearl Jam in the late '90s.
All the people how jumped off the GnR bandwagon during the alternative rock era would have jumped right back on. All the people who hated GnR because their brand of hard-rock was outdated and a rip-off copy of all the bands before them, would have instantly fell in love with GnR ... because the success of Snakepit, VR, and all Slash's other albums ... prove without a shadow of a doubt ... that Axl fronting Snakepit would have been the greatest band in the history of the world!
Lastly, had Slash not been so BIG-HEADED (as Marc Canter stated), he would have been on 3-4 tracks on CD. Oh man, had Slash added his awesome pentantonic+blues scale solos to 3-4 tracks on CD, CD would have been the greatest album ever ... no questions about it! Slash is the greatest guitarist ever!
Axl needs to invite Slash back on CD II. Hopefully, this time Slash won't be so BIG-HEADED.
LOL
-
Kurt Cobain is still alive! Except ... he now has a moustache! LOL
-
Every song on CD has a guitar solo that kicks azz and blows everything Slash has ever done with old-GnR and in his solo projects
You are entitled to that opinion but trying to establish a sense of musical superiority over an opinion like your posts try to do is silly
especially when the CD solos really weren't that memorable.
Memorable as in what? Critically acclaimed or POP CULTURE hype?
If you were really objective, you would admit that Slash's solos post GnR are actually better than his GnR stuff.
Even I can admit that. I mean, his solos on MJ's "Given to Me" blows NR and Estrange out of the water!
Slash is better on his own and not a part of Axl's band.
So why do people not find Slash's post-GnR solos memorable?
Because GnR stop being a POP CULTURE sensation post 1992! Slash isn't a POP STAR anymore post Michael Jackson! So nobody cares about his new stuff.
So if you were truly objective, you could get your head out of your stinky 1987 butt hole and actually be able to admit that the solos for AFD-to-UYI are so 1980s dated because Slash was just ripping off Joe Perry.
Zero innovation at all. Not even an honest attempt to be unique and different.
-
That will rival those from SCoM, Estranged, end of November Rain, etc.?
They have all the time in the world to make one eh? And with the 3 of them helping eachother, surely they can.
What are you smokin?
Slash's solo are all just cheap pentantonic or blues scale solos. OVERRATED!
Every song on CD has a guitar solo that kicks azz and blows everything Slash has ever done with old-GnR and in his solo projects. What makes the CD solos brilliant is that they don't sound like cheap pentantonic or blues scale solos.
What's an epic gothic solo? Is it a guitar solo played with a Les Paul, Marshall, pentatonic scales and a wah pedal by a guy in cheesy rocker hot topic looking clothing?
Solo's that are still relevant 25 yrs+ after they were recorded......unlike anything by some dude in a jason kockey mask w a KFC bucket on his head that lives in a chicken coop and puts num chucks up his ass
Relevant says who?
The alternative rock era pooped all over Slash style solos. Even Slash has adapted to try to make his solos sound like Soundgarden! LOL
-
No.
I am beating the dead horse again, but Buckethead is the only guitarist from the new GnR era that could have done so and did so on CD. Buble just ruined the songs he put on leads, Catcher was really poor work from him - I will never understand why that "solo" replaced Brian Mays one.
It's called ROYALTIES and LOYALTIES.
Axl probably didn't want to shell out more royalties to an outsider. And Axl probably wanted to make BBF feel a part of CD and the GnR family.
-
Izzy traveled to LA and Axl didn't have the courtesy to show up to a pre-arranged meeting? What a cock.
How many times has Izzy quit on GnR?
Marc Canter described Izzy as a PARANOID crack head who was afraid of losing all of his money. Izzy quit GnR to protect his financial wealth because he knew he was a trainwreck and he knew GnR was a trainwreck ... one lawsuit or drug-overdose away from losing everything.
How many people have contested to Izzy being an UNRELIABLE person you could not count on. Where do you think this phrase came about: WHERE IS IZZY? Because nobody ever knows where Izzy is!
But yet, folks like you hold Axl to a much higher standard than you do Izzy or any other former classic members? Axl bails on Izzy this one time, compared to the numerous times Izzy bailed on him and GnR, and you get all butt-hurt ... blaming Axl?! LOL
You should take everything bitter old man Alan Niven says ... with a grain of salt. The guy did have a psychological breakdown himself you know. And who knows how much financial problems he has now too. If I was in his position, I too would love to be getting my life-time royalties from the AFD and UYIs era.
The way Alan Niven describes it, it sounds like it was some big pre-arranged business meeting between Izzy and Axl. When does Izzy and Axl do "pre-arranged" business meetings with each other? LOL
It was more likely just a buddy call. Izzy probably just called up Axl and said he was going to be in L.A. and they should meet to discuss what to do about the RRnHOF because everybody is pestering him about it.
When has Izzy or anybody else ever changed Axl's mind? I truly doubt Izzy was actually going to try to convince Axl to attend the RRnHOF. So I really doubt Alan Niven's assertion that the purpose of the meeting was for Izzy to try to convince Axl to do something he didn't want to do.
Izzy more likely just wanted to know what Axl was going to do because the RRnHOF and the ex-members needed an answer from him too.
Izzy probably already decided that if Axl didn't attend, he too would not attend. So he needed to get a clear answer from Axl.
So Axl probably called Izzy with his final decision instead of having to do a "meeting".
I mean, how many times has Izzy jammed with GnR on tour before RRnHOF? Did they really need to meet face-to-face when they have jammed and hung out with each other countless times prior to the RRnHOF?
So Alan Niven is trying to make it seem like this supposed meeting between Axl and Izzy to discuss the RRnHOF was some big event in GnR history.
Given that Izzy is happily still jamming with GnR on tour, clearly indicates whatever supposed meeting they had "pre-arranged" prior to the RRnHOF was really all about NOTHING!
-
Doesn't matter how many times you type it - it won't magically become valid.Attacking him for being SUPER CONTROLLING = CONTROL FREAK is contrary to his ownership rights of "Guns n' Roses".
It doesn't require *magic* to become valid ... unlike the *magic powers* you need to see that Slash was only joking when he dissed Izzy's guitar playing and Scott Weiland's song-writing skills! LMAO
It just requires a brain capable of understanding and accepting the rights a person has to their property. The constitution of every democratic society has laws that clearly state and protect a person's rights to their properties.
Axl founded GnR and maintained LEGAL OWNERSHIP of his corporation (band) throughout GnR's entire life. He can do whatever he pleases with GnR. If you don't like it, tough poop!
So just like if you owned a home or business, you have every right to do whatever you want with it (within the law) and nobody else can tell you what to do or take it away from you. I can't come into your house and do whatever I please. If you tell me to leave, I must comply. If I want to work for your business, as long as the work conditions you provide are lawful, I must fulfill the duties you are paying me for. If I don't ... you as the owner of your business can fire me.
It's that simple.
Attacking Axl for being SUPER CONTROLLING = CONTROL FREAK over a property that he owns ... is contrary to his ownership rights.
So no matter how many times you try to deny Axl's right to operate his corporation - his property - the way he sees fit ... the unbiased and objective LAW ... clearly says you are in the wrong. Your magic powers can't erase this truth.
-
Nice try liar ... edited your post after I exposed you. You ain't foolin' anybody.
Nope that was way before. Seriously man? First you argue with out of context rehetoric and faulty logic and now you are manipulating edits and lying to make it seem like you are on some sort of moral high ground?
My posts edit shows clearly 3:03pm - over an hour earlier than your first initial response to me at 4:42pm.
Come on now ... why don't use your super insightful mind reading powers ... you know the ones where you could figure out Slash was joking about hating Izzy's guitar style?!
How do you know I did not read your post before you made your edit and didn't respond until afterwards? Not everybody has time to respond right a way.
You made an edit. Probably to keep @ifftheworld from reporting you.
Regardless, SUPER CONTROLLING = CONTROL FREAK ... same thing.
And no, the logic is not flawed. You didn't even understand differences between ownership and how copyright/ownership can be establish without a contract or legal document.
It's a simple concept called PROPERTY RIGHTS and OWNERSHIP. What is your property ... you have CONTROL over it.
From inception to today, Axl has either had MAJORITY OWNERSHIP or SOLE MAJORITY OWNERSHIP of "Guns n' Roses".
Axl has every LEGAL RIGHT to do what he pleases with his property.
Attacking him for being SUPER CONTROLLING = CONTROL FREAK is contrary to his ownership rights of "Guns n' Roses".
It's that simple.
-
http://www.chopaway.com/viewtopic.php?id=555
"Slash has accused you of turning in sloppily made demo tapes."
"That's not Slash talking. That's Axl talking and Slash repeating it. Axl did say the tapes weren't up to GNR standards. Well, in the beginning nobody owned an eight-track. All our tapes were made on a cassette player. Whatever, I'm credited with just about everything I wrote. I will say that Slash was much better at keeping tapes in order. He always labeled stuff."
Axl must be "God" or Slash is an Axl YES-MAN then.
But no, here you go: http://hem.passagen.se/snoqalf/art-199311-OK.html
I love recording like this. During Appetite..., Lies and Use Your... I had to put up with Izzy the whole time. I never liked playing with him. It was wonderful to escape him on this record. It sounds tighter and so much cooler than anything we've done before. I always got irritated over Izzy's way of playing. It didn't sound right. Before "Spaghetti", we erased his guitar and Gilby put on a new one. It sounded perfect!
Very intresting interview, thanks for posting.
Not really a revalation that Axl is a CONTROL FREAK, but it is still intresting to hear stories about the old days
Nice try liar ... edited your post after I exposed you. You ain't foolin' anybody.
-
It's not hypothetical! You just trying to cope out! LOL
The phrase "would be" implies a hypothetical. I am sorry if you do not know what a hypothetical is but that does not equate to a "cop out"
My positioned is that prior to 1987, the historical facts show that:
1. Axl owned the name "Guns n' Roses"
There are no legalities that officially state it, as I have said time and time again. Look we are going in circles, that point is not an objective fact - never was and never will be. Sorry but no dice (and I get the feeling that you will just keep this broken record type of posting nonetheless so whatever)
He was controlling in the band, simple as that.
LOL! So now Axl was just "controlling" and not a CONTROL FREAK? Softening your words huh?
Axl has every right to be "controlling" or in your words a "control freak" of his band ... just like a boss or owner has every right to assert his control over his business or property.
I'm sorry if that is too complicated for you to understand.
I'm also sorry you have a hard time understanding that there was never a time in GnR's history where Axl did not have MAJORITY OWNERSHIP of the name "Guns n' Roses", and hence, his corporation/band.
And no, it's not hypothetical to assert that Axl Rose had SOLE OWNERSHIP of the name "Guns n' Roses" prior to 1987. You don't need a legal contract or document to assert ownership or copyright. When no such legal document exists, all you need is proof of first use.
The historical facts clearly show the name "Guns n' Roses" came from the merger of Axl Rose's band with Tracii Guns band. And when Tracci quit, Axl continued the band and hired/auditioned/recruited everybody else. Prior to 1987, nobody else in the band could claim ownership of the name "Guns n' Roses" other than Axl Rose.
There is nothing "hypothetical" about these historical facts.
If you have any other facts to prove that Axl did not own the name "Guns n' Roses" prior to 1987, well ... please share it!
Otherwise, Axl has every right to assert his ownership rights even during the time period of 1987-1993 when he had shared MAJORITY OWNERSHIP with the other members.
-
The end of GN'R is actually simple. Axl=arsehole.
Why do you people insist on licking his balls? I mean he has even fallen out with nugnr members (Buckethead)!! Everyone who has ever worked with this dickhead has suffered what Slash and Niven went through. Yet a few dicksucker fans, with no doubt Estranged on the top of their playlist, still defend this awful human being.
So Buckethead is your only proof? LOL
Please tell us, what mean stuff has Buckethead said about Axl?
How many other CD members have attacked Axl? Seriously, really?
What about Slash's falling out with Scott Weiland? Have you read some of nasty stuff Slash said about Scott? What about Slash running drunk to Axl's house begging for his old job back while still being in VR with Scott Weiland? Surely, that is proof that Slash is the bad guy ... the awful human being!
-
Prior to 1987, there was never a legal contract or document to assert ownership of the "Guns n' Roses" name.
But it seems you have a hard time accepting that Axl Rose would be viewed as the right-ful owner of the "Guns n' Roses" name prior to 1987.
You must have missed the part where I said that hypotheticals like "would be viewed" does not hold any substantial weight.
And it doesn't matter what prior to 1987 entailed, what matters is that by 1987 when the lineup that actually mattered came to fruition that hypothetical became irrelevant.
>>>You cannot be a CONTROL FREAK of something that belongs to you.
Lol yes you absolutely can. If I own a house but have people staying with me and I forbid them from touching anything in the house, that is called being controlling. But Axl was not the "boss" until 1991 so that is irrelevant
It's not hypothetical! You just trying to cope out! LOL
If you claim that prior to 1987, they were all equal partners, then that makes Axl a MAJORITY OWNER. Hence, there was never a time Axl was never a MAJORITY OWNER of his band/corporation.
My positioned is that prior to 1987, the historical facts show that:
1. Axl owned the name "Guns n' Roses"
2. Axl auditioned/recruited/approved all the members
Point#1 alone gives Axl the right to be the "boss". If anybody were to start a new band and named it "Guns n' Roses", Axl could go to court to say he owns the name. All Axl would need to prove is that he was the first to use the name "Guns n' Roses".
And really, if somebody does something to your property that you do not approve off, you consider it to be a control freak to tell them not to do it? Please invite me to your house then! LOL
-
Show me the legal documents from 1987 saying Axl is the majority owner. And saying "well if the courts had hypothetically made a ruling back then..." doesn't cut it, because hypotheticals do not dictate certainty. And the whole "original member, name creation" aspect is not logically sound because as I have said many times once the AFD guys were in place the relationship fluxuated and shifted where one singer's believes does not equate fact.
I have answered those questions adequately and more importantly rationally. Look what is going here will just be a broken record. I answered and refuted your claims and answered the question.So, after thinking through all of these, please provide a rational argument why you believe Axl was unjustified to act like the "boss" of GnR, and in your words a CONTROL FREAK.
I am sorry your bias does not have room for the logical arguments presented to the point where you ask questions I have already addressed quite well, but that isn't on me. Revisionist history such that you provided (Axl being the sole Mr. Boss in 1985 on) after all isn't not logical and sound because of reasons already stated
You have?
Your claim is: Axl is a CONTROL FREAK
My counter claim: You can't be a control freak of something that you own
Has there ever been a time in GnR's history, where Axl was never been a MAJORITY OWNER of the name and corporation (band) named "Guns n' Roses"?
If no, then Axl has every right as a MAJORITY OWNER to assert what he wants for the band.
It's that simple.
Try again
It seems you do not understand the difference between MAJORITY OWNER and SOLE MAJORITY OWNER.
When the band was incorporated in 1987, legally it was an equal partnership between Axl, Izzy, Slash, and Duff. That makes them all legally MAJORITY OWNERS of the corporation known as "Guns n' Roses".
Post-1993, after Izzy, Slash, and Duff gave up all their rights to the GnR name, and hence corporation, Axl became the legal SOLE MAJORITY OWNER of "Guns n' Roses".
Prior to 1987, there was never a legal contract or document to assert ownership of the "Guns n' Roses" name.
But it seems you have a hard time accepting that Axl Rose would be viewed as the right-ful owner of the "Guns n' Roses" name prior to 1987.
Ok, put that aside. Do you accept that Axl was a MAJORITY OWNER of the "Guns n' Roses" band prior to its incorporation in 1987?
So, now I ask you again ... was there ever a time Axl was never a MAJORITY OWNER of the "Guns n' Roses" name and hence, corporation (band)?
If you answer NO ... then you have just proven your claim that ... Axl is a CONTROL FREAK ... is FALSE.
You cannot be a CONTROL FREAK of something that belongs to you.
It's that simple.
Rapper Wearing Gun N' Roses shirt
in 2013
Posted
If you're still selling records out of your car ... you haven't made it yet.
And exactly, Blackstreet isn't a real rap group. That's the point. That's why it was very sad to see Slash sell out to the black version of Backstreet Boys.
And no poop ... that MJ video is staged. That is what makes it sad. Slash embarrassing himself and the GnR brand once again.
It's funny how Slash complains about Axl wanting to be extravagant, then he goes and does this kind of poop with the King of Extravagant ... MJ.
Marc Canter was right about Slash.
Slasholes are getting mad and jealous ... that Axl's is making GnR "cool" again with the "cool kids" ... all without Slash ... and all without prostituting himself to the mainstream media.