That is all.
Tell you what…When I send my ex-wife her money…you can lick the stamps.

Thank you, and you are welcome to add yours.

I like both of you and your posts on this thread.
There is no angle, hostility, hidden agenda, or cynicism from either of you.
Just honest thoughts.
The board needs more folks like you.
Sincerely,
Craig Bartal

This message has been deleted.

Sorry, guys. All The Beatles seem like lovely people - though John seemed a bit troubled and could hit out at other people - but I meant in comparison to the Rolling Stones, which seem a bit immature to me.
Ringo is great.
I used to like George but loyalty to partners was not a strong point. I read Pattie Boyd's biography and he could be quite cruel. He also got obsessed with meditation, to the neglect of many other things. Overall, he still 7ecseems cool.
And John was very talented but he could be mean.
All in all, they were a great group and they seemed like solid people. I just especially like Paul. You could count Ringo in, too. They are thoroughly nice guys, there is nothing spoiled or mean about them, they were not involved in any scandals.

This message has been deleted.

Really?, cuz he admitted to being a huge coke fiend.

What did Ringo ever do that would place him under Paul on your integrity scale?
Hey, he's not the brilliant songwriter that Paul is, but that is not what you were focusing on.
Ringo has always been able to hold his head high, he has always taken every high road. He has been a pillar of stability as a Beatle and ex Beatle for 50 years.
You make this statement about Paul in terms of comparing him to the other Beatles. That's a pretty narrow focus group. So I just wonder what Ringo has done to place him beneath Paul according to your standards?