I didn't see this posted....

[img:$uid]http://i46.tinypic.com/mh7vqq.jpg[/img:$uid]

I saw this a week ago not on the ORG though so yeah you're safe.

[Edited 6/23/10 15:03pm]

too nice an ass for that face

Its time for Rolling Stone to just fade off into the sunset.

lastdecember said:

Its time for Rolling Stone to just fade off into the sunset.

I agree as far as the music side, but politically the last few years, they have been ON POINT. Their journalism is far better than Time, Newsweek, and the shitty news channels.

[Edited 6/23/10 16:24pm]

Layzie said:

lastdecember said:

Its time for Rolling Stone to just fade off into the sunset.

I agree as far as the music side, but politically the last few years, they have been ON POINT. Their journalism is far better than Time, Newsweek, and the shitty news channels.

[Edited 6/23/10 16:24pm]

Not that I mind them doing that but they should've had a sibling mag for the politrick shit.

Layzie said:

lastdecember said:

Its time for Rolling Stone to just fade off into the sunset.

I agree as far as the music side, but politically the last few years, they have been ON POINT. Their journalism is far better than Time, Newsweek, and the shitty news channels.

[Edited 6/23/10 16:24pm]

the thing is alot of the political stuff they get they get from Bill Maher, so i would MUCH rather see him because at least i dont have to sit through bad music with him, i can just laugh my ass off, and not have to read about the lame industry.

lastdecember said:

Layzie said:

I agree as far as the music side, but politically the last few years, they have been ON POINT. Their journalism is far better than Time, Newsweek, and the shitty news channels.

[Edited 6/23/10 16:24pm]

the thing is alot of the political stuff they get they get from Bill Maher, so i would MUCH rather see him because at least i dont have to sit through bad music with him, i can just laugh my ass off, and not have to read about the lame industry.

That's why RS is as corny as it is. Bill got a TV show we all watch for that, we don't need to see it being copied on what was supposed to be a MUSIC magazine and it can't even do a good job being THAT.

Wow...Madonna looks really skinny in that pic.

Lady Gaga is getting on my Gaga-damn nerves

[img:$uid]http://i39.tinypic.com/fwirsm.jpg[/img:$uid]

Jerry Seinfeld to Lady Gaga "You're a jerk!"

Lahan/Getty (Gaga), Morigi/WireImage(Seinfeld)

By Daniel Kreps

Jun 23, 2010 10:02 AM EDT

Lady Gaga may have millions of adoring fans around the globe, but comedian Jerry Seinfeld is not among her beloved "little monsters." In a story that seems like it was ripped from his own legendary sitcom, Seinfeld tore into the current Rolling Stone cover star during an interview with New York sports talk radio WFAN over the pop star's recent behavior at a New York Mets game at Citi Field. Gaga attended the game in the studded leather bra she wears in her "Telephone" video and flipped off fans and paparazzi with a defiant middle finger; when she stole the spotlight from the Mets on the field, the team's front office relocated her to Seinfeld's vacant luxury box. Seinfeld, a lifelong Mets fan, was infuriated, ESPN reports.

"This woman is a jerk. I hate her," Seinfeld said of the pop star. "I can't believe they put her in my box, which I paid for. You give people the finger and you get upgraded? Is that the world we're living in now? It's pathetic." The Mets front office later apologized for allowing Gaga to occupy Seinfeld's luxury box without his permission. "I don't know what these young people think or how they promote their careers," Seinfeld added, later joking about her stage name, "If you take one 'A' off of that and you've got gag." Despite the tirade, Seinfeld acknowledged his fellow New Yorker's stage skills. "She is talented," he added. "I don't know why she's doing this stuff."

Check out photos of Lady ...e moments.

The cast of Seinfeld on the cover of Rolling Stone, July 8, 1993 and Lady Gaga on the current cover of Rolling Stone.

Mark Seliger (Seinfeld), Terry Richardson (Gaga)

Seinfeld's outburst comes just days after Lady Gaga unnerved front office members of the New York Yankees — the team the Bronx native Gaga actually does root for — by appearing once again in just a bra (and reportedly drunk) in the team's clubhouse. Gaga showed up in the locker room following the team's loss to the Mets last Friday and spoke with Yankees' second baseman Robinson Cano. Gaga's behavior led to rumors she was "banned" from the Yankees' clubhouse, but general manager Brian Cashman later clarified that the front office was just upset that she entered the clubhouse after a loss, which is generally frowned upon, according to the New York Post. "She didn't do anything wrong," Cashman said. "There is a time and a place for that, and it's certainly not after a loss and not at the expense of the media doing their job."

The Mets have rebounded from Gaga's outrageous day at the ballpark by launching "Go Gaga For Wright Night" for tonight's game at Citi Field. Mets fans are being asked to show their support for their hot-hitting third baseman by voting for him to appear in the Major League Baseball All-Star Game. The first 20,000 fans who show up will receive a giant foam hand with the "Wright finger" — the index finger, not Gaga's middle finger — pointing upward. As an added bonus, Seinfeld himself will rejoin Mets announcer and Seinfeld guest star Keith Hernandez in the broadcast box during the game.

the fact that BP's Next Disaster is right next to her ass is cracking me up.

Dewrede said:

too nice an ass for that face

I'd still hit that ass, despite her butter face.

Who cares if she's a 'butterface'?

There are enough perfectly beautiful pop stars out there, why is it a big deal if she doesn't 'fit the mold'?

I think it's cool watching someone who isn't so aesthetically pleasing kicking ass, not being ashamed of who she is and playing with people's preconceptions of what a pop star should like.

And before any of you get up on my grill, I'm not just referring to some of the posts in this thread, recently I read something M.I.A said about how 'pop stars should be pretty' when talking about Gaga. Very, very annoying.

[Edited 6/24/10 10:05am]

LetMeLive said:

Who cares if she's a 'butterface'?

There are enough perfectly beautiful pop stars out there, why is it a big deal if she doesn't 'fit the mold'?

I think it's cool watching someone who isn't so aesthetically pleasing kicking ass, not being ashamed of who she is and playing with people's preconceptions of what a pop star should like.

And before any of you get up on my grill, I'm not just referring to some of the posts in this thread, recently I read something M.I.A said about how 'pop stars should be pretty' when talking about Gaga. Very, very annoying.

[Edited 6/24/10 10:05am]

all that and that ass is amazing

midiscover said:

I didn't see this posted....

[img:$uid]http://i46.tinypic.com/mh7vqq.jpg[/img:$uid]

Ok...Rolling Stone Magazine...stop this. This is just getting ridiculous! This is the same woman who boasted on LKL that she's "an icon". Icon for what? This? I like some of her music....but this is just...

[Edited 7/1/10 12:38pm]

uPtoWnNY said:

Dewrede said:

too nice an ass for that face

I'd still hit that ass, despite her butter face.

i reckon i would too

LetMeLive said:

Who cares if she's a 'butterface'?

There are enough perfectly beautiful pop stars out there, why is it a big deal if she doesn't 'fit the mold'?

I think it's cool watching someone who isn't so aesthetically pleasing kicking ass, not being ashamed of who she is and playing with people's preconceptions of what a pop star should like.

And before any of you get up on my grill, I'm not just referring to some of the posts in this thread, recently I read something M.I.A said about how 'pop stars should be pretty' when talking about Gaga. Very, very annoying.

[Edited 6/24/10 10:05am]

she's trying to look all sexy and seductive in that picture so she puts herself up for criticism

[Edited 6/25/10 3:48am]

Timmy84 said:

lastdecember said:

the thing is alot of the political stuff they get they get from Bill Maher, so i would MUCH rather see him because at least i dont have to sit through bad music with him, i can just laugh my ass off, and not have to read about the lame industry.

That's why RS is as corny as it is. Bill got a TV show we all watch for that, we don't need to see it being copied on what was supposed to be a MUSIC magazine and it can't even do a good job being THAT.

Rolling Stone has always covered politics, though. Jann Wenner was known as a counterculture political nutcase back in the 60's ,and the 70's marked the magazine's hallmark in covering politics. They didn't focus soley on pop music/tv phenomenons until much later down the road. Vintage editions of Rolling Stone are pretty cool actually. I wouldn't mind if they went back to something akin to their old skool format, that's how gems like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas are born

Ottensen said:

Timmy84 said:

That's why RS is as corny as it is. Bill got a TV show we all watch for that, we don't need to see it being copied on what was supposed to be a MUSIC magazine and it can't even do a good job being THAT.

Rolling Stone has always covered politics, though. Jann Wenner was known as a counterculture political nutcase back in the 60's ,and the 70's marked the magazine's hallmark in covering politics. They didn't focus soley on pop music/tv phenomenons until much later down the road. Vintage editions of Rolling Stone are pretty cool actually. I wouldn't mind if they went back to something akin to their old skool format, that's how gems like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas are born

I know that but they still should've had a separate format for that.

I still hated what that magazine has turned into the last little while.

[Edited 6/25/10 11:03am]

lastdecember said:

Its time for Rolling Stone to just fade off into the sunset.

It's a time for a lot of these magazines to fade off into the sunset.

Layzie said:

lastdecember said:

Its time for Rolling Stone to just fade off into the sunset.

I agree as far as the music side, but politically the last few years, they have been ON POINT. Their journalism is far better than Time, Newsweek, and the shitty news channels.

[Edited 6/23/10 16:24pm]

Don't you find them just a teeny bit biased? That hatchet job they did to McCain before the election was pretty shameful and they are certainly well to the left of most of the country.

I do think that their coverage of the financial meltdown/mess is solid but that's mostly the work of one writer (Matt Taibbi). Otherwise I find their political writing much too one sided. Not all Republicans are evil.

rialb said:

Layzie said:

I agree as far as the music side, but politically the last few years, they have been ON POINT. Their journalism is far better than Time, Newsweek, and the shitty news channels.

[Edited 6/23/10 16:24pm]

Don't you find them just a teeny bit biased? That hatchet job they did to McCain before the election was pretty shameful and they are certainly well to the left of most of the country.

I do think that their coverage of the financial meltdown/mess is solid but that's mostly the work of one writer (Matt Taibbi). Otherwise I find their political writing much too one sided. Not all Republicans are evil.

I find them to be on point, and most of the rest of the country to be to the far right.

Vulgar......plain and simple.

paintsprayer said:

rialb said:

Don't you find them just a teeny bit biased? That hatchet job they did to McCain before the election was pretty shameful and they are certainly well to the left of most of the country.

I do think that their coverage of the financial meltdown/mess is solid but that's mostly the work of one writer (Matt Taibbi). Otherwise I find their political writing much too one sided. Not all Republicans are evil.

I find them to be on point, and most of the rest of the country to be to the far right.

You may have missed my point. Over the last 30 plus years America as a whole has moved farther to the right. I don't know who first said it but there is a lot of truth to the statement that Richard Nixon was the last liberal president. Heck, even the sainted Ronald Reagan probably could not win the republican nomination today because he would not be considered conservative enough. If you consider most of the country to be to the far right then that must mean that the centre has shifted to the right. You would never know this by reading Rolling Stone which seems trapped in the '60s. It's fine for Rolling Stone to be a far left soapbox, they have no responsibilty to be balanced in their coverage, but to me it weakens many of their arguments and positions when they are so blatantly biased. I think that if they tempered some of their rhetoric they would have a better chance of reaching a wider audience with some of their views.

Anyway, back on topic. That's some ass on Lady Gaga.

rialb said:

paintsprayer said:

I find them to be on point, and most of the rest of the country to be to the far right.

You may have missed my point. Over the last 30 plus years America as a whole has moved farther to the right. I don't know who first said it but there is a lot of truth to the statement that Richard Nixon was the last liberal president. Heck, even the sainted Ronald Reagan probably could not win the republican nomination today because he would not be considered conservative enough. If you consider most of the country to be to the far right then that must mean that the centre has shifted to the right. You would never know this by reading Rolling Stone which seems trapped in the '60s. It's fine for Rolling Stone to be a far left soapbox, they have no responsibilty to be balanced in their coverage, but to me it weakens many of their arguments and positions when they are so blatantly biased. I think that if they tempered some of their rhetoric they would have a better chance of reaching a wider audience with some of their views.

Anyway, back on topic. That's some ass on Lady Gaga.

That is sort of the point, if they want to do stories that report facts and truths they will be perceived as left wing. The country moving to the right is not a good thing and people should not roll over for it.

paintsprayer said:

rialb said:

You may have missed my point. Over the last 30 plus years America as a whole has moved farther to the right. I don't know who first said it but there is a lot of truth to the statement that Richard Nixon was the last liberal president. Heck, even the sainted Ronald Reagan probably could not win the republican nomination today because he would not be considered conservative enough. If you consider most of the country to be to the far right then that must mean that the centre has shifted to the right. You would never know this by reading Rolling Stone which seems trapped in the '60s. It's fine for Rolling Stone to be a far left soapbox, they have no responsibilty to be balanced in their coverage, but to me it weakens many of their arguments and positions when they are so blatantly biased. I think that if they tempered some of their rhetoric they would have a better chance of reaching a wider audience with some of their views.

Anyway, back on topic. That's some ass on Lady Gaga.

That is sort of the point, if they want to do stories that report facts and truths they will be perceived as left wing. The country moving to the right is not a good thing and people should not roll over for it.

That's a fair enough point but I don't think they do a good job of letting the facts speak for themselves. Too often the political writing in Rolling Stone is coloured by opinions and not facts.

I agree with many of their pieces, in particular I think they are doing a good job covering the problems on Wall Street and the lack of real reform, but the way they are presented leaves a lot to be desired. I think if they were a bit less partisan that they would have a better chance of being respected and recognised by folks on the other side of any given issue.

This is the issue that got the general fired. With gasga naked on it. RS is getting their shine.

paintsprayer said:

rialb said:

Don't you find them just a teeny bit biased? That hatchet job they did to McCain before the election was pretty shameful and they are certainly well to the left of most of the country.

I do think that their coverage of the financial meltdown/mess is solid but that's mostly the work of one writer (Matt Taibbi). Otherwise I find their political writing much too one sided. Not all Republicans are evil.

I find them to be on point, and most of the rest of the country to be to the far right.

This is the issue that got the general fired. With gasga naked on it. RS is getting their shine.

that was actually the last issue, with Jay Z on the cover.

RKJCNE said:

paintsprayer said:

This is the issue that got the general fired. With gasga naked on it. RS is getting their shine.

that was actually the last issue, with Jay Z on the cover.

ahhh

[Edited 6/27/10 18:23pm]