Hey Yoko ... have a nice hot cup of STFU

I cannot stand Yoko Ono. Yet she also represents how, when John and Paul each had a similar decision to make, John was smarter.

"Linda, I love you! Come sing backup and help ruin my songs with Wings!"

Not even necessary to reference the alleged Knebworth tape from 1990. Just listen to her on Silly Love Songs.

Now John:

"Yoko, you are a talented person! SO talented, I think you should . .go into that other studio and make your own music! Sure, me and Clapton will play on a couple tunes, but YOUR name will be on thm, because you're SO talented!"

McCartney's ego was the main force behind the breakup of the Beatles, so I think Yoko gets a bad rap there. She contributed, but Paul's complte lack of respect for his bandmates hastened that decline.

That all said, she has been an absolute psycho when it comes to what she calls "John's Legacy." Yoko is very wrong in this case. At least, wrong to threaten to sue. But perhaps not completely wrong . . . .

It would be very interesting to find out the truth behind just what (or who) Lennon Murphy was named after. I've never heard of her until now, so I don't know what the story is behind that.

But here's a bio that reads like an official PR release:

http://www.melodic.net/artistsOne.asp?artistId=7942

"The New York-born Nashville-bred girl named after, yes, John Lennon, headed to Sanford, Florida in mid-2002 to work on what would become Damaged Goods."

Yoko is being an ass. But in thinking Lennon Murphy is using John Lennon's name, she's not completely wrong. In legalese, it can be said that since she is named after the great musician, she is indeed using his name to sell records. Yes, it's her name, but it came from where, again? And she could have recorded under the name "Lennon Murphy" to mark a clear difference.

 

Yoko Ono allegedly did give Lennon permission to record under the name Lennon before her first album came out. Just saying.

 

[blue]Another story Hondo linked from foxnews.com. I'm shocked.[/blue]

 

If Lennon Murphy even sought such permission in the first place, she already went above and beyond what should be expected.

She is named after John lennon. She records without her last name - likely because some record company flack thought it would sell more records - but who cares? Yoko should be glad John's name is in the news for something other than her insanity.

 

You can be my Yoko Ono! (Ah-hooo, woah woah)...

Take it Canucks!

(Yeah, that CD is in my player right now...)

 

Does that mean it didn't happen?

Check Google News asshole. It's on about 20 web sites.

 

Blue font, hondo. Blue font.

 

Using the same logic, Kenny Rogers could sue Kenny Chesney.

 

It's on a bunch of Web sites. But it appears the only one that did even the basic reporting thing of calling Ono's attorney is E! Online. The rest of them just ripped it off each other's Web sites. So the fact that the story appears a bunch of places means nothing -- since it appears only one of them went to the trouble of doing the journalism 101 thing and the rest just repeated what they saw elsewhere. It's like if I report you had sex with a goat and 30 Web sites just pick it up without checking it, the fact that it's on those 30 Web sites does not make the story credible. It's irrelevant how many places you find on a Google News search.

 

Note I'm not saying the story isn't true -- one of them links to a PDF of court papers. I'm just saying the fact that it's on 20 Web sites is not a basis for arguing the story's validity -- it's totally meaningless.

 

After checking out her website, I'm thinking a certain Heisman Trophy winner might be a fan, too.

I'm just sayin'.

 

If she has to change her name it will be just like starting over.