|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 29, 2010 19:40:34 GMT -4
Jackson did marry Elvis's daughter after all, so he has as much claim to the King's thrown as anyone. Has Jackson become such a household name yet that we no longer need to call him by his last name? Can we just say"Michael" and everyone will know who we mean?
Enquiring minds want to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jun 29, 2010 20:23:46 GMT -4
JHas Jackson become such a household name yet that we no longer need to call him by his last name? Can we just say"Michael" and everyone will know who we mean? Enquiring minds want to know. Not on this forum, people might think you're talking about Michael Collins.  |
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 29, 2010 20:33:35 GMT -4
If you were to randomly go up to people and ask "So, what do you think of Michael?" I doubt he'd be the first person they think of. It's way too common a name for even him to go by without also using his last name.
|
|
|
|
Post by lazarusty on Jun 30, 2010 0:50:13 GMT -4
What about Michael Ellis? Who remembers Michael Ellis? Who is Michael Ellis?
|
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jun 30, 2010 0:58:07 GMT -4
He's got that island in NY harbor, right? |
|
|
|
Post by lazarusty on Jun 30, 2010 1:01:56 GMT -4
Not the one I'm thinking of. |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 30, 2010 11:14:20 GMT -4
Has Jackson become such a household name yet that we no longer need to call him by his last name? Can we just say"Michael" and everyone will know who we mean? Enquiring minds want to know. My brother is Michael, I have an uncle named Michael, and I have a cousin named Michael. So no, saying just "Michael" will only confuse me. |
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jun 30, 2010 19:10:21 GMT -4
Among my friends we usually refer to Michael Jackson using his initials, MJ.
|
|
|
|
Post by lazarusty on Jul 1, 2010 1:50:29 GMT -4
They don't get mixed up with Michael Jordan? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jul 1, 2010 3:53:21 GMT -4
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Jul 1, 2010 4:00:07 GMT -4
That's why in these here parts we call 'em Jacko the Wacko 'cause, to be quite frank, that kid was nuttier then a hazelnut farm and had more issues then the Royal Gazette. |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jul 1, 2010 10:21:48 GMT -4
Jacko the Wacko, the king of pop. That is great. He certainly was a confused soul.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jul 1, 2010 14:29:55 GMT -4
I believe he was guilty, but I was still able to pity him. That whole family is seriously messed up.
|
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 1, 2010 16:52:05 GMT -4
I believe he was guilty, but I was still able to pity him. That whole family is seriously messed up. Well I suppose that even skeptics are entitled to believe things that are unsupported by the evidence once and a while. |
|
|
|
Post by lazarusty on Jul 2, 2010 3:40:07 GMT -4
Yeah, it was a set up. I remember when the story first broke in about '93, it seemed unreal, the newsreaders were reluctant to report it, you could hear the unbelief in their voices. Storm in a teacup. But you know, if you keep telling the same lie over and over, people will eventually believe it which they did when the second allegations flew about a decade later. Pressure on him to give up the rights to The Beatles music, is one conspiracy theory. MJ hinted at a conspiracy behind it all but wouldn't elaborate.
|
|
