i think 69% is too low for this. even though the songs might not be as radio smash worthy as the singles on The Fame, i think overall they are better. i was never a huge fan of her until hearing this because i thought The Fame was kind of boring aside from all the singles and "Beautiful, Dirty, Rich." every song on this release is catchy as hell, i can't stop listening to it.
Sure she has musical talent and it's nice that she actually writes her own lyrics, but honestly from what I've heard/seen of her lyrics don't seem to have any more depth than Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus or any other pop diva. Sure plenty of bands have image, but the outfits of the Ramones and Beatles aren't comparable. They weren't out trying to get attention because of zany outfits. They captured audiences with music, and that was their intent. It appears to me that Gaga's antics take priority over the songs themselves. The importance of her image is far more extreme than that of the other comparisons you've made.
To sum it up, image was never the focal point of The Beatles or The Ramones, it was the music. When it comes to Gaga, it seems like the persona of Lady Gaga, the wardrobe and the flashy stage shows are the focal point, not the music. That's what I dislike.
it's really not fair to compare her to artists like Britney and Miley. maybe she isn't an amazing lyricist, but she does not deserve to be lumped together in a category with manufactured pop stars who can't write, perform, play an instrument, or sing live. at least she's built this name for herself instead of having someone else do it for her.
and image has meant something to a lot of artists... David Bowie, Freddie Mercury, Elton John, Madonna... they all centered their music around theatrical images and stage performances. for some people, that's all they have. but it wasn't for those artists and since Gaga has shown that she actually has some raw talent i don't think it will be for her either.