Rolling Stone Magazine has lost wh**ever credibility it had left: Personally, I have never turned a page of this rag, and now I know I never will.

Worried for our children Loc: Massachusetts

Personally, I have never turned a page of this rag, and now I know I never will.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/convenience-stores-announce-boycott-rolling-stone-magazine-boston-marathon-bomber-cover

A letter from R.S.M. to all of us:

'Our hearts go out to the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing, and our thoughts are always with them and their families. The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone's long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens. -THE EDITORS'

Boston Mayor, Thomas M. Menino to editors of R.S.M.

B.F.D. Union president to the editors

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Worried for our children wrote:

Personally, I have never turned a page of this rag... (show quote)

As one of the talkers on Fox said this morning, Rolling Stone hasn't really been relevant the past 30 or so years.
:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Worried for our children Loc: Massachusetts

oldroy wrote:

As one of the talkers on Fox said this morning, Rolling Stone hasn't really been relevant the past 30 or so years.
:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Ok good, because I read a statement from a current musician earlier, and he said the same but said 5 years instead.

It's only been three months, let the victims heal, is all I'm saying.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Worried for our children wrote:

Ok good, because I read a statement from a current musician earlier, and he said the same but said 5 years instead.

It's only been three months, let the victims heal, is all I'm saying.

I won't be reading the piece in that mag, but I bet there are no words about the intent to shred skin and blow off legs and other limbs in the bombs that were used. Another one is trying very hard to make a terrorist look like a good looking "boy".

Ghost Loc: The 1st state to ever secede

The only time I found the Rolling Stone useful was when there was no toilet paper around.

Worried for our children Loc: Massachusetts

Ghost wrote:

The only time I found the Rolling Stone useful was when there was no toilet paper around.

👏👏👍👍 thanks for the laugh, Ghost.

Lou Loc: Florida

Gotta laugh at RSM 's paltry and pathetic excuse , "examine the complexities ..."
There are no complexities , the kid was terrorist , inspired by islam , and filled with enough h**e inculcated by his own parents to murder innocent people .
RSM is counting on a goodly number of i***ts to pick up their magazine based on it's outrageousness for even putting this slimeball's mug on the cover ,WELL AFTER ALL THE FACTS are clearly understood by all .

Who is that phony letter kidding ? The only time I would find this appropriate is AFTER this dirt bag is executed with the big red letters A.M.F. under his mugshot .

sisl Loc: West by God Virginia

RS is also good for lining bird cages and wrapping garbage.

I'm surprised to see that they are still publishing.

I read them when I was a 20-something, then I grew up.

Michael Nestorick Loc: Northeastern Pa.

If you find the article in Rolling Stones offends you, don't read it. Remember the 1930's. The First Amendment was put in place for all people and the press. Our government is trying to erode away our freedoms. Wake the hell up.

Lou Loc: Florida

Michael Nestorick wrote:

If you find the article in Rolling Stones offends you, don't read it. Remember the 1930's. The First Amendment was put in place for all people and the press. Our government is trying to erode away our freedoms. Wake the hell up.

Exactly . And that means not buying it . Uh ...in case you hadn't noticed , it's not the government restricting anything in this issue . In fact in this country , the only examples of seeing free speech restricted , comes from the religious or private sector who attempt to use government to klegislate such restrictions . Fortunately we have a Constitution and a Supreme Court .Each citizen is also entitled to due process .
Don't know where you live , but why not post ONE EXAMPLE of a freedom you have recently lost .
[ please be specific ]

Lou Loc: Florida

Michael Nestorick wrote:

If you find the article in Rolling Stones offends you, don't read it. Remember the 1930's. The First Amendment was put in place for all people and the press. Our government is trying to erode away our freedoms. Wake the hell up.

Exactly . And that means not buying it . Uh ...in case you hadn't noticed , it's not the government restricting anything in this issue . In fact in this country , the only examples of seeing free speech restricted , comes from the religious or private sector who attempt to use government to klegislate such restrictions . Fortunately we have a Constitution and a Supreme Court .Each citizen is also entitled to due process .
Don't know where you live , but why not post ONE EXAMPLE of a freedom you have recently lost .
[ please be specific ]

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Lou wrote:

Exactly . And that means not buying it . Uh ...in ... (show quote)

Per Secret Service regulations effective Spring of 2012, no individual or group of individuals may protest with 150-200 feet of any event the Secret Service is providing protection to a participant. That would be an abridgment of the free speech as well as right of assembly in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Perhaps because the policy went into effect in 2012 they may not be recent but it is a "freedom" lost.

Lou Loc: Florida

AuntiE wrote:

Per Secret Service regulations effective Spring of 2012, no individual or group of individuals may protest with 150-200 feet of any event the Secret Service is providing protection to a participant. That would be an abridgment of the free speech as well as right of assembly in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Perhaps because the policy went into effect in 2012 they may not be recent but it is a "freedom" lost.

Uh.....that's got nothing to do with free speech auntiE and I think you know that . I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt , that you are an educated woman , so please think about this example again . Considering the number of death threats and recent assassination attempts on Ford, Reagan , Bush Sr. , it's simply common sense in Security Measures . Since you've been born no one can enter the National Rotunda in Session to protest there ,as you will promptly be arrested .
Bad Example - try again.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Lou wrote:

Uh.....that's got nothing to do with free speech a... (show quote)

It in fact does have to do with free speech. Be assured I am perfectly aware of the issues relating to threats against elected officials. Considering the precautions taken at all events involving the presence of the Secret Service, it is still a violation to not be able to speak up or carry a sign. Certainly, a limitation on the size of said signs is appropriate. Proceeding through security at any event with the Secret Service is arduous and very time consuming. If, in fact, they would maintain the proscribed parameters such would be acceptable. They are not living to those proscribed parameters but ever expanding them.

My examples do not have to meet your perceptions of violations of freedoms.

Lou Loc: Florida

AuntiE wrote:

It in fact does have to do with free speech. Be as... (show quote)

No , they just have to meet COMMON SENSE . I think it ain't so common with you huh auntiE . I'd ask you to think , but that may turn out more disastrous than the last time , which resulted in this present ridiculous explanation by you .