July 17, 2013, - 2:18 pm

KUDOS to CVS: Drugstore Chain Says NO to Rolling Stone Tsarnaev Rock Star Cover Boy Treatment

By Debbie Schlussel

Rolling Stone magazine, which called me, “That Jew Lady,” after 9/11, is a dying magazine. Nobody reads it. It gets an occasional moment in the sun, when it published an embarrassing comment (calling Joe Biden, “Senator Bite Me”) that forced a U.S. general in Afghanistan to resign. And recently, the magazine enjoyed stoking conspiracy theories galore against the Obama administration over a reporter that died in a car accident (um, when has Rolling Stone EVER attacked Obama? Magazine Owner Jan Wenner’s a huge Obamanik). Now Rolling Stone features Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its latest cover, giving him the glamorous rock star cover boy treatment, romanticizing him as if he’s just a stoned lead singer of a band instead of an Islamic terrorist who blew up nearly 300 Americans, wounding hundreds and murdering four (including a security guard later on).


Rolling Stone is reveling in the attention the controversy has brought its dying brand, and clearly picked the cover by design for that purpose. And so I give kudos to CVS for refusing to carry the issue featuring Tsarnaev on the cover. Finally, a retailer has some guts, though it’s too bad the retailer doesn’t just dump Rolling Stone altogether, which would be an even more appropriate move. I’m glad CVS displayed corporate courage rarely shown in a politically correct world in which Islamic terrorists are “freedom fighters” and “legitimate resistance” and other such baloney terms.

Following a flurry of negative comments online, CVS Pharmacy announced it won’t be selling this month’s issue of Rolling Stone in their stores. ” As a company with deep roots in New England and a strong presence in Boston, we believe this is the right decision out of respect for the victims of the attack and their loved ones,” it said on a statement on Facebook.

The thing is, Rolling Stone will probably sell more of this issue and get more traffic to its website than ever. That’s why they whored themselves out to Tsarnaev like one of those disgusting “Free Jahar” chicks.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

45 Responses

It would seem that these brain-dead ditzes’ Tsarnaev fetish (with their “Free Jahar” bumper stickers and such) would constitute reason #1001? of why the 19th Amendment was a mistake (and ditto for the 26th Amendment), no?

As for Rolling Stone’s “political” coverage, it’s like reading a magazine from Bizarro World. Up is down, right is wrong, evil is good, and everything else out of Orwell’s “1984.” Their glorification of Islamo-terrorists such as Tsarnaev is no surprise, given how they’ve demonized anyone who sounds the alarm of the threat as “Islamophobes” and so on. To them, the NRA is a bigger threat (surprise, surprise – never mind that the one organization that truly deserves the “merchants of death” moniker they wrongly placed on that group, is Planned Parenthood which Rolling Stone lionizes).

ConcernedPatriot on July 17, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    You absolutely nailed it, CP! Well done!!

    Skunky on July 17, 2013 at 5:23 pm

We called CVS and gave our support. We are already prescription customers…was just in there yesterday to buy some needed COUGH meds, candy for the grandkids and aspirin for ME!!

It is just ME AGAIN on July 17, 2013 at 3:12 pm

Sean Collier was an MIT Police Officer. He was not a Security Guard. Not that there is anything wrong with Security Guards, but Officer Collier earned the right to be called a Police Officer. RIP Warrior.

Harbinger on July 17, 2013 at 3:27 pm

    Right on!

    Jay Bird on July 18, 2013 at 11:23 am

Rolling Stone put on their minors’ hard hats- brightest of lights affixed-, made their way to the bottom and kept right on digging.

What have they accomplished besides the purchase of temporary immunity from Muslim attack? Well that and unanimous world-wide accolades of the Left?

Advice to George Zimmerman: Conversion to Islam would go a long way in your rehabilitation in the eyes of them you can not see.

lee of the lower case "l" on July 17, 2013 at 4:04 pm

It’s a TERRIBLE magazine. They are extremely LEFT and are not afraid to hide it. The only interview I remember enjoying in decades was a two year old interview with a depressed Phil Collins. (A recent one on Natalie Maines was fun ONLY because one could read between the lines that she is a nutter, ruined her music career and her band (and band-mate relationships). She’ll never admit it but the proof was in her angry interview).

It’s all lefty lies, all the time. I do not bother to read Lefty rags because at this point in the game I know them and why should I get worked up over lies they promote? I don’t need to read “both sides” when I know 100% of the Left’s lying game.

I wonder if that walking bucket of diarrhea Matt Taibbi is not some kinda Mooooooslim or like a Lebanese Christian or something. He’s the BIGGEST Lefty liar who is treated like a lying King at RS.

His Dad was a famous Boston News reporter back in the day but I always thought he was Italian. As I learn more about Mooooslims, the ME and Dhimmis, lately I have been wondering if his last name is NOT Italian but Arab or Mooooooslim.

I see many “Boston Strong” T-shirts daily. It really makes me sick. Not a thing strong about Donk controlled and corrupt Boston!

Skunky on July 17, 2013 at 5:20 pm

Oh, I can tell the issue is gonna be bird cage liner already.

Willie Nelson (Boring, old pot-head. I hate his voice and I hate his music…and I LOVE country music!!).

Robin Thicke (A cheesy, corny, douche-chill nobody really knows or likes. He just acts like “Mr. Sex” when he’s a boring, dweeby joke. ZZZZ) His cheesy, Canadian dad is far more interesting.

Jay Z (An ugly, “Dino” from the Flintstones look-a-like. I heard NPR review his new CD and it was TERRIBLE. I am no Kanye West fan but the production on his (from NRP review, too) sounded interesting and different…the parts where the RAPPING didn’t ruin it!! I’d never listen to that boring, hack Jay Z…bung Justin Bieber in the CD player before that fool!).

Skunky on July 17, 2013 at 5:37 pm

    Holy crap, Skunky! Please don’t say it’s so you hate “On the Road,Again” and “Always On My Mind”.

    I can’t fathom that. Please confirm!?

    lee of the lower case "l" on July 17, 2013 at 6:33 pm

      Yep. Sorry. I hate his voice. Very much.

      But I do love Bob Dylan. Very much.

      Skunky on July 17, 2013 at 8:26 pm

        Sorry WN’s voice is a deal breaker for you, Skunky. Those two songs, particularly “Always On My Mind” count as real deal poetry.

        But that you love Dylan matters more. To miss Dylan’s gifts would be something like preferring Shemp to Curly. 🙂

        lee of the lower case "l" on July 17, 2013 at 9:17 pm

This rolling stone has gathered plenty of moss.

Where do you go when subversion is a cliché?
Explosive Demolition?
They suck.

knowitall on July 17, 2013 at 5:40 pm

A shitty rag named after a shitty song. I found it mildly interesting for a couple of months around 1980, and have not bought it since. I’d like to meet the POS who wrote ‘Jew Lady’.

Not Ovenready on July 17, 2013 at 5:41 pm

    Dylan’s “Like A Rolling Stone” a shitty song?! Have I read that correctly? More likely I’m a bit loopy this evening.

    lee of the lower case "l" on July 17, 2013 at 6:36 pm

Most magazines r going digital..lack of sales.

These guys will apparently do anything to move magazines.

Good for CVS..

sanjay on July 17, 2013 at 7:00 pm

Say what you will about Rolling Stone Magazine, owner Jann Wenner is a master marketer and he KNOWS his customers. Does that make what he did by giving Tsarnaev the rock star glamour cover treatment right or sensible? Of course not.

Rolling Stone is about making money, and Wenner is extraordinarily gifted in getting his loyal customers to part with their money by purchasing the rag. Not for nothing is Wenner worth an estimated $700 million. Wenner will likely be a billionaire by the time he retires, if he does retire.

Wenner LOVES the free press he’s been getting and in his book, there’s no such thing as bad press. Rolling Stone thrives on such controversy. Wenner knows that for whatever lost revenues this cover causes, temporarily, he will more than make it up and generate and even larger readership. The “Banned in Boston” tactic does NOT work.

Ralph Adamo on July 17, 2013 at 8:39 pm

    Thanks Ralph but I’m not in the marketing business so I don’t really need to be a Jann Wenner fan boy.
    Everybody knows how the game gets played.
    Are you so lost you don’t even know when it stops being a game?

    The magazine isn’t being “banned”.
    They’re just refusing to sell it at one outlet as far as I can tell and that “works” fine for them.

    hasimir on July 18, 2013 at 5:56 am

      You miss the point totally, hasimir. So I’ll make it plain as day for you: Don’t blame Rolling Stone or Jann Wenner for doing what they do; blame the people who buy the magazine (which is what creates the real source of their revenue stream, the advertising revenues). Get it? (Got it.) Good!

      Ralph Adamo on July 18, 2013 at 12:41 pm

        Sorry Ralph my man that’s kind of like saying don’t blame the pusher. Blame the addict. Getting it? Got it? Good.

        It’s important to understand that people like you are what I think in German is called “das gleiter”. The slipping away of the world although you consider yourselves to be the rock and mortar.

        Shops aren’t obliged to sell this garbage and we aren’t obliged to listen to you give us the same tired old mover and shaker spiel about it.
        Like I said everybody knows the game. The only difference is you get off on it.

        Jann Wenner has a right to green light a Tsarnaev cover and I have the right to despise him for it.
        Got it? Thanks

        hasimir on July 19, 2013 at 4:27 am

          hasimir, you say: “Sorry Ralph my man that’s kind of like saying don’t blame the pusher. Blame the addict.”

          Yes, that’s right. The drug problem is the result of the drug consumer. That is the nature of business. If there is a demand for a product, such as drugs, there will be a supplier to deliver it. In the case of drugs, that is all the more the case because the drugs are illegal and risks are involved, thereby making the selling of drugs exceptionally profitable for suppliers. Moreover, the fact that drugs are illegal, makes them all the more enticing to the drug consumer, who is a very weak person to begin with.

          So, your analogy only proves my point.

          But to return to the magazine business, of course merchants have the right to stop selling Rolling Stone or any other product that they choose to. Am I condemning that? Of course not. But what I am saying is that by banning the product, it only increases the demand for it among Rolling Stone’s customer base, and such “banning” may even lure in new customers because they are enticed by the notion of purchasing a “banned” product. This is especially the case where, as here, Rolling Stone is getting mountains of free publicity.

          Thus, if the aim is to harm Rolling Stone, I say those actions not only don’t harm Rolling Stone, but they actually have the opposite reaction, creating demand for the product.

          That is why Jann Wenner is laughing all the way to the bank when he gets all this publicity and when vendors say they will ban his product from their shelves (for the month, that is).

          I’m sorry that you don’t understand business or economics, and understand nothing about psychology. You might try reading a little about those subjects.

          I will also take back my “get? (got it) good!” line. I had assumed that you had some basic background to intelligently discuss the subject. My assumption was unfounded. You are simply too uninformed to get it no matter how thoroughly I attempt to explain it to you. There’s simply no educational background, knowledge, or training in your case to “get it.”

          Ralph Adamo on July 21, 2013 at 7:04 am

        P.S. Why do morons like you always assume that everyone who disagrees doesn’t get it?
        “Hate the game, not the player”. Is that really your argument?

        hasimir on July 19, 2013 at 4:33 am

          I’ve already made it clear that you don’t get it. Read and learn something for a change. If you want to hurt Rolling Stone, organize a boycott against the top advertisers. That’s how you hurt a magazine, not doing the “Banned in Boston” schtick. And as for your name-calling, I will not stoop to participating in jejune confabulations with a bewildered individual with saponaceous lard-laden brain tissue remnants.

          Ralph Adamo on July 21, 2013 at 6:20 pm

Also, kudos to Tedeschi, Shaw’s, Stop & Shop, Market Basket, RiteAid, KMart, Walgreens for not selling the issue.

Rocky Lore on July 17, 2013 at 9:08 pm

They should put that douche nozzle’s picture on those rubber screens they put in the bottoms of urinals.

RT on July 18, 2013 at 12:55 am

Rolling SCVtone Magazine has been dying for years. As noted, it has long since fallen into scandal and conspiracy theory, which is often the final stimulant for a decaying publication. Even Rolling Stone may have overdone it this time.

Worry01 on July 18, 2013 at 5:03 am

Walgreens and Riteaid have also stated they will not be carrying this issue of Rolling Stone. Thanks to all.

Gracie on July 18, 2013 at 6:47 am

I believe most of us “COMMENTORS” live in the U.S. and are Citizens of same.


1. Rolling Stone has Freedom of the Press.
2. All of us have Freedom of Purchase.

Do not buy it! I will not nor have I ever bought it and never will.

This is just another diversion away from Obama’s web of deceit and cover for the impending fiscal disaster.

Dennis on July 18, 2013 at 8:20 am

I can not stand Jan winner. This guy who is such a liberal has such a distaste for progressive rock music. Some of he greatest musicians come from this genre. Yet he had a policy of NOT allowing articles to be placed in his magazine.

As a big wig for the Hall of Fame he blocked many progressive bands. Bands like RUSH which finally made the hall and YES. You NEVER woukd read articles about them or see them on the cover. Even current progressive genius Stevn Wilson of Porcupine Tree and solo artist has not gotten a cover or an article. He even is known as a master of re releasing great albums with modern equipment. Yet he Boston bomber gets an article and cover.

The magazine is so liberal I stopped reading it regularly in the early 70’s. I preferred CREAM or CIRCUS magazine. A bit more objective and straight forward.

Glen benjamin on July 18, 2013 at 11:20 am

Rolling Stone has some egregious writers — e.g., Matt “Gonzo II” Taibbi, Tim Dickinson and Peter Travers, the latter arguably the worst film critic in the world. That said, it runs some genuinely excellent investigative pieces once in a while.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but RS magazine isn’t “dying.” Its total paid circulation in recent years has exceeded one million. Jann Wenner has been a major wheel in the Democratic Party since the mid-70s for a reason. He may be a jerk — ask anyone who’s written for him — but he knows his audience as well as anyone in publishing. That’s why his net worth is in the hundreds of millions.

In case one wonders, I’ve gotten my subscription comped for several years, being an old-timer. So nobody can accuse me of putting spare change in Wenner’s coffers.

Seek on July 18, 2013 at 11:54 am

    Interesting post, Seek. Also Glen B’s was as well.

    Seek is spot on about the writers. If I only cared enough to read Taibbi’s lie-filled articles I could actually audit what percentage he vomits up is actually truthful, but why risk health on something I know without having to look at a stupid word? Anyone who believes his palaver is a sad idiot.

    If Jan Wenner knows his audience he knows they are stupid, Libtards and HATE great music. Raggy RS is a crap magazine. I mentioned the only two interesting articles printed in at least 3 years. I think his readership are prolly junkies too. That’s the state of the content these crappy days. Reading material for junkies.

    They did an expose on mental-cased Britney Spears a few years back (when it was still the size of a Buick) that was interesting. It made me see how she got poisoned by filth, greed and growing up in the lucrative showbiz spotlight. But that did not stop her or her family from putting out product that will poison others as she was poisoned. It’s all about the $$$.

    Skunky on July 18, 2013 at 5:32 pm

Print media is dead.they just don’t know it yet. Apparentlt so is journalist integrity..should we also have a retrospective of a young Artistic Adolf Hitler and how that poor confused young man went off the beaten path?

Rolling stone has the right to their brand.we have the right to protest and express concern to establishments that sell tgis drivel

sanjay on July 18, 2013 at 2:04 pm

If I were dumb enough to have a subscription to this rag sheet I would cancel it immediately.

Paul on July 18, 2013 at 2:15 pm

hermes ??????

hermes ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:01 pm

hermes ?????? ??

???? hermes on August 7, 2013 at 5:20 pm


???? hermes on August 7, 2013 at 5:26 pm


???? hermes ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:29 pm

hermes ??

hermes wikipedia on August 7, 2013 at 5:32 pm


hermes ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:34 pm

hermes ??

hermes ? on August 7, 2013 at 5:36 pm

hermes ??

hermes ????? ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:42 pm

hermes ??? ??????

??? hermes on August 7, 2013 at 5:42 pm

hermes ??

hermes ?? ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:44 pm

hermes ???

hermes ?? ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:46 pm


hermes ?? on August 7, 2013 at 5:48 pm


hermes ????? on August 7, 2013 at 5:50 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field