Congressman Bob Turner. I don’t know about you, but to me, that special-election victory was a pleasant surprise. The election of a conservative Republican — pro-life and pro-marriage — in New York City was cause for celebration, and the more so because of some of the reasons for the win: growing opposition, even among registered Democrats, to liberal economic policy, liberal health-care policy, and even the cultural and legal push for a redefinition of marriage.
Bob Turner, by the way, got his first national coverage from yours truly on National Review Online. That was in 2010, when he challenged Rep. Anthony Weiner. Conservative-party chairman Mike Long and pollster John McLaughlin knew it was a long shot with the power Weiner then wielded. But Turner didn’t do too badly that first time round, gaining 40 percent of the vote against a six-term incumbent, despite the lack of resources and of mainstream-media attention. And now Turner — the guy who decided he’d had enough while watching his congressman on The O’Reilly Factor — has provided a little hope and change in the 9th district of New York.
I know not all readers of National Review and National Review Online agree with me, or with NR corporately, on all the issues — including some of the contentious ones that played a role in the Turner race — but, given that you are here, reading this, I suspect we have much in common. We want to preserve what has made our nation that shining city on a hill, that beacon for those who seek freedom. And you come back here because you know that Mark Steyn and Jonah Goldberg and Ramesh Ponnuru and Rich Lowry and Andy McCarthy and Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell and Charles Krauthammer and Kevin D. Williamson and — the list goes on and on — are in the business of conserving the constitutional values that have stood the test of time.
Some of you have known National Review since its founding. You have vivid memories of our late founder, William F. Buckley Jr., on Firing Line, still the best public-affairs program in the history of American television. Many of you have been reading National Review Online now for years. Others of you have just discovered us, maybe even in the last few months, weeks, or days. Whenever it is you joined us, you’re sticking with us. Even through a fundraising plea. National Review has always relied upon the generosity of its readers. Now more than ever: In addition to the fortnightly magazine, we are producing a product — this website — that requires bandwidth, talented writers and experts in various fields, technical people, and electricity. And believe me, we are frugal. You’re not paying for Starbucks runs or subsidizing expense accounts with your donation. In fact, most of the instant expert analysis you read on the Corner — long considered a cyber water cooler for conservatives — comes to us for free. Writers want to appear here, because they know their work will be read. By political powerbrokers. By educators. By media professionals. By culture changers. By you.
And all of this is, as you know, a plea to you: Please contribute to our fall fundraising drive. We need your support to continue to exist. To continue to bring you the authors you love. To continue to bring you informed reactions. To continue to highlight the Bob Turners of the world, before others give them a shot. To continue to challenge, to provide the facts, to encourage, and to give grief, too, where needed.
Your contribution of $500, $200, $100, $50, $25 — whatever you think is doable right now — will help to fund the continued life and growth of National Review. We’re always challenging ourselves to get you our best and clearest quickly and consistently. To investigate. To engage. Even to entertain. To make the mission set forth in 1955 go viral. Our readers have helped us since Day One, and with your donation, here, today, you will be a critical partner in assuring we see many more days, standing athwart bad ideas, yelling Stop, and shining a spotlight on what’s Right.