You’d have needed two hands, because the leg is très when it comes to avoirdupois. But nope, there’s no pulling required. Informed that, in the initial moments of our March webathon, 810 people have already made contributions — to help us wage war against the woke, and against our legal enemies who seek to crush both NR and free speech (don’t take my word — take Rich Lowry’s) — it turns out the truth is true. Disbelief will have to give way.
810. Zounds! That is a righteous number. Speaking of numbers: Our goal is to raise $250,000, each and every selfless penny of it sorely needed (twice as much is needed in fact, and then some). Of the selfless friends who in the past few days have joined us at the barricades, some have chosen to express views and encouragements while passing the ammunition. We share such:
- Tom spots us a $50 and shows his age (and affection): “Been reading you almost daily since Bill Buckley. Thank you all for your dedication toward spreading truth.” Thanks for helping us cover the spread.
- Michael offers $100, and words that from his lips we pray meet with God’s ears: “Mann will lose . . . eventually. In the meantime National Review and the other victims of his frivolous lawsuit suffer the real punishment — being bled dry while being dragged through the courts. But keep fighting! I can’t help but think that it will be worth it to see Mr. Mann get his well-deserved comeuppance someday. A publication like National Review is an ever more rare and precious commodity in the world today. We can’t afford to lose it!” Mikey, you got us pumped. Your words and deed mean a lot.
- Ted also drops a C Note on us, and this: “I cannot thank National Review enough for helping me keep my sanity over the last twelve months. Given the sensationalism and/or advocacy to which most other outlets have lowered themselves, NR is undoubtedly the most important publication in this country. Continue standing athwart!” We’re way too busy to sit anyway. Thanks, Ted.
- William thinks we merit $500, and we think William rocks. He sends this hefty note: “Reading Andrew Roberts’s account of the attempted defenestration of Winston Churchill at Cambridge, including his masterful refutation, was one more reminder that the intellectual vandals win only if eloquent defenders of Western civilization are silenced. I look forward to every issue of NR, articles on the website, and your podcasts to see and hear what Kevin Williamson, Charlie Cooke, and great newer talents like Madeleine Kearns and Michael Brendan Dougherty have produced. I often send copies of essays to my thirty-something daughters, to counter the very expensive indoctrination they received in college, and persuade them to save the planet by not passing that unnatural gas on to the next generation. (Ignorance is, unfortunately, our most renewable ‘resource.’) Maybe they will be subscribers someday. Until then, please continue in your efforts to save at least this part of the planet from Michael Mann!” Those daughters have a great dad. And we a great friend. Thanks, William.
- Shane puts a Fifty in the tip jar, and then truth-tells: “National Review is possibly the truest magazine I could name. By truest, I don’t simply mean that it prints the truth, which it emphatically does, but it has remained true to its soul through the entirety of its history. I began reading NR in my teens, when Bill was still Editor in Chief. Through a succession of editors it has stayed true to its aims and its journalistic integrity. Today under Rich’s leadership it is fundamentally the same magazine as it was all those years ago. There are other fine journals that speak to our ideology, and I subscribe to some of them. But National Review remains the North Star of conservatism. It is not just a magazine, it is an institution, and it needs to be conserved. I hope others will join those of us who have contributed to this institution. Even a small amount helps move our cause forward.”
Hot diggity dog! I mean come on folks — tell me you disagree with Shane! Or William. Or Ted, Michael, or Tom. You don’t, do you? So try to think of this from our perspective — this is a magazine, true, but also a vital cause, and one under some financial duress (welp, that’s how a millions-costing/still-far-from-over lawsuit can be described). We need your help, literally and sorely. If you can spare $20 or $25 or $50, $100, or $500, or more (a handful of kindly folks have donated a thousand bucks, some even more than that), we’d be thrilled and thankful (deeply!) to receive it. Please contribute here, and for those who prefer to send their generosity via the U.S. Mail, please make your check payable to “National Review” and send it to National Review, ATTN: Webathon, 19 West 44th Street, New York, N.Y. 10036. God love ya!