NYC Boss

NYC Boss

The Editors of National Review Believe . . .

The Editors of National Review Believe . . .

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett is sworn in during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Washington, D.C., October 12, 2020. (Patrick Semansky/Reuters Pool)

. . . the following, which we state as we launch this Stand with ACB flash webathon, and with which we are confident you will agree:

  1. That there is a Liberal point of view on national and world affairs, for which the word “Liberal” has been appropriated;
  2. That the point of view consists, on the one hand, of a distinctly Liberal way of looking at and grasping political reality, and on the other hand of a distinctly Liberal set of values and goals;
  3. That the nation’s leading opinion-makers for the most part share the Liberal point of view, try indefatigably to inculcate it in their readers’ minds, and to that end employ the techniques of propaganda;
  4. That we may properly speak of them as a huge propaganda machine, engaged in a major, sustained assault upon the sanity, and upon the prudence and the morality of the American people — its sanity, because the political reality of which they speak is a dream world that nowhere exists, its prudence and morality because their values and goals are in the sharpest conflict with the goals and values appropriate to the American tradition;
  5. That National Review must keep a watchful eye on the day-to-day operations of the Liberal propaganda machine: the theses it puts forward, the arguments (if any) it advances in their support, and the (implicit or explicit) policy recommendations it urges on us — in a word on the Liberal Line.

Everything old is new again: What you have just read was in fact first published by Bill Buckley in the November 19, 1955, inaugural issue of National Review. Today, barely a month from our 65th Anniversary, our sentiments and self-assigned task remain as true as they did then. These things speak to the sense of duty, to the sense that this institution is vital, is critical — as it especially is in these momentous SCOTUS confirmation battles that, at their core, are about protecting our Constitution from the Left’s assaults.

NR is a uniquely reliable and consequential alternative to the liberal media (maybe better described in 2020 as the hellbent leftist media?), becoming ever more important and sought after as the ever-partisan MSM has dropped any pretensions it might have had of objectivity and fairness. NR’s role in the fight to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett has already been (to understate the matter) profound: Do read Rich Lowry’s piece today for a thorough accounting.

We can only do what we do — on behalf of you and our mutual beliefs, so under duress and assault — with your financial support. In this weeklong drive, we are hoping to raise at least $150,000. It’s all terribly needed, but we’re realists: The target may prove to be a bridge too far. Well, it may be, but we will strive for that, and if we can, to surpass it, because our consequential voice, sustained by your camaraderie and generosity, is one of the few things that stand between a triumphant Left and our nation as the last best hope of earth.

In the heat of this raging political fight, where this voice must remain loud and powerful, “the Editors of National Review believe” . . . they believe that good and honorable conservatives will stand with us. Or, as we like to see it, that we will have the honor of standing alongside you.

Please donate to this to our flash webathon here. If you wish to contribute by mail, please make your check payable to “National Review” and mail it to: National Review, ATTN: ACB Webathon, 19 West 44th Street, Suite 1701, New York, N.Y., 10036. Many thanks.

Published at Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:58:31 +0000