When you're America's most venerable* journal of White Supremacy (h/t Brother Charlie Pierce) and you're once again caught flat-footed on the wrong side of history, there's only one thing to do.
Call the Tone Police!
Nothing to see here; just the National Review criticizing dissents by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson for their “shrill tones” and “shrillness.” pic.twitter.com/7scgXVexBd
— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) July 4, 2023
From Jonah Goldberg, David French and Ann Coulter to Dinesh D'Souza, Noah Rothman and Kathryn Jean Lopez, the National Review has been the whelping box for more poisonous ideas and noxious media creatures that were then portaged over into the mainstream media than any other single Patient Zero of the Conservative mind virus.
By all rights, they should have been put out of business long ago, forced to pay off their creditors like some weirdo pillow guy: by auctioning off their fax machines, Rich Lowry's Palin-era, jizz-stained bow tie collection and Kathryn Jean Lopez's reliquary of dubious Catholic artifacts.
But of course, as elite, front-of-the-line Wingnut Welfare Queen, the National Review doesn't have to worry about such grubby, proletarian concerns. From Wikipedia:
As with most political opinion magazines in the United States, National Review carries little corporate advertising. The magazine stays afloat from subscription fees, donations, and black-tie fundraisers around the country. The magazine also sponsors cruises featuring National Review editors and contributors as lecturers.
[William] Buckley said in 2005 that the magazine had lost about $25,000,000 over 50 years.
Let me state for the record that, as an extremely cost-effective Liberal blogger and podcaster, I'd be willing to lose half that amount, twice as fast...for America!
I Am The Liberal Media
“Venerable”
— Hal Sparks (@HalSparks) July 13, 2023
ven·er·a·ble
adjective
1accorded a great deal of respect, especially because of age, wisdom, or character."a venerable statesman"
🍿*munch munch*🍿 https://t.co/1z7PkSXTNy
