Anyone catch this at the Nazi--er, National Review site?

[bunkerbuster1]

This was so funny, I just had to share.

Buckley's preppies, apparently, got called on their BS and were sued.
And now they're actually asking for DONATIONS! I kid you not.

from
http://nationalreview.com/comment/appeal200409130736.asp

It was a very costly affair. Even though we have libel insurance, it comes with a $50,000 deductible. That, along with other attendant costs, brought our entire defense expenditure to more than $65,000 — money that NR can ill-afford. At the time, we were contemplating setting up a defense fund, which we felt would have attracted not only donations but media interest as well. However, we decided against it because the litigation was still pending.

So now we are out $65,000, money that came right out of NR's budget and should have been used to pay some bills. So, once again, we turn to you. If you would like to help defray this expense — let's call it a post-defense defense fund — you can make a contribution via Paypal or send it directly to National Review (215 Lexington Avenue; 4th Floor; New York, N.Y. 10016). Anything you can do will be gratefully accepted.

---

all together now: "Awwwwwwwwwww..."

/bb

[KurtNYC]

1. LOL - They sell freeps a subscription, send them lies and

then when the lies are exposed in court they ask the freeps to bail them out of their deductible?! That's just funny.

I also note their "solution" is not to spend more on fact checking.

[amber dog democrat]

2. Whom did they libel?

this time. ?

funny.

I may mail them a few pennies and some paper clips..

[bunkerbuster1]

3. oh, just some Arab guy

...and since, to Buckley's preppies, they "all look alike," so we can't really hold these NR folks accountable. I guess.

(to be honest, the linked story didn't go into a lot of detail, but I guess it was a matter of some guilt-by-association presumption of the sort that OUGHT to get these schmucks in trouble more often, but rarely does.)

/bb

[amber dog democrat]

4. You think they might have taken a media law & ethics class.

prior to working for the NR. I would point them to New York Times vs Sullivan and go over what constitutes grounds for punative damages.

A reckless disregard for truth or falsity is a good place to start.

ha ha ha ha ha ha

How stupid is this ?


ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Thanks you made my afternoon.

[Vogon_Glory]

5. RSVP Your Regrets And...

I hope that many recipients of that e-mail from NR will RSVP their regrets and send a financial contribution to DU instead.

:)

[chicagojoe]

6. Conservative Buttholes At Work.

I know, I know. Conservative Buttholes is redundant.