Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHahaha! National Review smears climate scientist, dares him to sue, begs for cash to defend suit!
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2012/12/20/this-is-what-you-wanted-this-is-what-you-get/Like his claim to be a Nobel laureate, the charges against NR are baseless and very much worth fighting. National Review doesnt look to get itself sued, but neither does it shy from a fight, especially one like this. Rich Lowrys response to Manns legal threats exactly captures our mood and determination.
As many of you know, National Review is not a non-profit we are just not profitable. A lawsuit is not something we can fund with money we dont have. Of course, well do whatever we have to do to find ourselves victorious in court and Professor Mann thoroughly defeated, as he so richly deserves to be. Meanwhile, we have to hire attorneys, which aint cheap.
The bills are already mounting.
This is our fight, legally. But with the global-warming extremists going all-out to silence critics, its your fight too, morally. When we were sued, we heard from many of you who expressed a desire to help underwrite our legal defense. We deeply appreciated the outpouring of promised help.
Now we really need it.
Whodda thunk it? A crappy publication that pushes junk science and writing finds itself the victim of the free market--no one wants to buy it, so it's cash strapped. And now defending itself from a victim of its smear campaigns.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 889 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hahaha! National Review smears climate scientist, dares him to sue, begs for cash to defend suit! (Original Post)
geek tragedy
Dec 2012
OP
"not a non-profit — we are just not profitable" - shouldn't they pack up, then?
muriel_volestrangler
Dec 2012
#3
DollarBillHines
(1,922 posts)1. What a sorry lot and a typical Rightie response
They push, shout and bluster. Then, when someone pushes back, they run to Mommie.
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)2. They should ask the Koch brothers. n/t
muriel_volestrangler
(101,315 posts)3. "not a non-profit — we are just not profitable" - shouldn't they pack up, then?
By their free market principles, it's clear not enough people want to buy their shit. It's a pretty pathetic magazine/website that can't afford to defend one libel case, especially one whose editor writes chest-beating crap like "we look forward to teaching him a thing or two about the law and about how free debate works in a free country".
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)4. Our job is not to worry about them. We'll never convince them that they
should take personal care and responsibility for their lives.