Here's an idea. Give a five dollar discount to anyone who submits proof of cancellation of his/her New Republic subscription with the subscription fee.

What better way to increase paid readership while driving another nail into Crazy Marty's coffin.

My conservative friends are already crazy.

One good reason to subscribe to print is that having the physical magazine around the house makes it more likely you will read something not immediately interesting to you, and thereby discover something new and wonderful. It encourages you to branch out into other topics, other sources of information, you might not otherwise explore.

Tilting at Windmills makes great potty reading, too!

Actually, the very fact that WaMo articles tend to be short is a selling point to me. Not that my attention span is People-length, but the long articles in The Atlantic often mean that I set the magazine aside until I have more time to read it. WaMo can pretty well be devoured over a single lunch.

I like this kind of pitch: straightforward, down to earth. You should buy our magazine cause it's like pretty good and stuff.

It's a nice antidote to Sullyman's shameless peddling of his "conservatism of scruple and mirth" and that book of his: "the Conservative Bosom: a Meditation for the Betterment of all Mankind".

By all means, subscribe to the paper magazine. Fatten the corporate collaborators and increase your carbon footprint in one simple stroke. Shame about all the trees felled for the printstock, the caustic chemicals used in the printing, wasted fuel in the postage and distribution. But those effects are out of sight, so they need not burden your conscience.

$30 is a lot of money for me right now. It's a week's groceries.

damn, hawk, i agree with you.

Kevin, unfortunately I have a problem. I love your blog, I read it every day, but most of the writing in your employer's magazine is from DLC-ish pro-corporate wonks and the kind of "Sensible Liberals" (to use Tom Tomorrow's phrase) that brought us the Iraq War. It seems to be moving in a more progressive direction lately, but much of it still seems to represent the Democratic side of conventional Washington groupthink. You are based in California, too far away to hang out with the in-crowd for lunch.

Now, if there were a way I could give money to you that wouldn't go to them ...

Will there be any nude photos of Anna Nicole Smith in it?

I've finally given in and gotten one. If this does not make me more interesting at cocktail parties I will be most put out.

I don't think the Washington Monthly panders to necropheliacs Joe Bob Briggs. But I imagine that like all good Capitalists, if there was a sufficent market then they would include nude pictures of the corpse of Anne Nichole Smith.

I took advantage of the "early bird" renewal rate that was offered weeks ago.

Alright, I'm in. I guess I owe the mag a bit, as I read the blog and online articles pretty regularly. Where else but on Kevin's blog would you get to name a cat, find out about the amazing Scanpan (I got two, a wok and a griddle; they're great!), and find out about peak oil, all in one place?

OK, so here's some bucks for the founders of Kevin's feast.

BTW, the Scanpan post is here

And I should have said, the founders of Inkblot's feast, right?

I suggest you dump the print edition and go entirely net as more and more publications are doing. Sell subscriptions as before and send each issue to subscribers by Email attachment. Among other things, you won't suffer the arbitrary space requirements of print. Your articles can be as long as you want them. Art, too, can benefit. And you are not bound by deadlines set by printers et al. Lots more advantages; these are just some.

I read most of it online but still subscribe (have for years) as a political contribution.

AMERICAN HAWK: Is there any chance that TNR and Washington Monthly can be bundled, leading to one low price for two publications?

What is this thing you call "cocktail parties"?

I might. To contribute in some way. But I have to admit I was pissed about the dismissive attitude regarding Seymour Hersh's essay here (from the New Yorker) and thought I might never post again.
I got over it, but it smacked me around a bit and I did not like it.
But I generally adhere to the reasonable person standard, and moved on with it.

"...we break a lot of stories before they hit other people's radar screens...you'll be ahead of the curve..."

I don't know about cocktail parties, but on at least one occasion I silenced a verbal sparring partner with info I'd gleaned from WM's pages. A Repub friend was prattling about the Chilean welfare system built on the private investment model so beloved by the Bush admin. I was able to murmur, "... but not the Chilean military, who were probably alone in having their wishes honored." Like S.J. Perlman in his prime, I rose and exited the room, conscious that I had scored.

Whats old is new again. Was it really 35 years ago I had a subscription to the monthly and Charles Peters commentaries? Guess I better subscribe again, particularly with anecdotes like this one that correctly describe the President as a recovering Alcoholic, who'll do anything, say any thing, and still be likeable to family and friends. He's got a disease, and anyone who has a relative recovering from Alcoholism, knows its symptoms, and effects/affects. The only difference is this one has his thumb on the nuclear button. Scary thought, isn't it?