Dave Weigel is my friend. Not one of my best friends. But he is a friend.

So when I see stories erupt involving him, like the one in which he is currently engulfed, I take an interest-- and find myself prepared, and arguably well-placed, to say some things that may not prove popular but which I think deserve an airing. And with that, here goes nothing.

Earlier in the week, Dave caught fire, proverbially, when comments he made in a supposedly off-the-record email listserv populated by prominent liberal bloggers and reporters (the famed "JournoList") were leaked. It turns out they weren't the kind of comments that conservatives were going to love. Matt Drudge “should set himself on fire” is the one that got the most attention.

This morning, the Daily Caller ran a separate story detailing further Weigel comments made on the listserv which appear to have conservatives even more pissed off. At the risk of drawing further attention to something that Dave may want to disappear, I'm going to list some of these right here so I can discuss them below (note: profanity follows): [intro]

“I hope he fails" (said in the context of Rush Limbaugh's hospitalization)

“Honestly, it’s been tough to find fresh angles sometimes–how many times can I report that these [tea party] activists are joyfully signing up with the agenda of discredited right-winger X and discredited right-wing group Y?”

“this need to give equal/extra time to ‘real American’ views, no matter how fucking moronic, which just so happen to be the views of the conglomerates that run the media and/or buy up ads." (said in discussing what's wrong with the mainstream media)...

That's the title of a piece I ran over at BlogHer on Monday... here's an excerpt:

About two weeks ago, following June 8 primary night, the big meme in political media was “The Year of the (Republican) Woman.” Primary victories by the likes of Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina in California, and a strong performance by Nikki Haley in South Carolina, followed on the back of victory the week prior by Susana Martinez in New Mexico.

But since then, another narrative seems to be taking hold in some quarters—that these women aren’t really women, they’re men in skirts. That is so because they a) didn’t emphasize their gender at every turn in the course of their respective primary races or b) don’t focus, or toe the line, on “women’s issues”—or both. In particular, objections have been raised that these women either are not pro-choice or are insufficiently vocal about being pro-choice, and therefore—the subtext seems to be—they’re more akin to men in skirts than “real women.”

It’s a sort of modern, through-the-looking-glass version of the critique leveled by a few on the distinct, definite right wing of American politics regarding Hillary Clinton back in the day: She wears pantsuits, therefore she’s not a “real woman.” The argument went then, real women wear skirts, and the items at the top of their priorities list are kids, husband, and housework, not kids, husband, and career. It continued: Have a career and want to pursue it, even if it means making some sacrifices like not being a stay-at-home-mom? Pro-choice? You’re a feminazi who is destroying America—and you certainly shouldn’t be elected to high office, where you might serve as a role model....

> Read more & share

Democrats across the country may be playing off of the BP disaster in the Gulf of Mexico to raise money, but Patty Murray, it appears, isn't one of them. Nope: Murray is using something more tried-and-tested-- hyping the dreaded Karl Rove's determination to take her down this November.

Here's a screenshot of an email I received just a few minutes ago, entitled "Karl Rove & Dino Rossi":

Why I find this interesting: Right now, I know very few self-proclaimed liberals or progressives (i.e., Democrats' online fundraising base) who aren't pissed off as all get out with Democratic leadership in Washington, DC. It bears a reminder, of course, that in the Senate, Murray is the #4 ranking member of said leadership, which has moved everything from a health care bill lacking a public option (which her base hates), to financial reform that many liberals/progressives deem toothless, and which has basically stalled on progressing (no pun intended) cap-and-trade and has been relatively silent when it comes to that favorite old Democratic base concern-- getting US troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

I have no doubt that the base will turn out and vote for Murray and her fellow Democrats. I also have no doubt that unions will whip their members to go volunteer and knock on doors to help turn out the vote for Democrats as November nears. But make no mistake, a relatively subdued and unenthused base is a problem for Democrats as they head into November, primarily because together with the continued crappy state of the economy, it's going to mean they'll raise less money than they otherwise might-- and as much as I, or they, may not like it, the fact is, in states with relatively large media markets (say, Seattle), money is going to matter. ...