Foster Kamer has a post up at the village voice about who smeared Dave Weigel, a gem from the piece:

I’m of the idea that Journolist was a bad idea in practice — because there is always a rat, always — but think that writers should be allowed to be sentient human beings with, you know, opinions about things. Otherwise, hold them in for seven presidential administrations, and the next thing you know, you’re Helen Thomas and your incredible legacy is now marred because you expressed an opinion about your job for the first time in your life that you’ve held in for way too long, that ends up being a “shocker” to people, and costs you your rep.

Take a look at that paragraph and the willful blindness it contains and it tells you a lot about the author. Poor Helen Thomas if only nobody knew what she really thought, we could have admired her in ignorance, just like Alger Hiss.

What annoys me is the title and the premise, Who smeared Dave Weigel? Smeared?

You might say who betrayed Dave Weigel, who outed Dave Weigel, who exposed Dave Weigel who embarrassed Dave Weigel but not smeared.

Smeared implies a falsehood, there is no falsehood here, Weigel wrote what he wrote of his own free will and said what he said.

Calling tea party activists racists, that is a smear. Exposing Weigel’s and Thomas’ true feelings in their own words to the light of day can be called many things but smear is not one of them.

So in the words of Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

If Foster wants to defend Weigel he should take a page out of Stacy McCain’s book:

Ali Akbar called me to discuss WeigelGate and pointed out something: Weigel hung out with us in NY-23, in Boston during the Brown campaign, at CPAC and at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.

During all that time, Ali remarked, not once did Weigel do a “gotcha” by disseminating reports of the off-the-record stuff he saw and heard. Whatever vicious snark and gossip Weigel dished out via his blog, or e-mails or Twitter, he did not abuse his journalistic privilege by burning the people who gave him access.

That is the defense of a friend rather than of an ideologue. Weigel is really lucky that he has Stacy McCain as a friend. Stacy will fight for his friends till hell freezes over and then will fight on the ice.

That is what the Washington Post calls him:

Robert C. Byrd, a conservative West Virginia Democrat who became the longest-serving member of Congress in history and used his masterful knowledge of the institution to shape the federal budget, protect the procedural rules of the Senate and, above all else, tend to the interests of his state, died at 3 a.m. Monday at Inova Fairfax Hospital, his office said.

Newsbusters notes his lifetime American Conservative Union rating was 28

Why is this the case? Well it is impossible to write the history of Robert Byrd without noting his involvement in the KKK. Interestingly enough as our fair and balanced media kept painting Tea Party Members and Conservatives as racists it was the democrats who were the party with a former KKK member in their caucus.

This was a problem, but now that he is dead, no matter what his actual voting record the media can now use the word “Conservative” to deflect that fact away from the party.

Update: CNN just called him an “archconservative” just before bringing up the Klan, what a bunch of phony bastards

Because he puts these two sentences back to back concerning Weigel/journolist situation:

If there is something that should be kept sacred in journalism it’s a non-biased reporting of the facts(often times questionable today) and that items “off the record” stay off the record. While Weigel’s remarks give us insight into how the left are willing to talk about conservatives from within the protection of their own echo chambers, the true scoundrel here is whoever released his comments.

When two sentences earlier he writes this:

According to the story about the list, often times this is where news is first developed and then echoed out to the country through blogs and editorials. Up to this point however, no one has been outed for their participation and what they’ve said.

So let me get this straight, this “echo chamber” is where news is “developed” and the “echoed” to the world, by a group of hard liberals in a “secret and secure” group to paint things a particular way to influence the American people and we are worried about a scoundrel who leaks e-mail about some guy venting?

It’s like saying Tessio is a scoundrel and Clemenza is not. They’re all friggen Mafia! They are by definition all scoundrels.

We need to be much more worried about how they are trying to spin the news as a collective than if Dave lost his temper and some guys decided to be a pain over it.

Via Glenn who puts it best: No honor among schmucks.

The only words that Joe Scarborough & Co seemed to know were “Joe Barton” during their interview with Eric Cantor.

Why Cantor didn’t say to Joe: “I know that the democratic talking points are to try to make the election about Joe Barton rather than Barack Obama, and if that’s the Democrats plan to keep power and win elections then they have very little respect for the intelligence of the American people.”

It’s moment like this why I wonder why I watch the show.

Now that Claire McCaskill is now I wonder if she is going to be grilled or pressed Will they ask about the “Betray Us” vote? The closest thing to a tough question was why are we in Afghanistan from Barnicle.

If this is how even Morning Joe is going to play the game, then I might have to change my opinion on if the GOP should bother going on the show. Why bother when the alternate media is out there?

to this post because he caved pretty fast:

Six days after walking away in a huff, the MSNBC host returned to his spot on the blog on Tuesday morning, with the headline “So, uh, this looks like a nice site.” He began: “OK, I’m back.”

MSNBC has no viewers to spare. So when you appeal to a niche market you belong to that niche, period!

why didn’t you bother to post about Mika’s big revelation?

Because as the Jamie wearing fool points out it isn’t a big revelation.

They have received e-mails and tweets from the White House on Air before as I recall. There is absolutely no secret about it but the fact that she is reading White House talking points (read liberal talking points) verbatim frankly is no different that what the MSM has been doing for years. When Democrats/Liberals have talking points the press has run with them for years. That is no more breaking news than the White House talking points were.

The idea that I’m going to be anymore outraged by it now, particularly since Mika does us the courtesy of not pretending otherwise is laughable.

“The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim.” Ahmed Aboul Gheit Egyptian Foreign Minister Jan 2010

I actually take this story from Atlas with a grain of salt, not because I doubt the veracity of Atlas (I trust her implicitly) but because I don’t trust Ahmed Aboul Gheit to tell the truth. I expect them (the Egyptians) to say whatever is to their advantage. She does however raise a much more interesting point:

This is a devastating claim, and yet no media outlet is covering it.

Can someone explain to me how 5 months this was said on Television, not whispered, not a rumor, not in confidence or unattributed, that it takes a US blogger to introduce such a statement to US media? Even to just call it a joke?

If the old media doesn’t want to do it’s job it should get out of the way and let those willing to do the work do it.

He calls out Morning Joe over covering for Obama and isn’t shy about it. You have 3-4 to one going after him, Joe is sitting back, but Mika, Barnicle, Ratigan, and Cramer are all going after him and they aren’t laying a glove on him. In fact Ratigan seems to be conceding points! Money quote from Rudy:

“I know you love him and want to protect him but the people of this country are more important than the president.”

Rudy is the only person who I’ve ever voted for when there was a clear pro life choice as an alternative because he leads.

…but it isn’t the least. He is basically connecting the Militia movement to the Tea Party movement. When asked if he is connecting Scott Brown supporters to the militia movement he bluntly says so.

It is a disgrace, it is just plain propaganda. He wants to paint a particular picture and MSNBC will help him do it for the sake of their political twist. This is simply evil.

Deutsch “questions” if it simply because Barack Obama is black and Matthews demurs. He is smart enough

NOT the confederate flag!
to know that such a charge will cost people he supports votes. He also talks about the Gadsden Flag and what it represents and how it worries him.

It is for this reason why we have women in Boston deciding that the Gadsden flag is a “Confederate” flag and why I got such a reaction from those older Black Women in Georgia. It’s because Chris Matthews and men like him decide to paint a false picture for the few viewers they still have. I didn’t see a Matthews crew at the Twin City Tea Party’s flag day event.

He is a purveyor of bigotry and if he’s not ashamed of himself, its simply because he no longer has that capacity.