In the email: "From: Barack Obama Subject: I want to meet Ann."

Kind of creepy, no? It gets creepier:

Ann --

Two years ago, I met 10 of you.

10 of me? An army of Althouses — is that really what you want?

Actually, as his "10 of you" locution suggests, his view of me is completely generic. He wants me to give $3 and be entered in a raffle be one of 3 winners of trips to Las Vegas (of all places) to meet him. That's not what I call "want[ing] to meet Ann."

"I want to meet three supporters like you backstage at a rally in Las Vegas." I don't think you even what to meet "supporters like [me]." That would be sad.

Click to read the whole email.

Ann --

Two years ago, I met 10 of you.

Just before I accepted our party's nomination in front of 80,000 people in Denver, I spoke with 10 grassroots supporters who had won a trip to meet me backstage.

I still remember the time we spent together -- because these are the people, like you, who stood with me in 2008, and got me through the tough fights since.

But we face another test on November 2nd that will say a lot about our future -- and I need you by my side again.

A Supreme Court decision I strongly disagree with has shifted the balance of power in our elections from folks like you to giant corporations. Their massive spending on attack ads could have a real impact on who represents you at all levels of government. Only supporters like you -- and all the work you are doing -- are standing in their way.

This may be our toughest fight yet.

So next week, just 11 days before the elections, I want to meet three supporters like you backstage at a rally in Las Vegas -- one of the last big rallies of this campaign.

Will you make a $3 donation now to be automatically entered to win a trip to be at my side at the rally in Vegas?

This movement has always been about more than me. It's about change, and the kind of future we envision for this country.

The folks I met backstage in Denver told me they wanted health reform, a clean-energy economy, and a resolution to the war in Iraq. They wanted a new kind of politics, and a new kind of leader.

It was their hope and expectation that together we would move beyond the status quo, that we would counter the special interests and corporate influence in Washington -- that we would do what was right and necessary for all Americans.

With your help, we have made historic progress, but there is much left to do -- and it will not happen without your involvement. I need strong allies in Congress who will stand with us in the tough fights ahead, and I need you to give it all you've got through November 2nd to make sure they can.

Your donation today will provide critical support to our Vote 2010 campaign as we reach out to millions of voters who will decide the closest races across the country.

It will determine if we pass this test, and win our toughest fight yet.

Please donate $3 or more to be automatically entered to win a trip to Las Vegas to meet me backstage:

https://donate.barackobama.com/Backstage

I hope to see you out there,

President Barack Obama

P.S. -- Making a donation automatically registers you for the sweepstakes. You may also enter the sweepstakes without making a contribution either online or via text message -- click here to enter online or here for instructions on how to enter via text message. No minimum contribution is necessary to be registered.

No purchase or contribution necessary to enter. Void where prohibited. You can enter the contest without making a contribution by clicking here. Only U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents over the age of 18 who are residents of the 50 states or D.C. are eligible to enter. Entries must be received by 11:59 p.m. on 10/15/10. Three winners will receive one round-trip ticket within the continental U.S. to Las Vegas, NV; hotel accommodations for one; and a meeting with President Obama at a rally event on 10/22/10 (approximate combined retail value $1,200.00). Odds of winning depend on number of entries received. Promotion is subject to Official Rules, available here, including restrictions on eligibility.

Government computers, government employees, private email, and state open records laws.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court rules in favor of individual privacy.

Burn, Davey, Burn — The Self-Immolation of David Weigel.

Consider poor, conflicted David Weigel. Hired by the Washington Post, he had the trappings of prestige and therefore he deserved the admiration of the cool young journalists of Washington, D.C. But his assignment was to cover the conservative movement, and that threatened to make him toxic, a man to be shunned. He needed a way to wriggle — to wiggle-Weigel — into the good graces of the cool kids. He had to show that he was covering conservatives, but he was not one of them.

He could try to do that subtly, and without deviating from the good-faith performance of his assigned task, perhaps by writing in a neutral, questioning style about what was going on with the righties these days and carefully raising doubts, undermining foundations, and strategically inserting a knife blade now and then. But would they get it? Didn't he need something a little more emphatic... and a little hipper?

So David started letting his need for lefty approval express itself on the email list, the Journolist, where the cool kids were being intimate and snarky. But those other kids were not tasked with covering conservatives. While they might have been embarrassed if the mean things they wrote in the email were ever leaked, they didn't have careers founded on their suitability for covering conservatives. The risk poor Dave took was of an entirely different nature. Why, Dave, why? Why did you risk the plum job?

“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?” Weigel lamented in one February email.

In other posts, Weigel describes conservatives as using the media to “violently, angrily divide America.” According to Weigel, their motives include “racism” and protecting “white privilege,” and for some of the top conservatives in D.C., a nihilistic thirst for power....

Of Matt Drudge, Weigel remarked, “It’s really a disgrace that an amoral shut-in like Drudge maintains the influence he does on the news cycle while gay-baiting, lying, and flubbing facts to this degree.”

He also said:

“This would be a vastly better world to live in if Matt Drudge decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire.”

Such nastiness doesn't hurt Matt of course. Matt drops another link, gets all the traffic, and moves on. Ironically, it is Dave who is undone. Having shown us his vivid hostility to the conservatives he was supposed to explain to us, we no longer have any reason to read him. Having destroyed the appearance of his capacity to enlighten us, he has lit the flame of his own self-immolation.

UPDATE: Weigel resigns.

Various readers suggest that the email-leaker was after Dave’s job. I think the WaPo should have a no-journolister rule for Weigel’s replacement, which would solve that problem, among others.

Indeed. One of the problems that might be somewhat solved is the cheeky smugness of the young journalists. The exclusive little club turned deadly for one of its members. And isn't funny how people who should be in the know still don't get modern technology. Tiger Woods brought down by texting, Dave Weigel by email, etc. etc.

AND: In smugger days:

David Weigel|6.14.10 @ 5:01PM|#

Well, I really enjoyed the two and a half years I spent here, and I'm constantly confused as to why mentions of my name lead to a lot of schoolyard insults. I really can't figure out why they do it -- lack of fulfillment seems like a good enough theory. After all, I'm here, and they're where I left them in 2008.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to return to my rewarding job and large circle of friends. I don't know how my ego will ever recover...

(Thanks to C3 for pointing to that.)

"As Watergate taught us, we rightfully reject illegally breaking into candidates' private communications for political intrigue in an attempt to derail an election."

Says Sarah Palin, after the man who broke into her personal email account was found guilty of obstructing justice and unauthorized access to a computer.

(The 22-year-old student, who faces a 20-year prison term, would like you to see what he did as a mere prank.)

"To any of the ladies I’ve offended, I apologize.."

"I say this to the men out there who have never opened a graphic image on the Internet: Don’t vote for me. For those who have, I welcome your vote."