In protest of what it calls a religion "of the devil," a nondenominational church in Gainesville, Florida, plans to host an "International Burn a Quran Day" on the ninth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks.

The Dove World Outreach Center says it is hosting the event to remember 9/11 victims and take a stand against Islam. With promotions on its website and Facebook page, it invites Christians to burn the Muslim holy book at the church from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.

"We believe that Islam is of the devil, that it's causing billions of people to go to hell, it is a deceptive religion, it is a violent religion and that is proven many, many times," Pastor Terry Jones told CNN's Rick Sanchez earlier this week.

It's astonishing that there are people in America who are so far gone in their islamophobia that they actually would celebrate 9/11 with a book burning.

There is no question there is the direct intention to be confrontational. Pastor Jones is honest about his hatred for Muslims. And, let's be clear, he has the Constitutional right to burn books as a way of making a political statement. What, however, does it say about the character of people who feel that the best way to express their views is the stamping out of all conflicting views?

Burning the Quran isn't going to persuade anybody and will most surely offend a great deal of people in this country and around the world. It certainly won't be a shining example of the central point of Jesus Christ's Sermon on the Mount:

And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

Luke 6:31

My path home took me through a canyon cutting across the Hollywood Hills that separate the San Fernando Valley from the greater Los Angeles basin. As my elevation rose, the outside temperature dropped. It was an overcast night with a hint of moisture in the air, and when I got to the top of the canyon, I saw something that will likely not be seen again around these parts for a few more years: snow flurries. An extremely light and fine dusting, to be sure, and not something that would count for anything by the harsh standards of an East Coast winter. But then, that's why people like to live in Los Angeles, precisely because that sort of thing is indeed such a rarity.

I happened to be waging an online argument with a climate denier conservative at the time--for some reason, it seemed like a worthwhile idea back then. And yes, he loved to bring up the fact that it had recently snowed in Laurel Canyon as evidence of the fact that global warming was bunk. Every single graph in the universe showing record average temperatures across the entire world meant nothing--because for one night, in one small portion of one city, something rare and unexpected had happened.

We went through the same thing on a national level just a few short months ago when the so-called "snowpocalypse" struck DC. Conservatives mocked Al Gore and crooned about the hoax that was global warming. And it didn't matter that climate science expressly indicated that extreme temperature fluctuations in both directions and uncharacteristic weather patterns in local areas were expected consequences of an average increase in global temperatures. The mockery continued unabated.

But now we're faced with a different set of statistics. Let's take a look at a small sample:

Iraq had its hottest day in history on June 14, 2010, when the mercury hit 52.0°C (125.6°F) in Basra. Iraq's previous record was 51.7°C (125.1°F) set August 8, 1937, in Ash Shu'aybah.

Pakistan had its hottest temperature in history on May 26, when the mercury hit an astonishing 53.5°C (128.3°F) at the town of MohenjuDaro, according to the Pakistani Meteorological Department. While this temperature reading must be reviewed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) for authenticity, not only is the 128.3°F reading the hottest temperature ever recorded in Pakistan, it is the hottest reliably measured temperature ever recorded on the continent of Asia.

Myanmar (Burma) had its hottest temperature in its recorded history on May 12, when the mercury hit 47°C (116.6°F) in Myinmu, according to the Myanmar Department of Meteorology and Hydrology. Myanmar's previous hottest temperature was 45.8°C (114.4°F) at Minbu, Magwe division on May 9, 1998. According to Chris Burt, author of the authoritative weather records book Extreme Weather, the 47°C measured this year is the hottest temperature in Southeast Asia history.

Ascention Island (St. Helena, a U.K. Territory) had its hottest temperature in history on March 25, 2010, when the mercury hit 34.9°C (94.8°C) at Georgetown. The previous record was 34.0°C (93.2°F) at Georgetown in April 2003, exact day unknown.

Just to name a few. Heck, it was even sweltering in DC this past week. And from the climate deniers on the right who mock us with every increasingly extreme winter? Not a word. No surprise there, of course. Hard to come up with anything when you have no integrity or respect for the truth, as long as it serves your personal and political agenda.

The Fed’s operational independence doesn’t mean this isn’t a subject people should have opinions about (politicians talk about the Supreme Court all the time) and it’s important. But Paul Ryan seems to have some odd views on how this works:

We need to do things to free up credit. We need regulatory forbearance there. Right now, the policymakers and regulators are doing opposite things. So you’re right that there’s a lot of capital parked out there, and we need to coax it out into the markets. I think literally that if we raised the federal funds rate by a point, it would help push money into the economy, as right now, the safest play is to stay with the federal money and federal paper.

Krugman:

I don’t even know where to start with this. What does Ryan think the fed funds rate is? (It’s the rate at which banks lend each other money overnight, usually to help meet reserve requirements.) He obviously doesn’t know the the Fed funds rate basically equals the return on federal paper, so that raising that rate would make banks more, not less, likely to stay with that federal paper. I’m sure someone will try to come up with a reason why Ryan is being smart here, but the truth is that he’s stone-cold ignorant....

So this is the smartest Republican Congress has to offer?

Of course, Ryan’s idea of fiscal reform is to run huge deficits for decades, but claim that it’s all OK because we’ll cut spending 40 years from now; and he throws a hissy fit when people challenge his numbers, or call privatization by its real name.

But hey, he’s intellectually ambitious.

Ryan's the wunderkind of the Republican caucus, House and Senate. Heaven forfend these people get the Congress back.

• Dante Atkins will have a motivational message in the aftermath of Netroots Nation.
• Decades ago, a science fiction editor set a goal for his authors: "Give me a creature that thinks as well as a man, but not like a man." Now progressives face another challenge, Mark Sumner wonders if we can build a movement that works as well as the conservatives on all levels without becoming like the conservatives.
• Brooklynbadboy will take a decidedly "good riddance" stance towards the downfall of Harlem's "Gang of Four."
• The primary schedule will get back on track this coming week with high-profile primaries in four different states. Steve Singiser will criss-cross the country offering a preview of the goings-on in Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, and Tennessee.
• Laurence Lewis will remind everyone that the right-wing racism now exploding into the open is neither new nor incidental.
• Now that racism and sexism in America are over, Kaili Joy Gray aka Angry Mouse will explore the plight of the new oppressed minority: white men.

He repeatedly refers to Steven Andrew as Steven Alexander. Secondly, Andrew was writing this column for The Examiner .. so it can hardly be attributed to Daily Kos, as both Fox Nation and Milloy did. Thirdly, Milloy falsely claimed that the posting was removed. In fact, it was just edited to satisfy Milloy’s tender sensitivities. Fourthly, Andrew never advocated either euthanasia or suicide for Milloy or anyone else. He merely invoked a humorous reference to the iconic film Soylent Green.

If Milloy and friends really want to crack down on violent rhetoric, they might check a network and a political movement a little closer to home. Where "jokes" and not-so-funny references to strangling or choking people to death, inciting deadly shooting sprees, or national politicians celebrating blowing up occupied buildings are regular events. The list of documented violent rhetoric and calls for violence going out to millions of viewers, readers, and thousands upon thousands of paranoid gun-toting maniacs coming from Milloy's side of the aisle, indeed often from his own news network, go on and on and on right through to this very day:

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton received hundreds of threats at her court offices within hours of her ruling last week on Arizona's tough and controversial immigration law. "She has been inundated," said U.S. Marshal David Gonzales, indicating his agents are taking some seriously.

But Milloy and company conveniently ignore all that, naturally, and instead somehow finds -- or perhaps feigns -- great offense at an offhand reference to a science fiction movie and a hypothetical future corporation that turns volunteers into food. On a website that gets a few thousand hits on a good day. That's telling. Methinks he doth protest too much.

NOM has been tweeting statements from spokesman Brian Brown during the course of the tour--and while a variety of them have been offensive in a lot of ways, this one probably takes the cake:

“It is 1972 for marriage. This is the same as the time as before Roe v. Wade. . . . What if William Wilberforce listened to those telling him not to bring his religion into the public square?”

Let's get the obvious out of the way. William Wilberforce was a British member of Parliament who was best known for his religiously based opposition to the slave trade, and was instrumental in outlawing slavery throughout the British empire in the mid-19th century. And in invoking the ghost of William Wilberforce, NOM has just compared opposition to bigotry against gays to...supporting the slave trade. Now it's not quite full Godwin, but by the time you're talking about the slave trade, you're getting pretty damned close.

That's bad enough. But what's actually just as interesting is in this little snippet, Brian Brown is making an argument that is expressly theocratic. By devolving to a rationale that is based simply on religion in the public square, NOM is essentially admitting that theocratic values are the only reason to oppose marriage equality (truth be told, if you had seen their closing arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, such an admission should come as no surprise).

But when it comes down to it, what Brian Brown is actually doing here is making a unwitting yet fundamental attack on the value of Christian morality. The implication of Brown's statement regarding Wilberforce's motivations is that if Wilberforce had not been so religiously inclined, he would not have pursued his opposition to the slave trade. Does Brian Brown really think that your average Christian believes that slavery is wrong because God said so, and that because in their view God says that gay marriage is bad, it has to be opposed with equal vigor? Is Brian Brown really suggesting that regular believers are so rigidly doctrinaire that they see no nuance?

If anyone needs a lesson in Christian values, it's obviously Brian Brown.

The Other Wes Moore: One Name, Two Fates
By Wes Moore
Hardcover, 256 pages, $25.00
Spiegel & Grau
April 2010

Money quote:

This is the story of two boys living in Baltimore with similar histories and an identical name: Wes Moore. One of us is free and has experienced things that he never even knew to dream about as a kid. The other will spend every day until his death behind bars for an armed robbery that left a police officer and father of five dead. The chilling truth is that his story could have been mine. The tragedy is that my story could have been his. Our stories are obviously specific to our two lives, but I hope they will illuminate the crucial inflection points in every life, the sudden moments of decision where our paths diverge and our fates are sealed. It's unsettling to know how little separates each of us from another life altogether.

Author: First-time author, former Army combat veteran, youth advocate, former special assistant to Secretary of State Condeloeezza Rice as a White House Fellow, speaker at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, investment professional.

Basic premise: Two African American men. Same name. Born around the same time, living in the same city, of roughly the same class. Ultimately, radically different lives. One imprisoned for life, the other a respected professional. Moore explores his life story and that of his doppelganger, hoping to tease out the reasons why some succeed and some fail in very similar circumstances.

Readability/quality: Smooth reading, nice “plot” development if one can say that about non-fiction (you can, regarding memoirs, in my view). Good character description and thoughtful consideration of difficult topics--nature versus nurture writ large in all its complexity.

Who should read it: Fans of memoirs and sociological explorations for laypeople, as well as anyone interested in race and class issues, urban settings, influence of family and peers on personal outcomes.

Bonus quote:

... when I finish my story, the question that comes up the most is the one that initiated this quest: "What made the difference?"

And the truth is that I don't know. The answer is elusive. People are so wildly different, and it's hard to know when genetics or environment or just bad luck is decisive. As I've puzzled over the issue, I've become convinced that there are some clear and powerful measures that can be taken during this crucial time in a young person's life. Some of the ones that helped me come to mind, from finding strong mentors to being entrusted with responsibilities that forced me to get serious about my behavior. There is no one thing that leads people to move in one direction or another. I think the best we can do is give our young people a chance to make the best decisions possible by providing them with the information and the tools and the support they need.

Moore took a subject that could easily veer off into self-indulgence--his personal history and that of someone similar--and made it larger than himself. Weaving his own story and the other Wes Moore’s together, he is able to draw attention to the places of similarities (missing fathers, early rebellions, overworked mothers) and places of difference (strong and involved grandparents, private school). But the parallels and divergences become about so much more than just these two men; the author’s luck in finding mentors, and in finding his own responsibility and strength in military experience outline the importance of structure, peers and adults who are committed to guiding the next generation. Both stories are, in every sense of the phrase, very American stories, with tragedy, challenge and success in our system often pegged to very small steps and missteps along the way.

Being Black, Living in the Red: Race, Wealth, and Social Policy in America
By Dalton Conley
University of California Press: Berkeley, CA
Softcover updated reprint, 217 pages, $24.95
Tenth anniversary edition

Money quote:

In 1865, at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation, African Americans owned 0.5 percent of the total worth of the United States. This statistic is not surprising; most black Americans had been slaves up to that point. However, by 1990, a full 135 years after the abolition of slavery, black Americans owned a meager 1 percent of total wealth. In other words, almost no progress has been made in terms of property ownership. African Americans may have won "title" to their own bodies and to their labor, but they have gained ownership over little else.

Author: Dean of Social Sciences at New York University, Conley has spent his career focusing on class and intergenerational economic patterns. Other books include Honky, a memoir of growing up white in a predominantly minority neighborhood in the 1970s; The Starting Gate: Birth Weight and Life Chances; and The Pecking Order: A Bold New Look at How Family and Society Determine Who We Become.

Basic premise: We’re asking the wrong question when we’re limiting inquiries about economic disparities and race to income and earnings only. What matters, says Conley, at least as much as salary is the ability to amass assets across generations. And there is ample evidence that historical and current policies in America penalize minorities in this area in subtle, yet devastating ways. This edition is updated from 10 years ago when it first was released, with a new introduction that looks at what has changed (or, more sadly and accurately, what has not) since initial publication.

Readability/quality: Free of jargon yet grounded in research. Charts and graphs with strong clarifying summaries make this a relatively easy read.

Who should read it: Anyone interested in delving into the policy behind race, class, economics, education and intergenerational inheritance issues.

Bonus quote:

Herein lie the two motivating questions of this study. First, why does this wealth gap exist and persist over and above income differences? Second, does this wealth gap explain racial differences in areas such as education, work, earnings, welfare, and family structure? In short, this book examines where race per se really matters in the post-civil rights era and where race simply acts as a stand-in for that dirty word of American society: class. The answers to these questions have important implications for the debate over affirmative action and for social policy in general.

Accumulating wealth and transmitting it across generations seems like a no-brainer for explaining many disparities in our society, yet most research that looks at why minorities continue to end up at the bottom of the social and economic ladder seem to focus on education, occupation and income in the contemporary generation. Conley makes a very strong case that the roots of many of socio-economic problems experienced by the African American community are based in wealth transmission problems. He also teases out where class and race diverge, and where they overlap as lower-income Americans of every stripe try to catch hold of the American Dream, which for those at the bottom seems to recede more and more each year. Highly recommended as a book to keep on the shelf as permanent reference and ammo against those who would argue that there is something in transmitted black culture--not economics--that creates hurdles for moving into the middle class.

• The Krazy Kims, acting up once again, as the North Korean soccer team was publicly humiliated in a six-hour ordeal:

  The entire squad was forced onto a stage at the People's Palace of Culture and subjected to criticism from Pak Myong-chol, the sports minister, as 400 government officials, students and journalists watched.

  The players were subjected to a "grand debate" on July 2 because they failed in their "ideological struggle" to succeed in South Africa, Radio Free Asia and South Korean media reported.

• Hilarity from CA-03 and its incumbent Republican, Dan Lungren, who was pulled over for speeding in the middle of a radio interview:

  "Uh, uh, I have to get off the phone just a moment here. ... I'm sorry, I'm talking with a police officer here," Lungren told the hosts of KFBK Morning News just after being introduced on the air.

  Lungren, who was on his way to his Washington office from his Alexandria, Va.-area home, quickly explained that he had just been pulled over for driving "probably just slightly over the speed limit" as he was chatting behind the wheel (he said his phone was in his lap).

  The officer could be heard asking Lungren to get off the phone -- "Can you hang up the phone sir? ... You need to hang that up."

  Even worse for Dan Lungren: His red-to-blue Democratic opponent Ami Bera has outraised him for four straight quarters and just released a site attacking him for circumventing ethics rules. This is a race to watch.

• This can't be said enough, because it's an unheralded success story of this administration:

  The telltale numbers for grading the auto rescue now are the first-quarter profits posted by GM and Chrysler while overall industry sales were still rotten -- compared with the horrific losses in pre-rescue years when people were buying cars like crazy.

  These are stunning results. Obama is right to celebrate them. We all should.

  Republicans, though? They would have been happy to see the American automobile industry fold if it ensured Obama would be a one-term President, because they don't care about this country.

• What does it say about the current state of the country when sweeping reforms to the offshore drilling industry can only pass by a thin party-line vote?

1. Obama gives reason to question his legitimacy
2. Obama Faction Again Shows Contempt for the Constitution
3. U.S. Constitution to Feds: "Hands Off Religion"