• As the public safety net is slowly delegitimized by those arguing that it should be replaced by private charity, those same folks are gradually turning their attention to delegitimizing private charity. This was utterly predictable, as Elizabeth Stoker Breunig points out: “Charity will be condemned with the same rule that condemns welfare, because the ‘dependency’ argument is an intentionally blunt instrument: it doesn’t really have an interest in poor people; it just proposes a premise on which to cease aid.” Yep.
• Josh Marshall observes the challenge for right-wing “news” sites this weekend: “The best I can say in defense of this comical ‘correction’ is that it would be challenging to amend the piece in light of the categorical collapse of the article’s central assertion. I mean, how do you correct it?” In reality-based journalism, such reporting doesn’t get fixed with a correction, but with a retraction. That requires a full-length follow-up article denouncing and apologizing for the prior false report. For Breitbart, retractions could be a routine daily feature — maybe a separate section of their site with its own dedicated staff. They’d be busy.
• This is encouraging news: “Non-Diamond Engagement Rings Becoming More Popular.” The “traditional” diamond engagement ring scam ran way longer than it ever should have.
• Poli-sci number crunchers go in search of the main reason that marriage equality opponents want same-sex marriage to be illegal: Christian nationalism. “This is the notion that God has chosen the U.S. and that the nation must follow God’s commands to flourish.” Interesting.
I mean, that is, it’s interesting that the influence of Christian nationalism as an ideology is such a key factor in opposition to marriage equality: “Nearly 90 percent of people with the lowest support for Christian nationalism support same-sex marriage, compared to just six percent of people with the highest levels.” The ideology itself is just kind of narcissistic, unbiblical and dumb and, thus, not particularly interesting.
• So a few weeks ago, apparently, the government of Iran executed a man for, among other things, adultery and “insulting” the prophet Jonah. You know who else insulted the prophet Jonah? The author of the book of Jonah.
Seriously, read the book of Jonah. It’s short and it’s not subtle. The theme — throughout all 48 verses — is that this Jonah guy is a total jerk and an awful, awful excuse for a human being. The story ends with him whining about how much he hates God and God’s steadfast love and saying that God’s mercy makes him so angry he wants to die. If you don’t think that’s an insult, then you’ve either never read the story or you don’t know what an insult is.
• On Malta, no one can hear you scream.
• I’m linking back to this post from 2007, not because of the substance of the post itself, but just because, apparently, it’s hidden message is once again pertinent. (See the second footnote.)
• This video has something to teach us about the impressive determination of artists. And also about chili peppers: