Megyn Kelly Set to Take the 9 PM Slot On Fox News

According to a UPI.com story, Fox anchor Megyn Kelly will be taking over the 9 pm timeslot on Fox News once she returns from maternity leave this fall. This doesn't come as a big surprise because the powers that be at Fox have been grooming Kelly for prime time for at least a couple of years. With this impending primetime shakeup, my guess is that Sean Hannity's program will move an hour back to 10 pm and Greta Van Susteren (who currently holds the 10 pm slot) may want to brush up her résumé. 

Kelly's move to the 9 pm slot on Fox will be an upgrade over the current occupant and a better complement to The O'Reilly Factor. It's no secret I'm no fan of Sean Hannity, but it's not because he's a conservative. I don't like him because he's habitually dishonest, whiny, and boring. The trifecta of bad broadcasting. Although I've had issues with Kelly, she can be one of the more reasonable voices at Fox (which is like calling Moe the "smart Stooge"). Change can be a good thing and I'm intrigued to see what Kelly does with her upcoming primetime show.

The clip below is from a spring 2013 segment of America Live with Megyn Kelly in which Kelly challenged guests Erick Erickson and Lou Dobbs on their views about women in the workplace.

Media Matters Founder Joins RNC Head In Urging NBC and CNN To Dump Clinton Specials

left to right: Priebus, Clinton, and Brock

On August 5th in a response to announcements late last month by NBC and CNN that they would be producing Hillary Clinton-related specials (a miniseries starring Diane Lane and a feature length documentary, respectively), RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called for both networks to put a halt to these programs. If they didn't, Priebus threatened that the GOP would boycott any 2016 presidential debates hosted by the two networks.

Priebus' letter to CNN

Priebus' letter to NBC

Surprisingly, Media Matters founder David Brock wrote letters to NBC and CNN the next day also requesting they cancel their planned Clinton programs. In addition to the story on Brock's pleas to NBC and CNN, the link below also includes the letters he sent to both networks.

David Brock call on NBC and CNN to cancel their Hillary Clinton specials

Although Priebus and Brock want the same result, their motives differ. Priebus feels that NBC and CNN are in the business of promoting Democrats and the Clinton specials would be a boost to Hillary's bid for the 2016 presidency (assuming she runs). Brock believes that the specials could tarnish the reputations of the news divisions of each network (they are being produced by NBC Entertainment and CNN Films, respectively). Brock's other concerns are the potential criticism the networks could face for failing to provide equal time to all potential candidates and for not adopting the right-wing noise machine's ideological view of Hillary.

I disagree with both Priebus and Brock, although I do think the latter's intentions are sincere. Priebus' criticism of NBC and CNN comes off as whiny, especially since it's no secret that the Republican party has its own network. It also makes the GOP look desperate and scared of a potential presidential run by Hillary Clinton. As for Brock, he shouldn't be aiding the GOP and their accusations of liberal bias. I was glad to see that CNN shows no signs of caving to the demands of Priebus.

Priebus' appearance on the CNN program OutFront with Erin Burnett:



Although Ms. Burnett did a good job overall, she let Priebus off the hook by not asking him about the numerous Fox News hosts and contributors who campaigned for the GOP in 2011-2012. At approx. the 6:20 mark, Ms. Burnett gets ready to ask Priebus a Fox-related question. However, he seemed to anticipate a tough question and cut her off in what appeared to be an effort to run out the clock. Although it's not the one I would have asked, the question about Fox that Ms. Burnett asked near the end was a good one.

Priebus' appearance on Hannity:



Both Priebus and Hannity were in typical form. In their eyes, if you're a member of the news media and not demonizing liberals or giving every break to the GOP, it makes you liberal by definition. Also, they're still blaming the so-called liberal media for the damage the debates did to the GOP brand. So much for the conservative's belief in personal responsibility. Towards the end, Priebus discusses plans for the GOP to select the debate moderators themselves. Priebus' stance against the so-called liberal media no doubt plays well with the GOP base. However, in addition to the aforementioned "whiny" and "desperate", I think Priebus' latest moves make him and the GOP look weak as well. 

Religious Scholar Takes Fox News Host to School

On July 26, author and religious historian Reza Aslan was a guest on "Spirited Debate", a FoxNews.com webcast about religion hosted by Lauren Green. Aslan was on the program to promote his new book Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. The interview has gone viral and Ms. Green has been heavily criticized. Words such as "the worst", "most embarrassing", and "cringe-worthy" have been used to describe her interview with Aslan. You can watch and see if the criticism is apt or not.



The merits of Ms. Green's opening question regarding why a Muslim would write a book on Christianity is debatable. One could argue that it was designed for those not familiar with Aslan's work. This theory may be giving Ms. Green too much credit though. However, once Aslan gave his response, Ms. Green sounded downright silly when she asked why he'd be interested in the founder of Christianity. If Pamela Geller was on "Spirited Debate" promoting one of her books about Islam, do you think Ms. Green would have questioned why a Christian is writing about Islam?! After watching the interview, it may appear to some as if Aslan wears his academic credentials on his sleeve. However, I think it was unfortunately necessary for him to repeatedly state his credentials because Ms. Green couldn't get off her talking point of whether or not he was qualified to write the book in the first place. As a side note, I'm willing to bet Aslan knows more about Christianity than many of the so-called Christians walking around.

During the interview, Ms. Green read criticisms of the book by two theologians and someone watching the webcast. Nothing wrong with that. However, the interview would have been much better if she also read passages from the book itself and then asked Aslan questions related to them. Ms. Green also accuses Aslan of trying to conceal his Muslim background. At this point she should have stayed down because Aslan easily dismantled her claim.

Until this past weekend, I had never heard of Reza Aslan. However, I think this interview will serve to raise his profile in a positive way because he calmly and eloquently stated his reasons for writing the book. Although I was familiar with Ms. Green's previous work reading news updates on the Fox News channel, with this interview many others are probably seeing her for the first time. The word "inauspicious" comes to mind.

Reza Aslan's interview with Lauren Green has proved to be a win-win for him. In addition to thoroughly schooling Ms. Green, Aslan has seen sales of Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth skyrocket. While it was selling steadily before the interview, as I write this post it is the #1 book on Amazon.com.

Victoria Jackson Voices Her Concerns About Communism to Bill O'Reilly

As readers of this blog may recall, I have occasionally done humor-based posts called "Sunday Funnies". Now today's post has its share of humor, but it's of the unintentional variety. Recently, Bill O'Reilly did an interview with actress/comedian Victoria Jackson in which she discussed her political evolution. If you're familiar with Ms. Jackson's actions over the last few years, you know what to expect. At any rate, here is what she gave us:



Her rantings are so obviously off the charts that it's pointless to waste time debunking them. In the aftermath of her appearance on The O'Reilly Factor, Ms. Jackson wrote an article on her website in which she discusses how her segment was deceptively edited by someone at Fox News. When I first watched the segment, I was puzzled by Ms. Jackson's reference to "them" when she was talking about communists. It appears she was referring to her children, but Fox News apparently edited this out. If this is true, Fox News made Ms. Jackson look like a paranoid lunatic for thinking there are communists in our government who are going to kill her for being a Christian. If we are to believe Ms. Jackson was the victim of deceptive editing, she's only a paranoid lunatic for thinking there are communists in our government who are going to kill her kids for being Christians. Ms. Jackson also mentions that her comments about books which prove President Obama is a communist were edited out as well. If that's true, the folks at the Factor may have done her a favor by leaving that nonsense on the cutting room floor.

We often hear conservatives (in particular, the ones at Fox) slam Hollywood for its liberalism. However, these same people cannot wait to line up and kiss the proverbial asses of Hollywood conservatives. Since Fox's raison d'etre is to promote the Republican/conservative brand, you'd think they would do a better job of featuring prominent and credible Hollywood conservatives. Although I disagree with their politics, I haven't heard anything outrageous from the likes of Kelsey Grammer and Gary Sinise. Why not invite them on more often? Maybe Fox has and their calls aren't being returned, I don't know. At any rate, how is Fox News advancing Republicanism/conservatism by giving the time of day to a washed up D-lister (at best) with zero credibility like Victoria Jackson? 

Guest Post: Which Group is Most Identified With Being More Racist Than Others? The Answer May Surprise You

One of the goals of Progressive Soup is to allow people with differing viewpoints on a variety of issues to share them here. Last week, I came across a blog post (Which Group is Most Identified With Being More Racist Than Others? The Answer May Surprise You) about a recent Rasmussen poll on race. When I contacted the blogger (Teresa) to see if I could use it as a guest post here, she gave her consent. For a wording of the Rasmussen poll's survey questions, click here. 

This was posted by Teresa on her blog on July 6, 2013:

According to a poll more citizens believe blacks are more racist than whites or Hispanics. The poll revealed that a person's political affiliation played much more of a role in feelings towards various races rather than a person's ethnicity.

The poll's findings: "Overall, 37 percent of Americans feel that black Americans are the most racist among the three ethnic groups, 15 percent feel that whites are and 18 percent think Hispanics are." 

Do you think this poll is accurate? And accurately reflects the feelings and perceptions of the various groups of Americans?  The only thing I'll say is if blacks are brought up to believe they are a victim then they are buying into the false notion that they're not as good or can't be as good as people of other ethnicities. If blacks accept victim status then jealousy could breed resentment, which could ultimately lead to hatred and misconceptions about other races. But being taught to hate can happen within any ethnicity or race.  From my perspective I see a majority of the mob violence and hate coming from blacks and gang members which consist of a variety of races.