Funniest Bad Fox News Interview Ever [W:353]

[Buck Ewer]

Fux Snooze proves once again that you can make bank on mouth breathing bigoted imbeciles as long as you attack someone else's religion.

 

[Aderleth]

Holy **** that was bad.......like how the **** can someone be that ignorant? :lol:

Well... she does work for Fox.

Hey who's the new avatar? I like the Jessica Pare bikini pic. (Not that the new girl isn't beautiful). Wait a second, is that Laura Prepon with dark hair?

 

[Your Star]

Well... she does work for Fox.

Hey who's the new avatar? I like the Jessica Pare bikini pic. (Not that the new girl isn't beautiful). Wait a second, is that Laura Prepon with dark hair?

Yep, it's her character from her new show on Netflix, "Orange is the new Black". It's rather awesome.

 

[Aderleth]

Yep, it's her character from her new show on Netflix, "Orange is the new Black". It's rather awesome.

Huh. I'll check it out.

 

[Gonzo Rodeo]

A smart person with an imaginary friend talking with a not-so-smart person about a different imaginary friend.

This. Is. Comedy. Gold.

 

[Your Star]

Huh. I'll check it out.

It's from the creator of Weeds, and Laura plays a lesbian :mrgreen:

 

[Aderleth]

It's from the creator of Weeds, and Laura plays a lesbian :mrgreen:

Okay, now I'll definitely check it out.

 

[Tucker Case]

:lol: She completely ignored what he was saying about Jesus (which was fairly ****ing complimentary, IMHO) and then interrupted him in order to accuse him of bashing Jesus. Damn but people are stupid.

 

[Middleground]

:lol: She completely ignored what he was saying about Jesus (which was fairly ****ing complimentary, IMHO) and then interrupted him in order to accuse him of bashing Jesus. Damn but people are stupid.

And the even ****ing sadder part (as if you didn't think it could get any lower) is that it was obvious that she never even read the book, let alone one freakin' chapter.

 

[americanwoman]

:lol: She completely ignored what he was saying about Jesus (which was fairly ****ing complimentary, IMHO) and then interrupted him in order to accuse him of bashing Jesus. Damn but people are stupid.

Especially when they are blinded by an agenda. She wanted him to be something and she just couldn't back down from that.

 

[lolabird]

The debate he was referring to was the show he was on - which is apparently a debate show - not the book itself. Obviously any scholarly work contains some element of the beliefs of its writers, but a good scholarly book will reflect only the relevant beliefs (which is to say beliefs regarding the actual subject at issue). Implying that one's faith supercedes an honest approach to the research is incredibly insulting, and reflects a laughably poor misunderstanding of how academia works. Here's a quote from the comments of the video by a religious studies grad student at Harvard on this point:

"As somebody who is studying to become a religious studies scholar, I couldn't help but cringe and become enraged at this. Obviously, she has NO IDEA about the world of academia and religion - because if she had even an inkling of an idea of it, she would know that scholars of all different types of faiths write about traditions that are NOT of their own. I'm a Muslim, and I study Judaism along with Islam. Nearly the entire concentration in Islamic Studies in my Masters program at Harvard is composed of students who are either Christian or Jewish - but you don't see me asking them WHY they are doing it."


He kept referring to his background, because she kept asking him variations of the same spectacularly stupid question, thus indicating that she couldn't wrap her mind around his answer.

Puhleeze! He read 1000 books. Do you think he gleaned anything from them? If he used the books as references, wouldn't his input be in the form of a debate?
Are you so arrogant as to state the interviewer hasn't any experience in the world of academia or religion and that you are so ensconced in academia as to be insulted by questions?

 

[Aderleth]

Puhleeze! He read 1000 books. Do you think he gleaned anything from them? If he used the books as references, wouldn't his input be in the form of a debate?

I suppose it depends what you mean by that. Certainly any scholarly work is part of the larger debate about a given academic issue. That doesn't necessarily mean that any such book is written as a debate or would be characterized as a debate by its author (which would be - among other things - really bad grammar). None of that is especially relevant to what Aslan was talking about when he used the term debate in the interview. He was talking about the interview. The show is called "Spirited Debate," after all.

Are you so arrogant as to state the interviewer hasn't any experience in the world of academia or religion

Apparently you know less about her than I do, because even a cursory look into her background makes it pretty clear that she has experience with religion (specifically Christianity and Muslim bashing). And yes, I will state that she has demonstrated a spectacularly poor understanding of academia by repeatedly asking a question that anyone with any exposure at all to that world would understand to be profoundly stupid. She pretty obviously did so in a failed effort to forward Fox's bull**** agenda.

and that you are so ensconced in academia as to be insulted by questions?

I'm not ensconced in anything. And I never said that either I nor Aslan were insulted by anything either. What I have said is that the question was spectacularly stupid, and demonstrates a laughable ignorance of the subject of this woman's show. She clearly made no effort to research the book she was allegedly debating, the person she was debating, nor the culture of the academic world in which he lives.

All of this is fairly obvious. Why it's upsetting to you is not.

 

[lolabird]

I suppose it depends what you mean by that. Certainly any scholarly work is part of the larger debate about a given academic issue. That doesn't necessarily mean that any such book is written as a debate or would be characterized as a debate by its author (which would be - among other things - really bad grammar). None of that is especially relevant to what Aslan was talking about when he used the term debate in the interview. He was talking about the interview. The show is called "Spirited Debate," after all.



Apparently you know less about her than I do, because even a cursory look into her background makes it pretty clear that she has experience with religion (specifically Christianity and Muslim bashing). And yes, I will state that she has demonstrated a spectacularly poor understanding of academia by repeatedly asking a question that anyone with any exposure at all to that world would understand to be profoundly stupid. She pretty obviously did so in a failed effort to forward Fox's bull**** agenda.




I'm not ensconced in anything. And I never said that either I nor Aslan were insulted by anything either. What I have said is that the question was spectacularly stupid, and demonstrates a laughable ignorance of the subject of this woman's show. She clearly made no effort to research the book she was allegedly debating, the person she was debating, nor the culture of the academic world in which he lives.

All of this is fairly obvious. Why it's upsetting to you is not.

You seem to be the one with your knickers in a twist.
I, having dipped my toe in the world of academia, would also have been curious as to why a Muslim would write a book about Jesus. Aslan's reply of "I'm a scholar; I've a PhD in Religions," would have caused me to raise an eyebrow because it's not an satisfactory answer since he said he was Christian and converted by to his faith of Islam. The space between the conversion, for me, is a curious one.

 

[Aderleth]

You seem to be the one with your knickers in a twist.

How so?

I, having dipped my toe in the world of academia, would also have been curious as to why a Muslim would write a book about Jesus.

Seriously? That's some half-assed academia you've been exposed to. Again, look back at the quote I gave you. It's extremely common for people in religious academia to explore religions other than their own.

Aslan's reply of "I'm a scholar; I've a PhD in Religions," would have caused me to raise an eyebrow because it's not an satisfactory answer since he said he was Christian and converted by to his faith of Islam. The space between the conversion, for me, is a curious one.

Than you, like the interviewer, clearly haven't bothered to look into Aslan at all. He's been a prominent thinker on religious history for a very long time. Right now, you're doing the equivalent of asking Noam Chomsky why a left wing political activist would want to write a book about linguistics. You're demonstrating a fundamental lack of knowledge on the background of the subject. :shrug:

 

[joko104]

I'm expecting mine in the mail when I get home from work this afternoon. It sounds really interesting. Also, no she didn't ask him why he hates American, but she did at one point ask him why a Democrat would choose to "promote democracy" by writing about a Republican, which is such a bewildering assortment of crossed wires I don't really know where to start.

Why are you buying his book?

 

[Somerville]

You seem to be the one with your knickers in a twist.
I, having dipped my toe in the world of academia, would also have been curious as to why a Muslim would write a book about Jesus. Aslan's reply of "I'm a scholar; I've a PhD in Religions," would have caused me to raise an eyebrow because it's not an satisfactory answer since he said he was Christian and converted by to his faith of Islam. The space between the conversion, for me, is a curious one.

A rather interesting take on academia. You appear to believe that only a person who is part of a group should be allowed to study/investigate and publish on the history of said group. I wonder why the Jewish guy from Brazil, with a PhD from Columbia, was my professor of Chinese History.

 

[Aderleth]

Why are you buying his book?

It sounds interesting. I've never read much about Jesus as a historical figure, Aslan is well-spoken, and based on various things I've heard him say, is intelligent and thoughtful as well. In short, it sounds like a good read. Also Amazon gave me a discount on the hardcover.

 

[lolabird]

How so?



Seriously? That's some half-assed academia you've been exposed to. Again, look back at the quote I gave you. It's extremely common for people in religious academia to explore religions other than their own.



Than you, like the interviewer, clearly haven't bothered to look into Aslan at all. He's been a prominent thinker on religious history for a very long time. Right now, you're doing the equivalent of asking Noam Chomsky why a left wing political activist would want to write a book about linguistics. You're demonstrating a fundamental lack of knowledge on the background of the subject. :shrug:

While I'm not a au fait as you because I'm not a Muslim, I have read extensively about religion, and while you believe that Aslan is a prominent thinker on religious history, he does not have a degree in history. He is an associate professor in the Creative Writing Program at the University of California, Riverside.
Your analogy using Noam Chomsky is bloviating, to say the least.
I was taught early on that abysmal smugness leads to an empty audience.

 

[lolabird]

A rather interesting take on academia. You appear to believe that only a person who is part of a group should be allowed to study/investigate and publish on the history of said group. I wonder why the Jewish guy from Brazil, with a PhD from Columbia, was my professor of Chinese History.

My questions in no way have spotlighted my stance on religion. Your perception is just that--yours.

 

[Utility Man]

"....why would a democrat want to promote democracy by writing about a republican...."

:lamo

Didn't she imply he is promoting Islam instead of promoting his book.

 

[Aderleth]

While I'm not a au fait as you because I'm not a Muslim, I have read extensively about religion, and while you believe that Aslan is a prominent thinker on religious history, he does not have a degree in history. He is an associate professor in the Creative Writing Program at the University of California, Riverside.
Your analogy using Noam Chomsky is bloviating, to say the least.
I was taught early on that abysmal smugness leads to an empty audience.

1) I'm not Muslim either. Again, you're placing far more importance on one's personal religious background than logic would suggest is desirable.

2) Aslan has several degrees. The ones most relevant to his involvement with religious academia would be the Masters in Theological Studies and his Doctorate in Sociology, which he acquired by writing a thesis on Jihadism. He's also written several books about religions with different emphasis. This of course is in addition to his many, many op-eds and interviews in a variety of publications and media on religious issues.

3) Aslan is also an associate professor in the Creative Writing Program at Riverside, in addition to his position as a research associate at USC, and his status as a published scholar on religious issues.

4) The reference to Chomsky made perfect sense. If you know who he is, it's in no way surprising that he'd write about linguistics. Similarly, if you know who Aslan is, it's in no way surprising he'd write about Jesus.

5) I'm not sure why you're bringing up smugness. If you're suggesting that Aslan was smug, I guess you were taught wrong, because in this case, his "smugness" has lead to massively increased sales and publicity for his book.

6) The bottom line is that this reporter made an absolute ass of herself, and most people seem pretty comfortable recognizing that fairly obvious fact. Did you even watch the whole interview? It's not like she asked him once why a Muslim would write about Jesus (which is stupid enough) she asked him four or five times from various angles, then accused him of trying to hide the fact that he's Muslim (despite the fact that it comes up in basically every public appearance he's ever made). It was an attack piece plain and simple, and it blew up in her face in the most hilarious possible way. Why on earth you're attempting to defend such a thing is beyond me.

 

[Somerville]

You seem to be the one with your knickers in a twist.
I, having dipped my toe in the world of academia, would also have been curious as to why a Muslim would write a book about Jesus. Aslan's reply of "I'm a scholar; I've a PhD in Religions," would have caused me to raise an eyebrow because it's not an satisfactory answer since he said he was Christian and converted by to his faith of Islam. The space between the conversion, for me, is a curious one.

A rather interesting take on academia. You appear to believe that only a person who is part of a group should be allowed to study/investigate and publish on the history of said group. I wonder why the Jewish guy from Brazil, with a PhD from Columbia, was my professor of Chinese History.

My questions in no way have spotlighted my stance on religion. Your perception is just that--yours.

I am in a quandry. First, statements are made to the effect, that the poster would be "curious as to why a Muslim would write a book about Jesus." AND a statement by the academic that his field of study is Religions, would have caused the poster to "raise an eyebrow". I will agree no questions were asked by lolabird but I do think that most readers would understand why I posed the questions I did.

The final response is slightly unrelated to the topic and the earlier statements. Afterall I gave an example of one of my professors teaching a subject unrelated to his personal beliefs or ethnic origin, so where did the statement about the earlier "curiosity" as Prof Aslan's religion not indicate a negative attitude toward him and his chosen religion?

 

[lolabird]

1) I'm not Muslim either. Again, you're placing far more importance on one's personal religious background than logic would suggest is desirable.

2) Aslan has several degrees. The ones most relevant to his involvement with religious academia would be the Masters in Theological Studies and his Doctorate in Sociology, which he acquired by writing a thesis on Jihadism. He's also written several books about religions with different emphasis. This of course is in addition to his many, many op-eds and interviews in a variety of publications and media on religious issues.

3) Aslan is also an associate professor in the Creative Writing Program at Riverside, in addition to his position as a research associate at USC, and his status as a published scholar on religious issues.

4) The reference to Chomsky made perfect sense. If you know who he is, it's in no way surprising that he'd write about linguistics. Similarly, if you know who Aslan is, it's in no way surprising he'd write about Jesus.

5) I'm not sure why you're bringing up smugness. If you're suggesting that Aslan was smug, I guess you were taught wrong, because in this case, his "smugness" has lead to massively increased sales and publicity for his book.

6) The bottom line is that this reporter made an absolute ass of herself, and most people seem pretty comfortable recognizing that fairly obvious fact. Did you even watch the whole interview? It's not like she asked him once why a Muslim would write about Jesus (which is stupid enough) she asked him four or five times from various angles, then accused him of trying to hide the fact that he's Muslim (despite the fact that it comes up in basically every public appearance he's ever made). It was an attack piece plain and simple, and it blew up in her face in the most hilarious possible way. Why on earth you're attempting to defend such a thing is beyond me.

You have a campaign of calumny against the interviewer without any real facts. You've taken what someone else deemed as an embarrassing interview and spread it atop a cracker hoping others will nosh from it.
You seem to be naïve about the game of selling books.
Perception isn't reality.

 

[Aderleth]

You have a campaign of calumny against the interviewer without any real facts.

I have ten minutes of her making a fool of herself. That's the one and only thing I've commented on.

You've taken what someone else deemed as an embarrassing interview and spread it atop a cracker hoping others will nosh from it.

No, I've taken what I've deemed embarrassing and encouraged other people to join in the schadenfreude.

You seem to be naïve about the game of selling books.

I've made exactly one comment about book sales and it's factually supported. Beyond that, you're just making **** up.

Perception isn't reality.

And?

 

[lolabird]

"....why would a democrat want to promote democracy by writing about a republican...."

:lamo

Didn't she imply he is promoting Islam instead of promoting his book.

Didn't Steven Spielberg co-produce and direct the movie, Lincoln?
Didn't Lincoln help to promote democracy?
I believe now should be able to answer your own question.