Replies

It doesn't help that Hanity is outmatched by Alan.
what? i have NEVER seen that happen. and i watch nightly.

I think his point is that Colmes has a basic concept of how to debate, whereas Hannity runs about three plays.

1 - Praise Conservative Guest (or Reagan)

2 - Read (R) talking points

3 - Ignore Liberal Guest and shout at him without refuting his arguements.

The most painful thing is that Hannity is 99% right on everything, but his delivery is so blunt and clumsy that he nearly always misses easy to shoot down lines. Colmes is like warmed over death, but he at least talks to the guests to develop leads without leaping right in to the attack.

If they had a sharper liberal on there, I think that the show would be a lot more interesting, and Sean would have to evolve out of his rut. He could really be hitting them out of the park if he could just bring himself to listen and refute better, rather than hit the 'attack' button every time.

i guess since the war stuff started, i can agree with you that Sean has lost effectiveness, and i commented to that effect to my husband. Once he gets irritated he can no longer refute the point effectively. But, i do take issue that Alan outmatches him, because he is not a persuasive debater either, by any stretch. i like alan, only because he is one of the few liberals i can stomach. and he will take on the more absurd extreme views on his side.

Agree with many of your points on Hannity. He is as quick as a whip...very, very smart. But, what drives me crazy, is his lack of restraint! He can not seem to stop interrupting guests! I hate that! I want him to listen to what they have to say, and refute it, with a good argument. I know he can do it, if he can get his emotions under control.