thanks for the correction. I actually noticed the mis-title right after I submitted but really didn't think it would make it out this quickly. I just put it out there out of pure reactivity because I think both Martin and Turner should burn in the inferno of historic moral lessons

I think he's basically saying "your argument is so stupid that I will fight your stupidity with stupidity."

Agreed, with baleen.
Hannity bringing out a Nazi guest just to smear Obama should justly be criticized.

But the point of his argument is to clearly demonstrate that this 'guilt-by-association' bullshit helps no-one, and is a waste of the airwaves.

Well then he failed because his argument made him and the obama campaign look stupid. not even colmes caught his point (if indeed it was some ironically self-defeating point). Gibb's should have stuck with the "Even conservatives served on the board" line of reasoning.

Colmes is a boring, staged democrat. His coyness and general kindliness toward Hannity makes this show more of a puppet show than it would be with just Hannity blowing steam everywhere.

You say he should have stuck with "reasoning" when there is no reasoning in these programs. You are given about seven seconds to "make a point." Your core audience isn't watching, so you're really just doing it to amuse yourself or make Hannity look stupid for the amusement of your friends. Hannity should not be putting people like Andy Martin on TV and then defending it with "well, we give people with different view points because we're tolerant (and you're not)." No, Hannity, you don't give white nationalists platforms because "you're tolerant." You do it because a sizable percentage of your demographic sympathizes with them.