Sadly, Sean Hannity had no idea what this issue was all about.

He usually does have no idea. Why doesn't Fox have a decent reporter representing Conservatives on that show instead of that flake? Countering Alan Colmes should be a no-brainer, but Hannity is seldom up to the challenge. I'd much rather see somebody like Rush Limbaugh or Bill Bennett in that chair. Alan Colmes would by in tears before the first commercial.

Sean is ok. He clearly is not Rush, but IMO he is deserving of his place as #2. Sean's problem is he gets myopic when he has libbies on either the radio show or H&C as guests. He prepares for the topic to be discussed and plans a "gotcha" type trap everytime. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. The problem is, this type of preparation prevents him from flowing with the argument. In the example above, he clearly didn't hear Brent Bozell's comment about the tape because he was thinking ahead to his attempt to trip Schecter up. He's far better on his radio show when he take calls and is forced to listen to the argument being made.

Rush is a master. Listen to him for a while and you can tell he comes from a long line of attorneys. I'm sure that debate was a "family tradition" in the Limbaugh household. When he debates/argues with someone he'll not only hit on his pre-scripted talking points, but he'll alter his argument to match his opponent.

As far as a replacement for Hannity on H&C, I've heard a rumor that it will be something that FNC has to address in the very near future.

In my humble opinion, Sean Hannity - nice guy that he is - too often has "gloves on" when interviewing Liberals. I listen occasionally to his radio show, and when he interviews guys like Lanny Davis, Charlie Rangel, or some other liberals, too often he tries to hit too many points, and comes across as "shallow" on the issues. And too often, when he tries to "hit deep," he relies on his own line of verbal reasoning, which he's repeated as a set-up in the minutes preceeding the actual interview. It's somewhat weaker than it could be.

Sean's got a staff, he should use them to the best advantage to dig up facts, then hit with punches, jabs, and body blows, never letting his "opponent" catch his breath.

Too often, Sean's interviews start off with an explanation of how he likes or respects the person, then get into the issues, but usually end with a "buddy-buddy" type of wrap-up.

Nice guy, but for #2, we want a Verbal District Attorney who's gunning for a conviction!