The whole thing is worth watching, but I'm posting a few choice exchanges below the video:
(2:11) Colmes : Mr. Martin, you are not being stopped from worshipping and being a Christian, are you? Are you less of a Christian because Obama is in office? How is your freedom of religon being taken away from you?
Martin: Alan, you're not listening.
Colmes: No, I'm not hearing anything that makes sense!
(3:32) Martin: And one of the things they intrude on is my freedom of religion, my freedom of speech..
Colmes: Your freedom of speech? Is your freedom of speech being compromised?
Martin: Sure, fairness doctrine...
Colmes: There's no fairness doctrine. Now hold on. First of all, I'm against the fairness doctrine, sir. Number two, you are misrepresenting...there is no attempt, no effort to bring back the fairness doctrine and you know it. Please don't misrepresent that argument. I know that issue very well. Excuse me sir, the Democrats have been in office now for two years. They've been in charge of the House actually longer than that. There is no attempt, there has been no attempt, and they're on record as saying there will be no attempt to bring back the fairness doctrine. Do not misrepresent what they're doing. You're wrong on that.
(4:17) Martin: Well, listen Alan, what we have is a President that told us just a mere two or three months ago that he would not let taxpayer dollars go to abortion.
Colmes: You keep repeating that but in fact in the health care...
Colmes: I don't know what Governor Rendell did yesterday, but you weren't talking about Governor Rendell. You were talking about Russ Carnahan, and you were talking about President Obama, and in the health care bill, they have bent over backwards to make sure that taxpayer dollars do not go to pay for women's abortions. Again sir, with all due respect sir, you're factually incorrect. (For background on Martin's false claims about Pennsylvania and taxpayer dollars going to abortion, read the post on FiredUp Missouri from last Friday. )
(5:26) Colmes: Is anybody forcing you to pay for an abortion or to have an abortion?
Colmes: Your tax dollars are not going to abortion. So, is there any other way in which your religion is being infringed upon?
Martin: Of course, as I've said over and over again, I'm glad to talk about it, is when you have a government that takes over health care, for example...
Colmes: They haven't taken over health care. I wish they would but they haven't done that.
Martin: Of course they have:
Colmes: They haven't taken over health care. There's not a public option. There's not single-payer. What are you talking about?
Colmes: But you're misrepresenting the facts!
(6:58) Colmes: Would you agree, sir, that taxpayer dollars even prior to Obama did go to pay for abortion?
Martin: President Obama said...
Colmes: Didn't that happen under George W. Bush as well? Wait a minute. Wait a minute! You're statement is that Obama in particular is taking freedoms away that you previously had.
Martin: Of course..
Colmes: When the same policies with taxpayer dollars existed under George W. Bush whom I bet you supported, so exactly what freedom was removed by Barack Obama?
(7:50) Martin: Pelosi, Carnahan, and Obama promised no tax dollars to abortion three months ago and yesterday Rendell said...
Colmes: You're playing a game of three card monte. Ed Rendell is not Obama or Carnahan and the tax dollars going to pay for abortion existed prior to Obama. You are playing a slippery game, sir, and you are misrepresenting the facts! With all due respect, you're not telling the truth!
That last quote pretty much sums up the appropriate response to Ed Martin's congressional campaign.