Alan Colmes Is Beneath Contempt (Updated)

Alan Colmes mocked Rick Santorum for the manner in which he and his family mourned the death of their 20-week old child.  Fortunately, Rich Lowry was there to smack Colmes down.  Look at Colms pouting as someone dares call him out for being a creep.

Colmes also brought the incident up on his website, completely mischaracterizing what the Santorums did in an effort to portray them as kooks.

What a loathsome human being.

Update: Alan Colmes apologized to Rick Santorum.  It’s good to know that people can still recognize when they have crossed a line.

 

48 Responses to Alan Colmes Is Beneath Contempt (Updated)

  • Jay Anderson says:

    It was Mark McKinnon – a Bush-McCain guy (who just couldn’t stomach voting against the Obamessiah and so left the McCain campaign) – who first opened this line of inquiry:

    http://proecclesia.blogspot.com/2009/08/words-cant-describe.html

    Look for the RINO Establishment scumbags to start a whispering campaign along these lines, planting more and more of these stories in the media. Don’t be shocked to learn that Colmes was encouraged to “go there” by someone in the Romney camp. That’s how those dirtbags roll (see, e.g., whisper campaign of smears against Sarah Palin by Romney sycophant scumbags).

  • RR says:

    It’s one thing if he brought him home to have a funeral. But to cuddle with a dead body for the night is creepy. In this context, “How dare you! His son died!” is the equivalent of shouting “racist!” It’s using emotion to end a conversation without getting to the merits. If I said it was creepy for someone to make love to his dead wife, apparently Lowry and many here would be outraged.

  • “How dare you! His son died!” is the equivalent of shouting “racist!” It’s using emotion to end a conversation without getting to the merits.”

    There are no merits to get to RR. Merely people so crazed by politics that they are happy to attack a family grieving over a dead child.

  • Art Deco says:

    It was Mark McKinnon – a Bush-McCain guy (who just couldn’t stomach voting against the Obamessiah and so left the McCain campaign)

    I would not identify him o’er much with either Bush or McCain. There appear to be a certain number of insipid careerists that politicians hire because they have useful skills, including this fellow McKinnon (and ‘Steve’ Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace, who also worked for McCain and have made public nuisances of themselves at odd intervals since, most particularly to Sarah Palin). Two generations ago, ward clubs were filled with people who circulated petitions and passed out palm cards and aspired to patronage jobs. (The difference being that ward heelers, per Ed Koch, tended to be passably likable as human beings, which I doubt is true of PR hacks).

    About 25 years ago, Roger Stone, who did this sort of work for Republican pols of that day, was asked to state a political principle. He replied with, “you can’t work both sides of the street”. What is unusual about McKinnon is that he actually does.

  • Art Deco says:

    I said it was creepy for someone to make love to his dead wife, apparently Lowry and many here would be outraged.

    I am doing a double-take here. Did you just compare the Senator to a necrophiliac? Do you think you might wish to reconsider that?

  • T. Shaw says:

    Every time Colmes, or any liberal for that matter, opens his/their mouth(s) the sum of human virtue is diminished.

    I have not had the stomach to endure him for years.

  • RR says:

    Art, yes I went to the extreme of the “creepy attachment to a dead body” scale to illustrate the absurdity of the “calling something creepy is an outrage” charge.

  • Pinky says:

    RR may have overstated his position, but I agree with his analysis. On a gut level, Santorum’s action strikes me as revolting, and I resent his implication that I’m less of a pro-lifer because of it. If I were Colmes, I probably would have decked Lowry.

    Colmes is right. A lot of Republicans are going to get the willies after hearing about this. People aren’t going to study up on NICU advice for grieving families, they’re going to react the way that I did, running screaming away from their computer screens. Colmes is wrong that bombing Iran is outside the mainstream; he’s wrong that comparing homosexuality to polygamy is outside the mainstream. He’s right on this. I’m not saying that Santorum has to mourn the same way I would; I don’t know how I’d react in that situation anyway. But Lowry’s way off base if he thinks that the average voter is going to take this story in stride.

    I respect Santorum. I’d vote for him. But this story will scare people off.

  • RR says:

    Note: Do NOT invite Foxifer to a funeral, let along a wake, cus it’s just like sleeping with a dead body, really.

    Politically, I don’t think this is as big a deal as Colmes makes it out to be but it’s still creepy. On Lawrence v. Texas, I agree in principle with Santorum and Lowry but I acknowledge that I’m outside the mainstream and Santorum’s outspokenness on the issue turns off a lot of independents. On Iran, again, Santorum and Lowry aren’t wrong but Santorum is so outspoken about it that it almost looks like he’s itching to bomb Iran.

  • Having lost 4 children to miscarriage and having to argue all my adult life with people about whether they were “real children” or not causes me to carry some unmitigated disgust towards Alan Colmes in this debate about, again, Santorum. Even Obama said to keep the children out of it when Sarah Palin’s kids were being accused and criticized in 2008. GET A CLUE, HOLMES…Anyone who has read of this knows he did not bring the deceased child home to “play with it.” They brought it home so the other children could have the one chance in their entire life to see and love that child, hold it, and pray for it. Isn’t that what funerals are for? But oh I forgot–our society does not care enough about dead babies to have funerals. You will not see me say this often about anyone but Alan Holmes is an true and total ASS. I hope he is fired and soon.

  • From the International Stillbirth Alliance website:

    “Parents may wish to spend time with their baby at home, prior to the funeral. For centuries birth and death took place at home and only during the past few decades has this changed. It is a parent’s right to take their baby home and/or arrange for the funeral director to bring the baby to their home. Many hospitals and health professionals will provide this option and assist families to arrange this. Parents can still take their baby home even if an autopsy/post-mortem has been conducted. Parents may wish to lie with their baby in bed (in or out of a basket or a casket). They may wish to see the baby in the cot or cradle they had prepared for him or her. Being at home with the baby may also be a further opportunity for family and friends to ‘meet’ the baby in a more relaxed environment than the hospital.

    For many parents, photographing and taking video footage of their baby can be a very special way of remembering him or her. The use of digital photography means that many photos can be taken and then stored on disc or printed out. There are a few things that may complement the baby’s features when taking photos. For example, if the baby is very premature, using a light blue rug or blanket as a background may allow for some of the baby’s features to be shown. Photographing feet, hands or ears showing the perfect parts of the baby can allow for lovely memories, particularly if the baby has some imperfections. It may be important that the whole family is included in photos of the baby, rather than only the mother with the baby or the baby on his or her own. Many parents and families speak proudly of the photos they have of themselves and their baby, especially those where despite the tragedy and sadness, they managed to smile and feel proud as parents. A professional photographer may be able to come to the hospital or home to take photos.”

    http://www.stillbirthalliance.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=51

    My wife and I have had three kids. I can’t even imagine the pain that Santorum and his wife and kids went through dealing with this loss. Criticizing them for how they expressed their grief is unfathomable to me.

    Perhaps some of the critics need to read the book linked below:

    http://www.amazon.com/Letters-Gabriel-Karen-Garver-Santorum/dp/1568145284

  • You don’t have any kids RR, although that is only a poor excuse for your behavior on this thread. I pray you never have to experience the grief that the Santorums went through, and, if you do, I pray in that case that no one is ever such an unfeeling jackass as to criticize you for the way in which you expressed that grief.

  • Pinky says:

    Come on! Charity, people. I’m not talking about dishonoring the dead. I’m acknowledging a visceral reaction that I had, and one that the average voter may not be able to see past. I’m not condemning Santorum for this, and I don’t think that RR is either – maybe he is, though; he can speak for himself. But not everything is resolvable by shouting caricatures at one’s opponents, which is what Lowry seemed to be doing.

    Decent Catholics can have differing reactions to this story.

  • Paul Zummo says:

    But not everything is resolvable by shouting caricatures at one’s opponents, which is what Lowry seemed to be doing.

    What? Alan Colmes effectively mocked Santorum for the way they he mourned the death of his child, and you think that Lowry’s the one whose behavior is inexcusable.

    And your talk of charity rings rather hallow considering your own comments re: Santorum.

  • First thank you Donald for your sensitive and understanding comments, as well as links for those having had miscarriages and still births. One of ours was intact and my then wife and I both held that child at least for a few moments. I will cherish that forever. And RR, you may not cuddle up and sleep with the dead, but do you ever go to cemeteries to honor your families and kneel to pray–right over the decaying body of your loved one? How grotesque!!! OR wait, how beautiful–it all depends if you think of that loved one as someone still in your life in the Communion of the Saints.

    And Pinky, I think it is not a matter of having simple differences of opinion. Of course different Catholics and other people of faith may have various ways of honoring their dead. That is not at issue here. At issue is viscious mockery of it for political gain. And to be fair both parties do such things at times. But it is never, never, never “okay.”

  • “First thank you Donald for your sensitive and understanding comments”

    Richard when my parents died I mourned them deeply. I can only imagine the grief of you and your wife over the loss of four kids. My deepest sympathies.

  • Pinky says:

    You know what, I take it back. The grieving process is too personal to speak of in broad terms. I realize that part of my reaction to this story was offense at the feeling like Santorum and Lowry were looking down on me, at the way I’ve experienced grief. I don’t think they did this on purpose. If I made someone else experience the same feeling, I’m sorry.

  • Thanks Pinky! Accepted, believe me. This whole thing makes my stomach churn. And Donald again many thanks. Every grief is different. What some think of as grotesque is needed for others. I was taught never to even touch a dead body, and then saw friends or family kissing them in the coffin. Now I would do so with no hesitation. Sometimes we just have to think, what is that person’s MOTIVATION, and respect that. RR comparing it to making love to the dead is revolting. And I do not believe I am the one being uncharitable here.

  • Well said Pinky. Grief takes us in different ways. My wife and I were gathering together my mother’s clothes to give to charity after her death. I was putting one of her favorite dresses into the pile of clothes and I thought that Mom wouldn’t want to part with it. It was then that grief for her death truly hit me.

  • Foxfier says:

    Before we try to figure out what the “normal” folks out there think and give it weight, we should probably keep in mind that one of the effective attacks on Mrs. Palin is that she did not kill her youngest son, as is normal.

    I do not care what those who let the news do their thinking for them would think of a family saying goodbye to their child at home.

    *pretend this is a separate post– my oldest is being adorable and it sparked a thought*

    We have cats. They are good enough that I have said: “Kit! STOP biting the CAT!” more often than I ever would have imagined possible. They also get hugged a lot more than they’d really care for. Guess what my response would be to someone trying to claim that them the toddler assault on Feline Dignity is the same category as bestiality. There are differences in degree and differences of kind– sex is a rather major difference of kind, as is, say, eating something.

  • Foxfier says:

    Richard G Evans-
    If, God please forbid, I lost a child… I don’t think I’d be able to bear touching them.
    That is my weakness– my mom’s family has a history of lost children, and terror of the same. I don’t think I’d be able to mentally bear feeling that the life wasn’t there. I’ve touched animals I loved after they died, and it tore me up, but that doesn’t mean I don’t understand those without the same visceral reaction– heaven knows that if I somehow got a postcard from Doc Roberts that had been delayed all this time, I’d clutch it like a lifeline in a freezing ocean. I even break down baking Nancy Cookies sometimes; Fred left a bit before Doc, and Nancy followed about two years later. None were physically or legally related to my family, although all were family of a sort. Love is a very, very powerful thing– kind of like the nuclear bomb of human interaction. Screw with it at your own peril, yes?

  • RR says:

    Like Pinky, I’m not criticizing. Many people think open caskets are creepy. I understand that and I don’t take it as mockery when someone points it out. Sleeping with a dead person is creepy! Absolutely nothing wrong with pointing that out! You guys remind me of the lefty PC crowd. Taking offense to something that isn’t offensive in intent, in fact, or in implication.

  • Foxfier says:

    Taking offense to something that isn’t offensive in intent, in fact, or in implication.

    You have dogs, RR?

    Hope they don’t sleep on your bed, or it’s the same as bestiality.

  • RR says:

    Have you ever seen a roach in person? Hope not because it’s the same as cuddling with it.

    No, I’m not saying a dead person is like a roach. I’m saying seeing something (like a dead person at a funeral) is not the same as sleeping with it, a distinction that Foxfier fails to see.

  • Foxfier says:

    I’m saying seeing something (like a dead person at a funeral) is not the same as sleeping with it, a distinction that Foxfier fails to see.

    And with that strawman, the irony meter explodes….

  • PM says:

    This Mr. Colmes offers irritation to humanity with his talent for creating revulsion. Walking in another man’s shoes, his targets, should be his sentence.

  • RL says:

    As a Catholic, and not a Kennedy or Pelosi type Catholic, there is of course going to be things about Santorum that the secular world opposes or views odd. For two thousand years Catholics have treated the dead as tenderly as we did when they were alive – then sometimes going as far as chopping their bodies into little pieces so many others can as well. I think it’s all a pretty marvelous thing actually.

  • Darwin says:

    Here’s the reason why Colmes use of this story is despicable: There are a lot of things which we do in private, for reasons that seem right to us, which are not immoral and yet would seem weird to other people. Especially when played out in the “will you belieeeeve this” tones of the news room.

    Would a lot of people, even some people who are in fact pro-life, be initially alienated on hearing a brief, unsympathetic description like that of actions by someone they don’t know? Sure. But it’s precisely why we have societal taboos about dredging up people’s highly personal expressions of love, grief, etc. and using them as tools of public mockery in the public square.

    And for violating those taboos, it’s certainly reasonable to consider Colmes a despicable pariah lacking any sense of decency who has no place in public discourse.

  • bill bannon says:

    If the posts of Richard Evans and Donald were put in TV form with the whole nation seeing it, the issue would vanish as to hurting Santorum at least for millions. Their posts just did that for me. But alas….TV’s role is to take one or two steps into depth….then stop. That’s why it’s hard to find Kierkegaard on TV.

  • Donna V. says:

    Colmes is disgusting but that is not new news. How Santorum and his family coped with their grief is nobody’s business. And THAT’S what troubles me about this. It is an intensely personal issue and from what I understand Santorum has referred to it fairly frequently on the campaign trail. That bothers me for the same reason it bothered me when John Edwards repeatedly brought up his dead son. Call me old-fashioned but it strikes me as terribly bad taste when politicans use dead offspring to score political points.

    And the fact that nobody blinks an eye about this sort of thing anymore also bothers me – it shows that the whole concept of privacy has been lost in our Orpahized world. We now expect politicans to share the most intimate details of their lives and pols being pols, they oblige. Is it any wonder that politics does not draw our best and brightest? You have to be seriously twisted to be prepared to discuss the most painful, private moments of your life in front of the entire nation.

  • enness says:

    I think we’re kind of forgetting that this was a baby, not an adult. If we treat babies differently than we do adults in life, holding and cuddling and making goo-goo talk at them, it’s not really that surprising that we might treat them differently in grieving the dead.

    Donna, you may have a point about privacy, but I think the question to ask there is, in what context did the subject originally come up? I can’t remember, if indeed I ever knew. Would he have brought it up if he knew it would be used against him this way? Is it that now the cat is simply out of the bag and he finds himself having to be constantly on the defensive?

  • enness says:

    (SPOILER ALERT)
    I also find it odd that the ending of ‘The Notebook’ was insufficiently creepy for the film to have grossed some $80 million in the US. Is it just because they’re both dead?

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .