Colmes apologizes for comment about son after Santorum and wife get emotional; Update: Video added

posted at 9:31 pm on January 2, 2012 by Allahpundit

You guys are creeping up on 500 comments in the other thread so I figured you’d want to know how the Santorums reacted.

Not well.

At a Pizza Ranch restaurant in Newton, Iowa, a member of the audience asked Santorum to react to a controversial attack leveled by liberal Fox News contributor Alan Colmes, who called the Santorum family’s approach to grieving for their dead baby boy, who lived for only two hours after his birth in 1996, “crazy.”…

[I]n Iowa this afternoon, Santorum explained that it was important for his other children to “know they had a brother.”

Santorum’s wife, Karen, who was at the event and listened to her husband talk about the experience, began to weep.

“It’s just so inappropriate,” she said as tears streamed from her eyes.

Santorum reportedly asked her at the event if she wanted to respond to Colmes. The terse reply: “No, I’d better not.” Colmes tweeted later that he spoke to Santorum by phone and that his apology was graciously accepted, which is probably sufficient to back Santorum’s political enemies off of this nasty line of attack until, oh, Super Tuesday at least. I’m looking for video of him addressing Colmes’s comments today on the trail but I can’t find anything at YouTube, CNN, or elsewhere. If you see the clip, please e-mail with a link.

Update: No video from the trail, but here’s Santorum talking about his son’s death and Colmes’s comments on “Hannity” tonight. Click the image to watch.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6

I was glad when Hannity dumped Colmes and went solo. But, then, I’ve stopped watching Hannity as he’s a bit more than my cup of tea. My understanding is that FOX contributor Monica Crowley is related to Colmes, and they usually appear on The O’Reilly Factor together. I sense that Monica is the only real reason that Colmes has any appearances on FOX at all. Know this, though, any time Colmes is on, regardless of the host or the show, I flip the channel. Just like when Obama is on the tube – Heh!

Bob in VA on January 3, 2012 at 10:00 AM

In 1943 some obstetriations decided that one of their patients was carrying a baby that was going to be born with complications and who existance was endangering it’s mother’s life. They were going to give the woman a LEGAL abortion(w/out her consent or even knowledge) and then tell her that she miscarried.
Somehow, the woman got wind of it-and raised such a fit that the OB’s backed off.
In April, 1944 her only child was born…my mother.
Despite having 4 strokes-Ma is still a very feisty old broad.
Drs can be wrong.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 3, 2012 at 9:37 AM

the doctors should allays give the choice to the mothers of taking risky pregnancies.
good for you. your mother took the risk and everything worked fine. this does not mean that other people will evaluate risks differently and take a different choice.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:00 AM

i am not asocial conservative. i want less goverment and less spending everyone to think like “i” do because “i’m” right
nathor on January 3, 2012 at 9:21 AM

hoosierma on January 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

nathor on January 3, 2012

You’re still ugly and you cannot change that fact.Just gross .

CW on January 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

i dont believe that a human becomes a human at moment of conception.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM

What it is gowing in the mother’s womb, then? A puppy?

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:04 AM

uh-oh……still learning the system! I’m moving on….no more comments to obstreperous nathor! :-D

hoosierma on January 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

“Macacca” destroyed a man’s career, as did “Things would have been different had he been elected.” They both appologized too. It didn’t matter.

This should be no different.

P.S. Please stop feeding the trolls.

29Victor on January 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

the situation is very very bizzare being it a 10 inch fetus. more so because this situation could be avoided. its like the santorums planed for this to happen from the very beginning. they let themselfs and their children get attached to a baby that would die anyway and they have this strange ritual to say goodbye to him.

The only way something like this is both “bizarre” and “avoidable” is if you propose instantly euthanizing any person with a terminal illness and depriving the family of any chance to say goodbye before staring into a casket. Don’t get too attached to Grandpa, kids, he has non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

What strikes me as bizarre is the attitude to dismiss and dispel human life so one does not have to process the fact that another human being lived and died in one’s presence.

The Schaef on January 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

i change my mind, this is nuts. something is not ticking well inside santorum’s head.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 7:15 AM

something is not ticking well inside santorum’s nather’s head.

Wade on January 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

And yet, you sit in judgement of the Santorums choice. Apparently freedom and rights only exist if it is going to be “imposed” on your family.

melle1228 on January 3, 2012 at 9:45 AM

i asked you if you wanted to forbid inviable fetus abortions. i would not want to do it and i disagree strongly of santorum decision but i dont want to take is right to do it.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:07 AM

What it is gowing in the mother’s womb, then? A puppy?

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:04 A

Apparently you have to be a “viable” “fetus” for it to be considered human life/

It doesn’t matter that viability is not an ethical standard, but only dictated by the limitations of modern medicine and changes year by year.

melle1228 on January 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

uh-oh……still learning the system! I’m moving on….no more comments to obstreperous nathor! :-D

hoosierma on January 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Wow. I just got my WFTD. And maybe a new Skyrim name: “Obstreperous Nathor.” Thanks!

29Victor on January 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

What it is gowing in the mother’s womb, then? A puppy?

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:04 AM

A single-celled organism with no brain, no heart, and no internal organs.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:09 AM

i dont believe that a human becomes a human at moment of conception.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Sometimes it never happens, as in your case.

Naturally Curly on January 3, 2012 at 10:10 AM

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 7:15 AM

Dear Nathor, I pray (yes pray) that you never experience this. I do not know if you are a man or a woman, but I am a man. And I lost a daughter that lived for a lifetime, 3 days.

I knew my daughter for only 3 days and I was sad. Fortunately, a couple who were friends with us, took my wife and I aside and and explained what I hope to try to explain to you, but much more briefly.

I did not bear the child. I did not live with the required change of diet, people rubbing my belly, going to the bathroom constantly and the million other things that a pregnant woman goes through. To my wife, she KNEW the child even before she KNEW she was pregnant.

If a co-worker of 3 days passes away, its a shame, but you really didn’t know him. If someone that you have lived every moment of every day for several months passes away it is immense.

My friends taught me three lessons:
1) No one can be “equally” grieved. All our pain is unique.
2) Everyone lives a full lifetime, 3 days or 100 years. Meaning to a lifetime is derived from how they touched other lives. My daughter’s life was meaningful.
3) Idiots abound, even well meaning idiots. What do you say to a woman on Mother’s day who lost a 3 day old child the previous year? What do you say to a woman on Mother’s day who lost a 30 year old the previous year? If you have to think about it, you get my point.

barnone on January 3, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Is nothing off limits? Let’s dig into the pundits lives and talk about that. Fair game if they have the power to destroy and defame people who are willing to run for public service.

lea on January 3, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Apparently you have to be a “viable” “fetus” for it to be considered human life/

melle1228 on January 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Yep. And 200 years ago you had to be lilly white to be a human being.

Same argument, same people, different century.

29Victor on January 3, 2012 at 10:13 AM

It doesn’t matter that viability is not an ethical standard, but only dictated by the limitations of modern medicine and changes year by year.

melle1228 on January 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Not to mention it changes from baby to baby. So, in practice, you can never tell if a particular unborn baby is human or not.

neuquenguy on January 3, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Let me guess, she becomes human at the moment of….”viability”?

neuquenguy on January 3, 2012 at 9:58 AM
its subjective and my opinion is not relevant. pick a moment according to the accepted morality of country, make it law. enforce the law.
if it happens that most people in the country are very pro life and want to make humans, humans at point of conception. then make it law.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:18 AM

A single-celled organism with no brain, no heart, and no internal organs.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Described yourself, perfectly.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 3, 2012 at 10:18 AM

It doesn’t matter that viability is not an ethical standard, but only dictated by the limitations of modern medicine and changes year by year.

melle1228 on January 3, 2012 at 10:08 AM

The ‘viability’ standards are a very poor measure; a baby that had no chance at living 100 years ago might very well make it today. Eventually I think when the heart and brain come online is when ‘viability’ will start. Once those two organs are up and running, everything else is secondary. An adult that loses them is a lifeless shell and so is a baby that never gets them (ie; stillborn).

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Described yourself, perfectly.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 3, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Says the snotty little fundie with no brain.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:21 AM

barnone on January 3, 2012 at 10:10 AM

with all respect. the situation is that the santorums knew that the fetus was inviable early in pregnancy and still carried the pregnancy. if you knew early in the pregnancy that your baby would die 3 days after birth would would carry on the pregnancy?

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Says the snotty little fundie with no brain.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Says the Paulnut whose tin foil hat has shaped his head into a point.

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Says the Paulnut whose tin foil hat has shaped his head into a point.

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Keep babbling, jester, maybe someday you’ll be something more than a complete joke.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:26 AM

so is a baby that never gets them (ie; stillborn

I don’t think that most people who are pro-life would argue that a baby that died in the womb would need to be delivered in most circumstances. It can cause infection to the mother and be life threatening. I don’t think that this applies in the Santorum’s case though. The baby was alive.

The heart actually comes online three weeks after conception usually before the woman even knows she is pregnant. Brain waves are detected 6 weeks after conception around the time the woman figures out she is pregnant.

melle1228 on January 3, 2012 at 10:27 AM

if you knew early in the pregnancy that your baby would die 3 days after birth would would carry on the pregnancy?

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Saw an article in a Focus on the Family magazine about a family who did…the title was “One day with Jeanna” or something like that.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Nathor –

The very simple fact is that from the moment that each of us are born, we will eventually die. Not a single one of us is getting out of this alive. It doesn’t matter how long that life thread is, every human life is valuable and deserves to be loved whether it’s for 2 hours or 60 years. IMHO, you should examine your own conscious that you feel you could not or should not love a child that was less than perfect. The Santorum’s have been honest about the life and death of their child that they loved unconditionally.

This past fall, my son’s friend (15 years old) passed away after a 3rd relapse of cancer. I truly hope your daughter has a long healthy life and that you never have to deal with a life or death childhood accident or disease. That will be the day, that you realize you will do whatever it takes to give your daughter a fighting chance. It won’t matter to you whether she is 6 or 16 or 46…

The Santorum’s did not use this story for political gain. Mrs. Santorum’s book was written to help other parents facing the same difficulties in their life. … but it appears that the liberal media has put down their marker for how far they are willing to go to destroy not only a Conservative candidate, but also the candidate’s family. We’ve already seen the lengths they are willing to go to with the Palins, the Huckabees, the Cains, the Bachmanns, the Perrys….

The message is that if a candidate stays in the race that the Dems will do everything in their power to destroy your family. And there lies the true tragedy of Alan Colmes soulless actions.

2nd Ammendment Mother on January 3, 2012 at 10:27 AM

i have to go. thanks for your time and answers.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Keep babbling, jester, maybe someday you’ll be something more than a complete joke.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Repeact the veteran posters around here, and you might last for more than a month, idjit.

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:31 AM

i have to go. thanks for your time and answers.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Thank you for your time. You defended yourself well. I don’t think we changed any minds, but this is what discouse is about. I hope we’ve given you some understanding of beliefs in the sacredness of life.

itsspideyman on January 3, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Hmmm… I may have actually found a Republican I can vote for.

elfman on January 3, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Oh! For heaven’s sake. A new life is formed when it takes 23 chromosomes from the father and the other 23 from the mother resulting in a 46 chromosome individual. Whether you like it or not, the gender, the hair color, the color of eyes and all those significant physical details are all in the DNA map of that unique individual. This is simple embryology!!

MISFern on January 3, 2012 at 10:36 AM

The message is that if a candidate stays in the race that the Dems will do everything in their power to destroy your family. And there lies the true tragedy of Alan Colmes soulless actions.

2nd Ammendment Mother on January 3, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Alan Colmes is desperate for attention. That, however, does not excuse his inexcuseable comments.

Roy Rogers on January 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Hmmm… I may have actually found a Republican I can vote for.

elfman on January 3, 2012 at 10:34 AM

If that’s the hill you’ve picked to die on, then yes, Santorum is probably your man. Fair warning – his chances of actually winning are pretty slim.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM

A perfect example of absolutely filthy liberal maggots and their hatred exposed.

royzer on January 3, 2012 at 10:42 AM

its subjective and my opinion is not relevant. pick a moment according to the accepted morality of country, make it law. enforce the law.

if it happens that most people in the country are very pro life and want to make humans, humans at point of conception. then make it law.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:18 AM

One more stab at this: I put a lot of blame on the medical community. While we have been unable to establish a point at which life begins, they have been able to establish a point where life ends, at the cessation of brain activity.

If you wanted to really come up with a medically defendable definition of life, it would be at the initiation of brain activity, at around 20 weeks. After this, you could objectively argue that life starts.

I can hear pro-lifers, because I’m one too; life starts at the point of conception, and I agree with this argument. The fact that this never comes of as in discussion points with pro-choicers is one confirmation that “viability” has no bearing, and partial-birth abortions are acceptable alternatives.

itsspideyman on January 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM

with all respect. the situation is that the santorums knew that the fetus was inviable early in pregnancy and still carried the pregnancy. if you knew early in the pregnancy that your baby would die 3 days after birth would would carry on the pregnancy?

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Yes, we did with our second child. And POOF, a new EXPERIMENTAL drug in the seventh month saved our child. She is 27 today with three kids. She is VERY glad you are not her parent.

barnone on January 3, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Oh! For heaven’s sake. A new life is formed when it takes 23 chromosomes from the father and the other 23 from the mother resulting in a 46 chromosome individual. Whether you like it or not, the gender, the hair color, the color of eyes and all those significant physical details are all in the DNA map of that unique individual. This is simple embryology!!

MISFern on January 3, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I don’t believe liberals have 46 chromosones.

Roy Rogers on January 3, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Colmes is such a turd.

JustJP on January 3, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Santorum is not surging – it is a ploy by the media and pollsters..
Even the vaunted Des Moines Register Poll, supposedly the best predictor, only had about a quarter of their respondents identify themselves as “likely caucus-goers”. I know enough about polling to know that you can do a LOT with how you phrase the questions and how you pick your sample.

If Governor Perry “surprises” tonight (defined by me as third or better), it will be due, in part in my view, to the almost desperate panic of the combined leftist media and the Beltway Republican Establishment Commentariat, which has collectively drunk the Romney “Electability Kool-Aid”, and like, Reverend Jones, is trying to lead the conservative movement to do so as well, to its, and the country’s detriment.

nancysabet on January 3, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Is nothing off limits? Let’s dig into the pundits lives and talk about that. Fair game if they have the power to destroy and defame people who are willing to run for public service.

lea on January 3, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Excellent idea. I’m beyond sick of these cretins in the MSM continually doing this.

PatriotGal2257 on January 3, 2012 at 10:48 AM

I see our new trolls are well fed this morning. But why? We know the progressive Little Goebbels when we see it. As with Colmes, there is no argument. Just chop at the knees and press on.

Kenosha Kid on January 3, 2012 at 10:48 AM

i dont believe that a human becomes a human at moment of conception.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Haven’t read all the other responses to this ridiculous statement of yours, but what on earth do you think that cluster of cells represents, anyway? What do you think these cells grow to become? A library book? A stalk of hay??? Don’t think so, Charlie. Go back to church and then figure it out.

chai on January 3, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Is nothing off limits? Let’s dig into the pundits lives and talk about that. Fair game if they have the power to destroy and defame people who are willing to run for public service.

lea on January 3, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Excellent idea. I’m beyond sick of these cretins in the MSM continually doing this.

PatriotGal2257 on January 3, 2012 at 10:48 AM

I would be all for it! Give the lamestream media a taste of their own medicine and see how much they like it.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Don’t think so, Charlie. Go back to church and then figure it out.

chai on January 3, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Won’t do him any good. When I mentioned God several hours ago nathor was very quick to point out he is an atheist.

Yoop on January 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM

My son describied life to me so profoundly for a young teenager. It takes 23 LIVING chromosomes from the father and the mother to continue the cycle of life. Life was started with the first two humans and it never ended, with each baby it is continued…The Santorum’s chose to let life continue even if it was for two hours….

Asianeyes704 on January 3, 2012 at 10:56 AM

What really makes me bite my tongue is the left thinking that all that is necessary to say is that you’r e sorry after making a rude statement. Clinton was also a believer of the I’m sorry crap.

mixplix on January 3, 2012 at 10:56 AM

barnone on January 3, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Beautiful, worthy comments there. I thank you for them.

Lourdes on January 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Taking your genetically retarded dead fetus home and sleeping with it in bed is totally normal grief/coping behavior, guys! JEEZ!

nice_poltergeist on January 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM

What intrepid sophisticates. What perfectly ignorant putzes. Playing with fire is kid’s play compared to playing with Karma and I take it Alan Colmes also makes fun of all the Shomer’s who have ever sat watch in his own culture.

How appropriate that you call yourself a poltergeist—an unclean, restless spirit whose eternity is endless, nasty practical jokes. And what a vile bit of mockery.

I’ve lost a child and I cared obviously beyond your understanding about the fate of her earthly remains. At her “viewing” my husband had to be physically pryed from her casket so the lid could be lowered. This was in 1996. I can’t hear or see that year without a catch in my belly. Rick Santorum’s child died barely 3 months after my own.

You, obviously, have absolutely no concept of the depth of grief or of a burden so heavy you drag it. The emptyness of a future without light gives one a very clear insight into the depths of Hell. Parents who have faced this accept without judgment someone elses path to peace, as long as that path hurts no one else. Did you know that there is an extraordinary number of siblings who take to drugs because of the death of a sibling and the grief of the parents? Did you know that grief, undealt with, is the most destructive emotion in the whole human arsenal of emotions? and that the death of a child is the most stressful situation anyone has to face? And it doesn’t matter if that child is 2 hours old or 20 years or 50 years old.

I sincerely hope you never have to “deal” with that kind of unimaginable pain. For your own sake, you’d best do a little research about grief and burial customs which involve the family taking care of and watching over the body. Only in 21st Century America and 20th Century Germany and China and USSR are the beloved dead treated like disposable flotsdam. God have mercy on you and please read and think before you mock. You are, indeed, the master of your fate and captain of your soul.

Portia46 on January 3, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Won’t do him any good. When I mentioned God several hours ago nathor was very quick to point out he is an atheist.

Yoop on January 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Yoop, that explains it all. I often wonder how atheists ever figure out the universe, the various patterns of life, and the fact of human existence. Perhaps all that is beyond their reasoning powers, since they have no faith in God to turn to.

chai on January 3, 2012 at 11:05 AM

A private apology for such a disgusting public display is not enough. This guy needs to apologize publicly to as big an audience as saw his ugly remarks.

Scrappy on January 3, 2012 at 11:05 AM

ChickaBOOMer: Alan Colmes Released From Santorum Sanitorium
http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2012/01/alan-colmes-released-from-santorum.html

StewartIII on January 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM

i dont believe that a human becomes a human at moment of conception.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM

DNA must be an inconvenient fact for you.

dominigan on January 3, 2012 at 11:14 AM

i asked you if you wanted to forbid inviable fetus abortions.

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Exactly what do you mean by inviable?

My daughter was born 2 1/2 months premature. She weighed 2 lbs 10 3/4 oz. You could hold her in one hand. And she was a baby, not a fetus.

She is now a strong-willed young woman, 21 years old… and has our first grandchild (grandson), who turned 1 a few months ago.

You think Santorum is “wrong in the head” for what he did? Personally, I think that there’s something “wrong in the head” of anyone who thinks killing their children is a “viable” option!

dominigan on January 3, 2012 at 11:21 AM

with all respect. the situation is that the santorums knew that the fetus was inviable early in pregnancy and still carried the pregnancy. if you knew early in the pregnancy that your baby would die 3 days after birth would would carry on the pregnancy?

nathor on January 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM

We did.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:33 AM

No use to address nathor any more. He bailed out an hour ago.

Yoop on January 3, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Colmes.
Creep, lightweight.

The guy could not be a more perfect ass.
Brilliant hire by Fox.
The perfect bad example.

PaleoRider on January 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM

No use to address nathor any more. He bailed out an hour ago.

Yoop on January 3, 2012 at 11:35 AM

I don’t know about these new guys, Yoop.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM

• I had my first child about 14 months ago, she was born on Halloween of 2010. This child was very wanted through out a difficult pregnancy with just about every complication you can think of (gestational diabetes, marginal placement of the cord on the placenta, single umbilical artery, advanced maternal age, polyhydraminous). I was warned early on that certain conditions increased the odds of downs syndrome and other genetic abnormalities. I was offered additional testing such as amniocentesis and cvs which I declined with the support of my obstetrician. Nothing on a test would have ever convinced me to abort my baby. If the worst were to come true and my baby had a condition that wasn’t compatible with life I would keep her in my body until she had the strongest chance of survival on the outside. I would then surround her with love and hope for as long as I was able and I’m sure a piece of me would have died with her.
Thankfully, my daughter is an overall healthy 14 month old who is a blessing to this world.

Gabriel was a tiny little baby that was born too soon and with too many issues to stand much of a chance in life. His family wanted him and I’m sure love him to this day. It is cruel to not only judge how his family grieved for him, but to even debate if he should have been born.

Knock it off and mind your business. Go find some butterflies to pick the wings off of, but leave this baby and this family alone.

LawnGnomeFanFirst on January 3, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I don’t know about these new guys, Yoop.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Sometimes they can argue themselves into a corner with rationalizations that are just totally bewildering to anyone with a bit of common sense.

nathor, with a small ‘i’, claimed to be a social conservative and an atheist, but his beliefs are so… liberal. He isn’t a troll, just confused.

The warning is always put forth to “not feed the trolls”. But there are times when the ideas like those expounded by nathor must be challenged, and cannot be left to stand without challenge.

To me the liberal, progressive mind has always been like being in a dense swamp, without a compass.

Yoop on January 3, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Maybe I missed it, but did anyone respond negatively to the call by some to remove specific HA readers comments because a few were offended?

If not, then shame on EVERYONE! You have now exposed yourselves as being the liberals (a.k.a. “social conservatives”) that you truly are.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Colmes is a jerk.

joecollins on January 3, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Maybe I missed it, but did anyone respond negatively to the call by some to remove specific HA readers comments because a few were offended?

If not, then shame on EVERYONE! You have now exposed yourselves as being the liberals (a.k.a. “social conservatives”) that you truly are.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Do you have any clue at all as to what you’re talking about?

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:06 PM

After on the last thread Nathor boldly asserted they ran every possible test, and if they were to have a Downes baby, it would certainly be aborted,.. that in his view, to not test, or to bring into this world, a handicapped child was immoral.

My wife and I refused the test all three times, a child was a gift from God, and we so very much wanted and planned our children. An abortion would never happen with us, never….

So by not testing, in his world, we’re immoral, my wife and I, to that fount of all knowing wisdom,.. nathor of Mordor…

I’m so sick of the souless ghouls taking Colmes side in this..

Human beings aren’t just tissue to be discarded when less than perfect, and he may hate the comparison.. but I have one living developmentally handicapped brother, my sister and older brother, both with the same handicap have already passed away.

So they all are unworthy of life nathor?

Nazi Germany began euthanizing their handicapped population as being the “moral” choice.. who decides Nathor?

you?

If my brother were drowning in a pool alongside you and I could only save one.. do you think I’d opt to save the “normal” person, or my brother? When you start deciding who’s worthy of life, it’s a moral bridge you can’t uncross.

and Hell’s just down the road.

I was grieviously offended that my wife and I violated some kind of Paulian code, by not testing and possibly aborting a child for the crime of imperfection. As I saqid, two were born normal, if underweight and early, my son,.. my second son, was buried with a full funeral, and a host of grieving family. He died in my wife’s womb, but we saw him delivered, and never knew till…..

I would never dismiss him as tissue nathor, and it’s beyond cold blooded to even think that way. He had my first son’s face, his small hands, his fine brown hair.. he was our son,. and he may never have seen our faces, but that doesn’t change anything.

He was Garret, son of Mark, son of Angela, grandson, great grandson, and on back to the dawn of human existence. That is his birthright, and no one will strip him of that.

mark81150 on January 3, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Portia46 on January 3, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Thank you Portia.

If anything, regardless of election results and politics, we have humanity on our side. As a father of four, one with autism, my greatest fear is that I’ll outlive my children. I can’t see how anyone whom truly loves their own child could’t grant Santorum the grace to mourn and process the loss in a manner he and his wife sees fit.

The one thing the left claims, but consistently shows they do not have the slightest appreciation of, is the value of life. Be it unborn, just born, a child, or a beautiful young adult daughter like the one Sen. Kennedy left to die.

mtucker5695 on January 3, 2012 at 12:15 PM

“I don’t believe that a human becomes a human at moment of conception.” — nathor on January 3, 2012 at 9:53 a.m.

It isn’t a question of belief, but of scientific fact.

I have in front of me a copy of “The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology,” a textbook written for medical students (not seminary students), and it says on page one:

Human development is a continuous process that begins when an ovum from a female is fertilized by a sperm from a male…A zygote is the beginning of a new human being.”

People who support the legal right to kill babies by abortion are the most anti-science people in the galaxy.

KyMouse on January 3, 2012 at 12:19 PM

a few were offended?

If not, then shame on EVERYONE! You have now exposed yourselves as being the liberals (a.k.a. “social conservatives”) that you truly are.
Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

When did liberals become social conservatives?Being conservative does not mean being libertarian – except in the Paulworld.

Actually it appeas that the majority were offended by the comments – seems like the only ones not offended were those equally devoid of any empathy or decency.

katiejane on January 3, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Wow, I should have checked in to this thread earlier this morning.

To all those who say the Santorum’s action was ‘ghoulish’, or that the baby was diagnosed ‘unviable’ by medical professionals, OR that bringing the body home to show the other siblings was ‘traumatic’ to them, I now say:

There’s lots of examples of the difference between faith and unbelief.
This is just ONE of them.

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 12:48 PM

I saw this on Fox and I have to say I don’t believe I’ve ever seen anything this vile come out of the mouth of a liberal commentator on TV, and we all know a lot of vile things come out of them. Alan Colmes should be fired over this and I, for one, will be contacting Fox News to do this. I actually couldn’t believe anyone could be this nasty toward someone concerning the death of a child.

silvernana on January 3, 2012 at 12:50 PM

I just listened to Santorum’s interview with Hannity again (third time). Since my wife and I have been through a similar tragedy, let me try to explain a few things to those who find this “creepy”.

The Senator says his son was pronounced dead around 3am. What Mrs. Santorum went through that day was crushingly exhausting, both mentally and physically. His day was almost as bad. A father’s natural instinct is to protect his children. The helplessness one feels in such a situation is agonizing. So let’s look at this logically. It’s probably 5am and both parents’ energy has been sucked bone dry. To fall asleep with the baby takes on a different meaning when taken into context, right? To read some of these comments and Colmes’ original statement, it would seem as if some people think the Santorums peacefully cuddled up with Gabriel for a long, restful night. Wrong!

Our baby died in the afternoon and our 1 year old was at the hospital with his Grandparents. We were encouraged to let him see his brother and he did. His brother was in heaven…he got it. My Mother-in-law, who had lost a baby of her own, asked to hold little Carlton. It brought her closure because in her time, the babies were quickly disposed of. We held him, too. He was a perfectly formed miniature of his brother, and to see and hold him changed my opinion of what constitutes life irrevocably. I can see the Santorum’s desire to share Gabriel with the rest of their family…it’s not weird at all. The other kids knew they were supposed to have a new brother. For him to simply “go away” would be confusing and possibly traumatic. To suggest Gabriel was brought home for the others to “play with” is disgusting. This, in my view, was the most egregious claim Colmes made and it should be universally condemned. Those of you who take perverse joy in trying to reinforce this image are in need of serious help. Now. You are showing signs of “genetic retardation”. Luckily for you, you don’t get to pass judgement on yourselves. By your standards, you’d be gone by now. Those who wish to make the Santorum’s actions into some ghoulish ritual betray something of themselves. If you haven’t walked in their shoes, you can’t understand, so please don’t assume the worst. Your heartless criticism is just plain indecent.

As many others have said, this is a matter of choice. Freedom of choice, we are constantly told; is a cherished Constitutional right. If you accept that, you must accept the choices we grieving parents are forced to make. This is NOT about Santorum’s politics at this point; it’s about yours. You can think whatever you want about his policies, but, by your own standards, he and his family have the right to grieve as they see fit.

To sum up (and I hope this has been seen as acceptable by Admin.), you haters are causing more collateral damage than you know. Those of us
who have been through this feel your words and they sting. If you have no compassion for the Santorum’s because of politics, I feel sorry for you. If you have no compassion for the thousands who go through this every day, you need to see a doctor. Do yourselves a favor; be well.

Kenz on January 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Colmes.
Creep, lightweight.

The guy could not be a more perfect ass.
Brilliant hire by Fox.
The perfect bad example.

PaleoRider on January 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Colmes’ statements on Fox in defense of liberal viewpoints are so scattered and disjointed I can’t believe liberals want him on national news defending their positions. He continually comes up with a contrarian liberal viewpoint even when I suspect he is agreeing with the conservative view regarding the topic for discussion.

I dislike the man so much I change the channel when he is talking. Not any more. Now I will listen to every word he has to say, every liberal position he takes. PaleoRider is correct – he is the perfect representative (by being the worst) of the liberal viewpoint to be on Fox. I credit the conservative brain trust at Fox – no way him being on-air there is not intentional. Whenever he speaks he strengthens my negative opinions of liberals and the liberal movement in general, and proves to me that my conservative views are the proper, mainstream, moral, and ethical positions to take in life. Liberals are the soulless fringe outside of the mainstream, and always will be – I think deep down they know that and hate themselves and their unhappy lives for it.

AttaBoyLuther on January 3, 2012 at 12:54 PM

mark81150 on January 3, 2012 at 12:13 PM

I am so sorry for your loss Mark. I really think people are just caught up in the political and are truly forgetting that these babies had families and are loved.

LawnGnomeFanFirst on January 3, 2012 at 12:56 PM

You have now exposed yourselves as being the liberals (a.k.a. “social conservatives”) that you truly are.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

There ain’t no way you’re gonna get away with that statement.

The issue of abortion is just as mathematically based, as the issue of the economy.
The issue of the economy is just as morally based, as the issue of abortion.

I don’t have any illusions that I somehow just “changed your mind” on the subject. But it’s important for the purpose of these debates/arguments that you know that prolifers (myself included)believe it.

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Gelsomina

There are plenty of instances where mothers have chosen to die in order that a baby might live.

I do not consider this odd at all. Any parent would give his life for a child.

Age of the child is not a factor.

Or – you can put a “fetus” on a shelf in a closet, close the door, and have a delightful dinner with good wine and friends.

Baal would be proud of the latter.

Horace on January 3, 2012 at 2:55 AM

Yes.

“A woman must be able to decide what she does with her own body” – that’s the mantra of the pro-choicers. And that’s exactly what Mrs. Santorum did.

If the “pro-abortion folks” were honest, they would agree with Mrs. Santorum’s decision. If she decides to risk her life for her baby, we have to accept it. It’s much less weird than letting your own child die for your well-being.

Gelsomina on January 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM

You have now exposed yourselves as being the liberals (a.k.a. “social conservatives”) that you truly are.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Are you serious? or stoned? Conservatism is a three-legged stoo consisting of Social Conservatism, Fiscal Conservatism, and National Defense.

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Kenz on January 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Thanks for sharing that. Very well put.
(But you bought tears to my eyes, dang it)

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 1:06 PM

People who support the legal right to kill babies by abortion are the most anti-science people in the galaxy.

KyMouse on January 3, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Dittos!

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Bob in VA on January 3, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Massive Mega Dittos.

Texyank on January 3, 2012 at 1:17 PM

There are no normal reactions to grief. This is a non-story.

That said, I’m hoping Santorum’s moment in the spotlight is brief.

Potfry on January 3, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Do you have any clue at all as to what you’re talking about?
hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:06 PM

To a true conservative, the call for a suppression of speech is worth the price of death. It was 200+ years ago, anyway. Yet, readers of HA readily do exactly that when the speech does not fit their socially “conservative” views. There is no difference between a “liberal” that calls for Big Brother solutions and the “social conservatives” that call for the same.

Actually it appears that the majority were offended by the comments – seems like the only ones not offended were those equally devoid of any empathy or decency.
katiejane on January 3, 2012 at 12:41 PM

And those that call for Big Brother solutions to silence the speech of those without empathy and decency (decided by whom?) are not true conservatives. The fact that no one (other than Carnac) noticed and took issue with the call for a Big Brother solution for silence is quite telling.

It is enlightening to discover that when the mirror reflects negatively, the holder of the mirror is branded as just another crazy and must be cast into the corner with the Ron Paul supporters (wrong guess). Truly, the Founding Father’s would be scorned by both sides of the political spectrum today if brought back from the grave.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 1:28 PM

single-celled organism with no brain, no heart, and no internal organs.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Not sure how to embed. Watch this video and then tell me that you stand by your statement.

http://youtu.be/fKyljukBE70

Strike Twice on January 3, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Macacca” destroyed a man’s career, as did “Things would have been different had he been elected.” They both appologized too. It didn’t matter.

This should be no different.

P.S. Please stop feeding the trolls.

29Victor on January 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Exactly. besides, it’s hardly the first time he’s done something like this.

Hard Right on January 3, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Are you serious? or stoned? Conservatism is a three-legged stoo consisting of Social Conservatism, Fiscal Conservatism, and National Defense.

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 1:04 PM

It seems a concerted attempt by Paulites and trolls to redefine conservatism to suit their own agenda. I’ve been a conservative since the trauma of seeing what McGovern was actually saying in 72, when I was 13. I saw Mr. Reagan’s rebuttal, and that made me a Reaganite for life. He was a social, fiscal conservative, stronger than anyone on defense..

and these folks have the audacity to claim, they are the “true” conservatives?

Where the Hell were they in all the battles in the last 30 years? I haven’t seen them..

oh,.. right,..

they were busy building bunkers and storing canned goods, so convinced the society was too rotten to save,.. so they’d rather shoot a starving neighbor over a can of beans, than help rebuild with the sane part of the country. They were absent from every major fight, till the country elected Obama…

Now they come out to engage?

and then, only to damage the only viable alternatives who can get elected so they can wallow in their own filth at the temple of Paul. They’re like pod people,.. passing as human only till they take over.. except for one small detail,.. nationally, they don’t have enough supporters to fill a good sized stadium.

people don’t like crazy,.. no matter how grandfatherly he looks.

mark81150 on January 3, 2012 at 1:34 PM

What it is gowing in the mother’s womb, then? A puppy?

kingsjester on January 3, 2012 at 10:04 AM

A single-celled organism with no brain, no heart, and no internal organs.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:09 AM

That’s only the case for about seven seconds, and then it starts dividing. If this is the line you want to draw, then your solution would be to favor abortions within an hour of conception.

Here’s the problem, though: by the time someone even KNOWS they are pregnant, the baby has all of the things you mentioned above; you can see the heartbeat even on the miniscule ultrasounds one can take at five weeks.

Are the heart and brain the only internal organs you consider critical to human life? If a person has an artificial heart installed, are they no longer human? What happens when we hit Kurzweil’s predicted moment of singularity and machines do the thinking for us, or we start imprinting our personality onto technology? Are we no longer human if our brain is enhanced or even replaced with cybernetics? Are there other organs you think a baby should have in order to “count”? The liver, perhaps, or kidneys, or lungs? Medical science has contrived ways for people to survive with some loss of function that would sound almost ridiculous if you removed them from the modern context.

Bottom line is, this argument doesn’t sound like it makes a strong case for abortion being anything other than ending a human life. A few advocates I’ve spoken to openly acknowledge this and say that the family should decide ANYWAY, equating it to the decision to turn off grandma’s life support.

The Schaef on January 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM

To the Administrator: what am I doing wrong? I know my 2 posts were long, but not as long as others, and I’m not using profanity or going off topic. I’m looking for some guidance here.

Kenz on January 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM

There ain’t no way you’re gonna get away with that statement.

The issue of abortion …..

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 12:59 PM

When did my argument about HA readers wanting to stifle the speech of others become an issue about abortion?
Examples:

Could we get this thing banned?
sharrukin on January 2, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Second the banning notion…this comment crosses a line.
Bluray on January 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

In fact, this Colmes story was never about abortion. Somehow the Santorum constituency morphed the responses into a discussion about abortion. Now that I have seen what a Santorum run for the Presidency is going to entail, I will be going elsewhere with my vote. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM

To the Administrator: Never mind. I missed it…sorry.

Kenz on January 3, 2012 at 1:44 PM

The ‘viability’ standards are a very poor measure; a baby that had no chance at living 100 years ago might very well make it today. Eventually I think when the heart and brain come online is when ‘viability’ will start. Once those two organs are up and running, everything else is secondary. An adult that loses them is a lifeless shell and so is a baby that never gets them (ie; stillborn).

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:20 AM

If this is your standard for viability you are a scientific mental midget.

Tell me, how much chance is there that an adult who has “lost” a heart and a brain (whatever that means) will live long enough to spontaneously create brand new ones? The child, on the other hand, has close to a 100% chance to do just that. I don’t think the term “viability” means what you think it means.

runawayyyy on January 3, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Colmes’ comment reveals his ignorance and his inhumanity.

That his “fans” and employer are letting him get away with a simple personal apology reveals the same about them.

Over twenty years since our loss and we still grieve.

Over50 on January 3, 2012 at 1:46 PM

The reason viability is so important is that it is the point at which the baby is no longer dependent on drawing resources from the body of the woman for its survival. Prior to that point it can be argued that in an abortion the woman is not killing the baby, but rather that she is just choosing to withdraw the use of her body. The baby’s death is incidental. The decision to withdraw the use of her body means the baby is going to die anyway, so then the ‘best’ way (for the mother) to withdraw the use of her body becomes to kill the fetus that is going to die anyway.

You may not like the idea, and you may believe a woman should never do that even to the point she should be incarcerated for murder if she does, or you may not like the ‘bloodless’ way I have pointed it out, but the argument is what the argument is, and it is the argument that has won the battle of ideas on the subject so far in modern civilization.

So you should understand what the viability argument is. What it is not is an arbitrary mark of the personhood of the fetus.

BTW, I am not promoting that position on the subject. I am just pointing out what it is.

My own take on the subject is that when a woman chooses to engage in procreative behavior (normal intercourse), she should be prepared to accept the consequences. By agreeing to intercourse she has agreed to nurture the baby.

fadetogray on January 3, 2012 at 1:50 PM

In fact, this Colmes story was never about abortion. Somehow the Santorum constituency morphed the responses into a discussion about abortion. Now that I have seen what a Santorum run for the Presidency is going to entail, I will be going elsewhere with my vote. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM

The ‘Santorum constituency’ did not morph the discussion. The Santorum bashers did.

So, now that you know that, I suppose you will be voting for Santorum?

fadetogray on January 3, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Dear Alan Colmes, FOAD.

DANEgerus on January 3, 2012 at 2:04 PM

fadetogray: Does the definition of “viability” as it pertains to the Mother’s desire to provide “resources” extend to providing milk? If a child is born, but is starved to death by its Mother, is that OK? It seems as if you’re saying that viability is in the eye of the beholder, as long as the beholder is the female partner of successful intercourse.
I read your whole post, so I’m not picking on you specifically, but the viability standard, as you describe it, covers a multitude of sins.

carnac: I’m not seeing much in the way of Big Brother activity. I’m seeing an appeal to common decency. If you reject that appeal, pointing out that you’re an insensitive a$$hole doesn’t seem to be out of line.

Kenz on January 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM

The Schaef on January 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM

That’s just the honest ones..

The rest continue to delude themselves, because it shields them from the horror of what they do. We’ve all seen the babies dumped in dumpsters pictures, the ultrasound of a baby pulling away from the abortionists tools.. You can’t see these things and just shrug..

Unless it’s that you simply do not value human life.

at least none but your own.

Too many parents have now spoken out, we aren’t alone, there are so many who have lost a baby to count almost. I did shed tears, reading what the others had gone through, it took me back to 2004, and our son. I also shed tears, telling our story,.. it rends you,.pulls you apart on the inside..

I wish to God none of you had gone through a loss of a child. The cliche’ is true, no parent, should outlive their child. But sometimes we do,.. and you put your lives back together for your surviving children and your wife or husband. There remains a saddness, deep and empty that never completely goes away..

God Bless you all, who have known this..

I know, if I follow the path, I’ll see my son again someday,.. We’ll all be together again,.. I know my mother is already looking after him,. my father,..

I just want him to see us, and be proud, that we spoke for him, for the others taken so young, for the ones cast away, unwanted,..

I believe we have to account for what we do in life, and for what we didn’t do, when it could have made a difference.

mark81150 on January 3, 2012 at 2:06 PM

If you care to tweet to @AlanColmes you too can tell him to F.O.A.D.

DANEgerus on January 3, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Touche!
I thought you were talking about Santorum’s baby that died.

I have since gone back to your 11:57 AM post, and found that I STAND CORRECTED.
(hanging head in shame) doh.

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 2:14 PM

This story was about Colmes and his use of “crazy” in reference to Santorum. That was, we are told, followed up by an apology by Colmes to Santorum.

My initial comment was to make note of the response to some HA readers when they used phrasing that was unappreciated by some. A few made a call for Big Brother to stifle the speech.

In the process of being the last defender of the freedom of speech, the following words/phrases have been used in reference to me:
clueless
from Paulworld; a Paulite; a troll
anti-prolife
stoned

And along the way mark81150 even called Paul “crazy”, the exact term used that initiated this story in the first place.

But not to worry. I won’t be needing any apologies.

Just to note, I am not supporting Ron Paul, I am pro-life, I am not stoned, and I may or may not be clueless. The other thing that I am is a defender of free speech. So if that bothers the likes of some of you, you’ll have to take it without an apology from me.

I will end by saying that if the social conservatives really believe that they need Big Brother/Government to institute their brand of conservatism (including, apparently, the stifling of undesired speech), then on the flip-side when what you’re left with is the likes of Obama/Pelosi/Reid in charge, don’t throw a hissy fit.

Carnac on January 3, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6