- BitsBlog - http://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com -

I Come Not to Piss on Alan Colmes

Did Allah Pundit make a rather bad metaphor or just a uniquely apt one? …. from Hot Air [1]:

You’d think liberals would want to pull their punches against Santorum until he’s built up enough momentum nationally to complicate life for Romney, yet here’s Colmesy throwing an uppercut straight to the groin. Pure instinctual ideological bloodlust? Or … is this actually a sly bit of jujitsu in which AC, through a calculated display of jerkiness, forces the viewer to sympathize with Santorum, thus giving him another little boost before tomorrow night? It’s good cop/bad cop co-starring Rich Lowry. Fiendishly clever!

An uppercut to the groin. Watch the video and you decide.

Hat tip video: Right Scoop [3].

Reax Nice Deb [4]:

You’ve probably been hearing about the brouhaha over Alan Colmes’ despicable remarks about how the Santorum’s handled the death of their newborn in 1996. The usually even-keeled Rick Moran called Colmes a “heartless monster”  [5] and if you haven’t yet seen the video of the confrontation between the morally outraged Rich Lowrey and the simpering, unapologetic Colmes, it is a must see. [1]

I agree with Deb that something fundamental is missing with Colmes.   However I don’t think it is his heart, or lack thereof, but rather his brain.

Anybody who claims to be non-judgmental is  naive or a liar.   Colmes expresses total submissiveness to the Supreme Court in matters of sexual morality yet deems how Rich and Karen Santorum choose to grieve their late  son.  Maybe the Supreme’s have not ruled on what is an acceptable way to memorialize a dead child, thus permitting Colmes to have his own opinion.

Speaking for  myself , I feel the best why to show respect for your loved depart ones to try and behave as they were still present.    While I find the Santorum’s particular memorial unusual, it is fitting with  the prior concept.

As the Supreme Court being some sort of judge of what is moral and not moral, not in my book   The same court which declare the Negro had no rights (Scott v Sanford) and that racial segregation was legal (Plessy v. Rerguson).     Were it not for Brown v. Board of Education, are we to believe that Colmes would be objecting to the darkies in the white schools?