We’ll have to see how this plays out:

Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman has “unconceded” in New York’s special House election after reports that the vote margin between him and Rep. Bill Owens (D) has narrowed.

Hoffman conceded the race on Election Night after learning he trailed Owens by 5,335 votes. But the Syracuse Post-Standard reported last week that the margin had shrunk to 3,026 votes after recanvassing.

Hoffman appeared on conservative commenatator Glenn Beck’s radio show this afternoon. Beck asked the him if he would “unconcede.”

“Yes, if I knew this information at the election night, I would not have conceded,” Hoffman said. Beck asked him again if he was “uncondeding” and Hoffman replied “If that’s possible, yes.”

Officials in the upstate New York district are still counting over 10,000 absentee ballots, which also had Republican nominee Dede Scozzafava’s name on them.

Some of my liberal counterparts had near apoplectic responses to John Hinderacker’s article entitled, “Why does he hate us?” In it, Hinderacker highlights his compatriot Paul Mirengoff’s article in The Examiner, an excerpt of which follows:

In the area of foreign and national security policy, however, Obama can operate largely unchecked. And a weak, guilt-ridden policy toward our foreign adversaries is almost certain to produce grave consequences.

To some extent, we have seen this act before. The damage of just four years of Jimmy Carter’s America-effacing presidency included Soviet expansion, communist inroads in Latin America, the replacement of a friendly government with a virulently anti-American theocracy in Iran, and a prolonged hostage crisis that came to symbolize the new American impotence.

But although Carter was ambivalent about America, his efforts to promote democracy abroad showed that he thought we had something to offer t[he] world. Obama will not grant America even that.

Emulating Carter the ex-president, rather than President Carter, Obama has shown essentially no interest in human rights or democracy promotion. His belated support of the Iranian protesters following this summer’s election could hardly have been more lukewarm.

It seems that, in Obama’s view, all we have to offer the world is our non-interference in its affairs, except perhaps when it comes to bullying our allies.

This led one of my liberal acquaintances to retort:

Sorry, but the “facts” in the article simply do not lead to the conclusion that constitutes the assertion in the title.

So, Does Barack Hussein Obama really hate America? Consider the following:

In his formative years, young Barry Soetoro hung out with the likes of Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers, who loved America so much they decided to bomb the living crap out of it.

The guy sat in a church for 20 years listening to a guy screaming “G-d Dmn America!”

Barack Hussein Obama, himself, in his own words, said the Constitution was a flawed document because it did nothing to ‘spread the wealth.’

Obama never misses an opportunity to apologize for what he feels to be American ‘arrogance.’ (yet he himself, is the paragon of arrogance).

Rather than speaking of American greatness, Obama speaks only of its perceived flaws. Rather than build on the principles that made America great, he seems to feel that it is his job to single-handedly correct what he believes to be over two centuries of wrong-minded policies, and to turn America and its founding principles on its head as a means to weaken and humble our nation in the process.

Barack Hussein Obama never speaks of a strong America; he never speaks of America being a leader for freedom; but instead he speaks of America as a nation in need of neutering, one to be relegated to be on equal footing (or lower) with even the most rogue of nations. Rather than the Monroe, Truman, JFK, Reagan, and Bush doctrines, which each recognized the greatness of America and sought to protect and champion the cause of freedom and liberty around the globe, Obama’s is the new doctrine of “American moral relativism;” rather than being clothed in Old Glory, we are now bathed in sackcloths and ashes, being beaten down and forced to atone for what in Obama’s mind are past and unforgivable wrongs. Rather than stand up to tyrants, dictators, and monarchs, he bows before them in supplication. Rather than representing America in strength, he cowers in his own fecklessness.

In an effort to hasten his remaking of America, Obama has even cheapened the very structure, fidelity and integrity of governance, appointing a wide variety of tax scofflaws, avowed communists, and innumerable unelected, unaccountable ‘czars‘ to carry out his policies.

I would therefore submit that, taking into account how he chose to spend his developing years and as is certainly evident in the intent of and in the way he conducts policy, it most veritably can be inferred that Barack Obama isn’t necessarily a fan of that for which America has traditionally stood.

In fact, to make the inference that Barack Hussein Obama loves America and all for which it has traditionally stood is certainly more of a stretch of inference than is its corollary.

Among many other things pointed out by Victor Davis Hanson is this:

Cato vs. Nero

I visited the Reagan ranch yesterday—for the first time. In my 20s and 30s I remember the media mantra about the ex-governor’s getaway: Reagan’s wealthy cronies had supposedly secretly bought him in a sweet-heart-deal a Hearst Castle-like estate where he looked down at hoi polloi below and did photo-ops chopping wood. I half expected “the ranch” to be comparable to Oprah’s nearby estate.

But I was struck by the array of simple farm tools in the garage, the do-it-yourself trails and fences, the unadorned home of about 1700 sq. ft of rustic simplicity and ad-ons with basic old GE appliances, no insulation, wiring conduited onto the whitewashed walls, low ceilings, basic, unevenly settled tile floors. In terms of comfort or frills, the Western White House “ranch” was probably not comparable to “John’s room” inside the Edwards’ “Two Americas” estate, or the garage at one of John Kerry’s mansions, or Al Gore’s boathouse.

How odd that the supposed plutocratic Reagan lived like the proverbial Philemon and Baucis, while today’s populists—Gore, Kerry, Kennedy, Edwards, Rev. Wright, etc., fill in the blanks—seek to emulate Nero’s Golden House.

I’ve been there, too. Along with my wife and Matt when Matt and I were giving a talk on Caucus of Corruption for the YAF. The ranch is a slice of heaven and there is no wonder, once you’re there, why the Reagan’s bought the place – isolated as it is, and even more so when purchased in the mid-70’s. Immediately upon arriving, the strongest urge one gets is a desire to never, ever leave. But it was the house which most astounded – and what struck me as most moving was, actually, Reagan’s tool bench…precisely like the tool bench of millions of middle class do-it-yourselfers. The only thing at the ranch which lets you know that Ronald Reagan was President of the United States is his Secret Service ball cap and the presidential seal emblazoned on the lawnmower.

In that house and at the ranch I understood, finally and completely, why we loved Ronald Reagan – why the left and the MSM could never break the bonds: because he was one of us. While time has blurred the edges of leftist hate for Reagan, the fact remains that from his first entry to politics until his retirement from public life, the left kept up an endless drumbeat of hatred. Just as they, also, kept it up (and keep it up) about President Bush and, now, Sarah Palin.

You see, being one of the people is not a function of wealth – you can be poor, or rich or in between. It isn’t about birth. Its all about being one of the people – liberals don’t understand this. And I don’t think they ever will. But those in politics who are of the people will win and retain the loyalty of the people – and will always triumph over those who claim to speak for the people, rather than meeting them on the level.

Yep:

Years after the circus-like trials of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, Attorney General Eric Holder, acting for the president, has asked for a repeat performance. He is ordering trials in New York of five men who finally succeeded in the original plan to bring down those towers and, in the process, kill almost 3,000 civilians.

There is every reason to believe that in these trials the government may face even more substantial Sixth Amendment hurdles than it did in the original World Trade Center case — hurdles relating to the defendants’ rights to counsel, to subpoena witnesses, and to obtain access to classified information regarding the detention abroad of terrorists. Then there is their treatment while in detention and the names of states and state actors who assisted us in bringing to heel those who murder us here and abroad.

Do any of you pinhead liberals out there think we have KSM’s fingerprints on the written order stating “drive planes in to buildings”? When dealing with psychotic, mass murders you don’t get evidence like that – why do you think KSM was hiding in Pakistan while his minions were driving planes in to buildings? If KSM really believed in the cause, he’d have been one of the pilots…but, no, he wasn’t. He doesn’t really believe in the stated cause, and thus kept himself as far away from evidence as possible because he knew he was doing wrong.

Stalin was like that, too. So was Lenin. You think if we sifted through the Cuban state archives we’d find orders signed by Castro for all those murders? In Arafat’s private papers are there detailed instructions on how to torture and murder captive Jews? I feel pretty certain that the evidence we have on KSM is highly circumstantial and strongly based on the words of others, some of which will be hearsay and other bits will have been coerced. The basics of the trial are shot through with elements a determined and clever defense attorney can make hay with.

And, so, even if we get a conviction, the ultimate result will be to provide KSM a platform, put him back in the Islamist eye as a hero and the whole effort will be used to put the United States on trial and the global left – domestic and foreign – will be all over it.

Of all the terrible decisions made by the Obama Administration, this is the worst – and the one most likely to be paid for in blood, in the by and by.

Woohoo!

About a year ago, thousands jammed Grant Park in Chicago to celebrate Barack Obama’s election to the White House, a communal civic defining moment. But those giddy days are long gone as Democrats in Illinois face the potential of losing the Senate seat President Obama once held next November.

The Illinois primary is Feb. 2, and the Democrat and Republican races are ripening, with the deadlines to file or withdraw nominating petitions now passed…

…Alexi Giannoulias is the Democratic front-runner. His main competitors are Cheryle Jackson, the former Chicago Urban League chief and former Blagojevich spokeswoman; former City of Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman, and attorney Jacob Meister, who is a factor only because he put more than $1 million of his own cash into the race. With days lost to Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year’s, well, it’s practically voting day already…

…Giannoulias’ potential biggest liability is his former association with Broadway Bank, founded by his father and the subject of controversy because of loans made to alleged mobsters and convicted influence peddler Tony Rezko…

The best they can get is tied to Obama’s corrupt fixer, Tony Rezko…man, oh, man; if we can’t wrest this seat from the Democrats, then we really are a bunch of losers.

The main GOPer – Kirk – was made a bit famous a little while ago when he started angling for Palin’s endorsement…which is also, though, the smartest thing he could do as Palin’s endorsement carries with it a great deal of political passion on the part of the outraged populist right, the key to GOP victory next year.

Matt and I saw a lot of this sort of thing when researching Caucus of Corruption and now perhaps Reid is up to it. Details over at Dump Reid.

Well, we might want to start calling it a putsch, I guess:

The Obama administration will propose that the federal government take over safety regulation of the nation’s subway and light-rail systems, responding to what it says is haphazard and ineffective oversight by state agencies.

Under the proposal, the U.S. Department of Transportation would do for transit what it does for airlines and Amtrak: set and enforce federal regulations to ensure that millions of passengers get to their destinations safely. Administration officials said the plan will be presented in coming weeks to Congress, which must approve a change in the law.

The proposal would affect every subway and light-rail system in the country, including large systems in Washington, New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Now your local bus route will come under the supervision of the same people who did such a bang up job with H1N1…feel safe?

The moth cannot resist the flame, it would seem:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday that the Obama administration will push for “immigration reform” by giving the estimated 14 million people who are in the United States illegally “fair pathway to earned legal status.”

“A tough and fair pathway to earned legal status will mandate that illegal immigrants meet a number of requirements—including registering, paying a fine, passing a criminal background check, fully paying all taxes and learning English,” Napolitano said Friday at a panel discussion at the liberal Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C.

“These are substantial requirements that will make sure this population gets right with the law,” Napolitano said. “It will help fix our broken system.”

As I’ve said many times before, I am in favor of a path to citizenship for long-term, illegal residents of the United States. So are three or four other people. Pretty much, the American people have spoken on this – the border is to be secured. And, then? Well, once the border is secured, you may ask, again.

It is political poison to attempt anything which isn’t first and foremost an effort to secure the border – to make it impossible for illegals to just wander across it. Americans have seen the videos of illegals just waltzing in – and they also saw all those Mexican flags at the pro-illegal-immigration demonstrations a couple years back. The decision has been made – and politician attempting to finesse around this core, popular desire is playing with fire. So, naturally, Democrats are walking over to the fire with extra gasoline.

I guess they are still figuring that they’ll gain more votes in the long run than they’ll lose – but even if that is correct, by piling amnesty on top of Obamacare on top of Afghan dithering on top of Cap and Trade on top of Stimulus on top of TARP the liberals are risking such a massive melt down that even if 100% of Hispanics vote for them, it won’t make a difference. The only thing left for the liberals to do is advocate gun control or a national pro-gay marriage law…

Which, the way things are going, is probably right around the corner…

America and God are inseparable:

The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man. – G K Chesterton

And what did they find?

…the 11 fact-checkers triumphantly unearthed six errors. That’s 1.8333333 writers for each error. What earth-shattering misstatements did they uncover for this impressive investment? Stand well back:

PALIN: Says she made frugality a point when traveling on state business as Alaska governor, asking “only” for reasonably priced rooms and not “often” going for the “high-end, robe-and-slippers” hotels.

THE FACTS: Although she usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard)…

That looks like AP paid 1.8333333 fact-checkers to agree with Mrs Palin: She says she didn’t “often” go for “high-end” hotels; they say she “usually opted for less-pricey hotels”. That’s gonna make one must-see edition of “Point/Counterpoint”.

I mean, seriously, this is getting absurd – for crying out loud, liberals and MSMers, will you just stop hating Sarah Palin. She’s not an ogre out to destroy all life on earth – she’s just a populist-conservative wife and mother who wants to field-dress liberalism’s dead carcass. She’s also much, much better looking than any liberal chick you’ve got…so, there.