There's good news to begin the week from the public opinion front. Despite - or perhaps because of…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
New Poll: Americans Oppose Obama-Iran Accord By Over 2-to-1

There's good news to begin the week from the public opinion front.

Despite - or perhaps because of - the Obama Administration's desperate effort to sell a skeptical Congress and American electorate on its dangerous nuclear accord with Iran, a new Quinnipiac poll shows that the public opposes the deal by more than a two-to-one margin:

American voters oppose 57-28 percent, with only lukewarm support from Democrats and overwhelming opposition from Republicans and independent voters, the nuclear pact negotiated with Iran, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.  Voters say 58-30 percent the nuclear pact will make the world less safe, the independent Quinnipiac University poll finds."

That skepticism is matched by some in Congress, including Senator Tom Cotton (…[more]

August 03, 2015 • 09:58 am

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Notable Quotes
 
On the President's Emissions Overreach:
 
 

"The Obama administration is expected to announce today new restrictions on U.S. power plants that are, in the words of the New York Times, 'the strongest action ever taken in the United States to combat climate change.' In reality, the new regulatory regime is no such thing, a fact that ought to inform the years-long political and legal fight that the president's unilateral rulemaking inevitably will provoke.

The president will instruct U.S. power plants to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions by just under one-third (32 percent). How that is to be achieved and at what cost is . . . not Barack Obama's problem. States will have until 2018 -- comfortably remote from any presidential election -- to submit their plans, and until 2030 to implement them.

The president and his partisans insist that these measures are necessary to prevent catastrophic global warming. But global warming is, famously, a global issue, and even steep cuts in one sector of one country's economy many years in the future will have only a minuscule effect on global atmospheric conditions, especially given the fact that developing nations such as India have made it clear that they will not artificially lower their peoples' standards of living to satisfy a moral panic in the affluent world. China, for its part, promises that it will freeze its emissions right where they are -- someday -- in exchange for certain concessions, a promise with about as much credibility as the Iranians' insistence that they want enriched uranium to supply a new plant powering a national fleet of Chevy Volts because they'€™re on a jihad to comfort the polar bear."

 
 
— The Editors, National Review
— The Editors, National Review
Posted August 03, 2015 • 12:28 pm
 
 
On What Voters See in Donald Trump:
 
 

"[Trump's] rise is not due to his supporters' anger at government. It is a gesture of contempt for government, for the men and women in Congress, the White House, the agencies. It is precisely because people have lost their awe for the presidency that they imagine Mr. Trump as a viable president. ...

"Mr. Trump's supporters like that he doesn't in the least fear the press, doesn't get the dart-eyed, anxious look candidates get. He treats reporters with courtesy until he feels they're out of line, at which point he calls them stupid. They think he'll do that with Putin. His insult of John McCain didn't hurt him, and not because his supporters have any animus for Mr. McCain. They just saw it as more proof Mr. Trump will take the bark off anyone. ...

"Trump's power is not name ID. He didn't make his name in this cycle or the last, he's been around 35 years. He's made an impression."

 
 
— Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal
— Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal
Posted July 31, 2015 • 12:17 pm
 
 
On Administration Rebuke Over Withholding Docs in IRS Targeting Scandal:
 
 

"A federal judge Wednesday rebuked the Obama administration's IRS for refusing to divulge documents, including Lois G. Lerner's emails, and warned that he would hold in contempt those who break his orders.

"Judge Emmet G. Sullivan called the administration's defense 'nonsensical' and said the IRS must release documents every Monday to Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest law firm that requested the documents under open records laws and then sued after the IRS didn't comply. ...

"Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said Judge Sullivan's displeasure with the IRS shows just how poorly the agency is performing.

"'The missing-and-then-not-missing Lois Lerner saga is a stark example of the Obama administration's contempt for a federal court and the rule of law,' Mr. Fitton said. 'That Obama administration officials would risk jail rather than disclose these Lerner documents shows that the IRS scandal has just gotten a whole lot worse.'"

 
 
— Stephen Dinan and Dave Boyer, The Washington Times
— Stephen Dinan and Dave Boyer, The Washington Times
Posted July 30, 2015 • 12:32 pm
 
 
On the Ruinous Compassion of Minimum-Wage Laws:
 
 

"The current fashion among progressives is the demand for a $15/hour minimum wage. Bernie Sanders supports it, Elizabeth Warren supports it, Martin O'Malley supports it, and Hillary Rodham Clinton . . . won'€™t quite answer the question. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a $15/hour minimum wage would throw 3.3 million Americans out of work. Jonathan Meer and Jeremy West of Texas A&M put the number at 6.6 million lost jobs; Jeffrey Clemens and Michael Wither's estimate for the National Bureau of Economic Research puts the number of lost jobs at 16.8 million. If those jobs do in fact disappear, the politicians will try to redress this development with more economy-distorting subsidies and penalties, and when these fail you can be confident that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump will make a lot of noise about the wily Chinese and dirty Mexicans 'stealin' our jobs!'"

 
 
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
Posted July 29, 2015 • 12:21 pm
 
 
On the Democrats' 2016 Presidential Nominee:
 
 

"While in all probability Clinton remains the prohibitive favorite to win the nomination, it is true that her favorable ratings have taken a tumble. For over four years, from 2009 until well into 2013, Clinton's favorable ratings in the Gallup Poll were in the 60's, but a few months into 2013 they started a plunge down to 43 percent. Arguably, her favorable ratings were unsustainably high during her tenure as secretary of State, when she was a diplomat more than a politician. Yet it does raise the question of what happens if the USS HRod begins taking on water. What would Democrats do? Is there an emergency 'break the glass' option if real questions of Clinton's electability arise? It seems extremely unlikely that any one issue could bring Clinton down, but what if she begins to suffer 'death by a thousand cuts'?

"Would Vice President Joe Biden and/or Sen. Elizabeth Warren jump in? Or would/could someone not being currently mentioned throw a hat into the ring, like say, Sen. Sherrod Brown or former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg? Presumably Bloomberg would need to join the Democratic Party, but then again, has Sanders joined yet? Or would O'Malley effectively win the political Powerball by being the only plausible alternative running? While all of this is just idle speculation, it is an interesting hypothetical."

 
 
— Charlie Cook, The Cook Political Report Editor and Publisher
— Charlie Cook, The Cook Political Report Editor and Publisher
Posted July 28, 2015 • 12:22 pm
 
 
On Continuing to Make Light of the IRS Targeting Scandal:
 
 

"No sooner did President Obama claim last week the IRS scandal was just a mirage than new evidence emerged to show it was anything but.

"The conservative group Judicial Watch says documents it obtained 'confirm' the agency targeted the donors of certain tax-exempt organizations. And the Government Accountability Office faulted IRS procedures, saying they failed to prevent bias in the selection of nonprofits for audits. That's key, since the agency has been accused of targeting conservative groups. ...

"Of course, the biggest scandal of all is that Team Obama has managed to stonewall and leave the public hanging. And that no one has been held accountable."

 
 
— New York Post Editorial Board
— New York Post Editorial Board
Posted July 27, 2015 • 12:24 pm
 
 
On Opening a Criminal Investigation into Clinton's Email Account:
 
 

"WASHINGTON -- Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

"The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton's private account contained 'hundreds of potentially classified emails.' The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management.

"It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them."

 
 
— Michael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo, The New York Times
— Michael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo, The New York Times
Posted July 24, 2015 • 11:59 am
 
 
On Regretting the Iran Nuclear Deal:
 
 

"A few years from now -- after Iran has used its negotiated breathing space to rearm, ratchet up its terrorist operations, and eventually gain a bomb to blackmail its neighbors -- the current deal will be deeply regretted. Expect a Nobel Peace Prize for Secretary of State John Kerry now, followed by Chamberlain-like infamy later. ...

"China and Russia will never again see any advantage in joining the West in embargoing and sanctioning a would-be nuclear state -- not when such a hard-won common front can become utterly nullified at any moment by a fickle United States. Both powers will grow closer to Iran.

"In 2015, we naively hail peace with honor, but by 2020, sadder and wiser, we will lament war and shame."

 
 
— Victor Davis Hansen, Hoover Institution Senior Fellow and Nationally Syndicated Columnist
— Victor Davis Hansen, Hoover Institution Senior Fellow and Nationally Syndicated Columnist
Posted July 23, 2015 • 12:26 pm
 
 
On Hillary Clinton's Primary Season:
 
 

"She's still an obvious favorite for the nomination, but it's telling that the Clinton campaign is already trying to lower expectations for the New Hampshire primary and Iowa caucuses, suggesting that Bernie Sanders might win some early bouts.

"The point is that personality matters a lot, and no one would confuse Clinton's personality for a secret weapon. It's been a cliche for three decades for Clinton's defenders to say, 'If only you could know the Hillary I know.' That's an unintentionally damning defense. It may be true that she's a wonderful friend to her friends, but as a candidate, she is a remarkably uninspiring, un-charming and un-compelling woman who has every bit as much of a problem connecting to ordinary people as Mitt Romney did. Indeed, like Romney, she has polled poorly (June, CNN) on the question of whether she 'cares about people like you.'"

 
 
— Jonah Goldberg, National Review Senior Editor
— Jonah Goldberg, National Review Senior Editor
Posted July 22, 2015 • 12:05 pm
 
 
On the UN Security Council's Unanimous Approval of the Iran Nuclear Deal:
 
 

"President Obama thinks he has the U.S. Congress right where he wants it as the Members consider his nuclear deal with Iran. Not only do opponents need a two-thirds majority in both houses to stop it, the President has maneuvered to box them in by having the United Nations approve it first.

"That's the meaning of Monday's unanimous vote by the U.N. Security Council approving the deal less than a week after negotiations were completed. ...

"Congress shouldn't fall for it. Other than Israel and the Sunni Arab states, the U.S. has the most to lose from a bad nuclear deal. Iran doesn't call China 'The Great Satan,' and its proxies haven't murdered Russian soldiers. The ballistic missiles that Iran will be able to build with impunity after eight years won't be aimed at Paris. They'll be aimed at U.S. allies, troops and the American homeland."

 
 
— The Editors, The Wall Street Journal
— The Editors, The Wall Street Journal
Posted July 21, 2015 • 12:01 pm
 
Question of the Week   
Which one of the following Obama Administration officials stated in April 2015 that under the nuclear deal with Iran, “you will have anywhere, any time 24/7 access as it relates to the nuclear facilities that Iran has”?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"The Obama administration is expected to announce today new restrictions on U.S. power plants that are, in the words of the New York Times, 'the strongest action ever taken in the United States to combat climate change.' In reality, the new regulatory regime is no such thing, a fact that ought to inform the years-long political and legal fight that the president's unilateral rulemaking inevitably…[more]
 
 
—The Editors, National Review
— The Editors, National Review
 
Liberty Poll   

On August 6, Fox News will televise two debates with the Republican presidential candidates, at 9 p.m. with the top 10, and at 5 p.m. with the rest of the field. Do you plan on watching one or both?