Alongside nearly every other conservative and libertarian organization of which we're aware, CFIF opposes…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Former Clinton Administration Official Rips FCC's Set-Top Box Proposal as "Massive New Federal Regulation"

Alongside nearly every other conservative and libertarian organization of which we're aware, CFIF opposes a toxic and wholly unnecessary new proposal from the Obama Administration's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate cable television set-top boxes before the clock runs out on the Obama presidency.

But opposition extends across the political spectrum.  In today's Wall Street Journal, former Clinton Administration Undersecretary of Commerce Ev Ehrlich excoriates the FCC's proposed set-top box regulation for what it is -- a crony capitalist, purloining, invasive, already-obsolete, anti-competitive, "massive new federal regulation":

The Federal Communications Commission wants you, the consumer, to allow a new set-top box into your home that rearranges the programs…[more]

May 25, 2016 • 12:25 pm

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.
Serious Republican Failures Print
By Quin Hillyer
Thursday, November 08 2012
The problem wasn’t only Romney’s. Republicans under-performed across the board.

For those who are right of center, this week’s election results look worse and worse the longer they are stared at. The situation is this: When all the votes are counted, Mitt Romney’s raw vote total will be almost exactly equivalent to the pathetic numbers achieved by John McCain four years earlier.

Ten times more money, at least, was spent by Romney’s campaign or by affiliated SuperPACs than was spent by or for McCain. Far more money and time and effort were spent by the Republican National Committee and a host of conservative groups to build a vote-turnout “ground game” than was ever spent on McCain’s behalf. McCain ran in the midst of a horrible financial crisis blamed on the unpopular incumbent of his own party, against a brilliant cypher riding the crest of a messianic wave. And McCain’s campaign was riven by internal discord, whereas Romney’s was professional, collegial and apparently quite competent.

Finally, Romney ran against an incumbent presiding over a terrible economy, an incumbent who had picked a fight with and effectively was strenuously opposed by the bishops of the nation’s largest faith denomination, an incumbent who regularly had insulted his opponents and one who was less than two months removed from a major foreign policy disaster that was turning into a full-out scandal.

Yet, somehow, Romney’s team couldn’t turn out more Americans to vote for him than McCain achieved. McCain received 59,934,814 votes; as I write this on Wednesday afternoon, Romney’s total is 57,573,527 (which will probably keep rising toward the realm of, but probably not over, 60 million by the time all late, provisional and absentee ballots are counted).

The problem wasn’t only Romney’s. Republicans under-performed across the board. Incumbent Republican statewide U.S. Representatives Rick Berg of North Dakota and Denny Rehberg of Montana both lost Senate bids in states carried in landslide fashion by Romney. Veterans George Allen in Virginia and Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin ran behind Romney’s percentages in their races for the Senate and Connie Mack IV in Florida got walloped by more than a million votes. Republican Senate candidates in Michigan and Minnesota also were absolutely trounced, and of course Senate GOP candidates in Connecticut, New Mexico, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Ohio and Pennsylvania, all longer shots who nonetheless at one time were thought to offer electoral promise, also lost by significant margins. Finally, of course, foot-in-mouth candidates Todd Akin in Missouri and Richard Mourdock in Indiana raped their own chances in seats Republicans had absolutely counted on winning.

Back to the presidency: The numbers state by state were awful, too. One would have thought that the Bush-2004 effort, in a nation populated by 29 million fewer souls, would have provided a floor for Republican voter turnout, considering the supposed “energy and enthusiasm” driving the grass-roots against Barack Obama. Instead, Bush’s effort usually served as a ceiling that Romney failed even to reach. In Wisconsin, the Republican vote dropped from 1,478,504 in 2004 to 1,408,745 this year (with 100 percent of precincts reporting, although perhaps with some straggler provisionals uncounted). Iowa’s totals went from about 751,000 to 727,000. In Pennsylvania, site of a multi-million late media buy and late visits by Romney, the totals went down from 2,793,847 in 2004 to 2,655,885 in 2008 and even further down this year to 2,615,327.

And so on, in state after state.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama’s final totals will be down from well over 69 million to about 62 million (just over 60 million at this writing, but provisionals still coming in). Had Romney just matched Bush’s 62 million, he might well have won.

All of which means Republicans are doing something very badly wrong. Their candidates and the consultants who advise them have completely forgotten how to mobilize voters. They don’t know how to “connect,” to galvanize, to reach both the hearts and minds, of enough Americans. These races this year were more than eminently winnable, but Republicans blew it, horribly, even as their turnout “technology” and “organization” vastly improved.

Technical campaign proficiency cannot overcome dreadful weaknesses in taking issue stands and communicating the same. (See my earlier columns on issues  “left on the table,” for instance.) They especially can’t overcome a failure to understand popular culture or to show real empathy for those of different economic strata.

Republicans and conservatives must do some real self-analysis. Their own inadequacies helped doom the country to four more years of a radically leftist and imperial presidency. The elections were a disaster, and the next quadrennium will be a long, hard slog.

Question of the Week   
Since its inception in 1861, how many Medal of Honor recipients have been women?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Last week's unanimous passage of a Senate bill making it easier for 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia and other foreign terror sponsors was widely heralded as a major victory.It's more of a cruel hoax.It turns out that just before the vote, Sen. Charles Schumer and other proponents of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act stuffed an amendment into the final draft allowing the attorney general…[more]
 
 
—Paul Sperry, New York Ppost
— Paul Sperry, New York Ppost
 
Liberty Poll   

Which one of the two major political parties do you believe will be more unified behind its presidential candidate following the nominating conventions?