In our Liberty Update commentary entitled "No, Scandinavia Doesn't Vindicate Socialism" this week, we…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: Gallup Poll on Americans' View of Job Market Hits All-Time Record

In our Liberty Update commentary entitled "No, Scandinavia Doesn't Vindicate Socialism" this week, we rightly ridicule admitted socialist Bernie Sanders, including his odd claim that "we now have an economy that is fundamentally broke and grotesquely unfair."  Well, as this Gallup survey illustrates, he's swimming upstream against American public opinion.  Specifically, in a survey that Gallup has conducted periodically since 2001, the public's view of the job market has now hit an all-time record high:

. [caption id="" align="alignleft" width="720"] Sorry, Socialists[/caption]


. Perhaps this helps explain why Sanders has suddenly plummeted in 2020 Democratic candidate surveys, although one wonders how long people like Elizabeth Warren can avoid the same fate.


June 14, 2019 • 02:30 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.
Notable Quotes
On Bernie Sanders' 2020 Presidential Run:

"Bernie Sanders, the antique Brooklyn socialist who represents Vermont in the Senate, is not quite ready to retire to his lakeside dacha and so once again is running for the presidential nomination of a party to which he does not belong with an agenda about which he cannot be quite entirely honest.

"Progressivism in 2019 is a funny critter, indeed.

"Comrade Muppet puts on a good show, but if you want to know where his heart is, go to, where you'll find a Bernie Sanders swag store and a donations link and precious little about what the candidate thinks and believes. Sanders has been around long enough to appreciate that Democratic presidential campaigns are made of rage and money, with ideas way back there somewhere near the caboose. Fresh ideas don't pay the mortgage on second and third homes, either, which must be of some interest to a man with Senator Sanders's real-estate portfolio, relatively modest senator's salary, and light professional resume."

— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
Posted February 21, 2019 • 07:30 am
On the President's Legal Authority to Build a Border Wall:

"A review of existing federal laws makes clear that President Donald Trump has clear statutory authority to build a border wall pursuant to a declaration of a national emergency. Arguments to the contrary either mischaracterize or completely ignore existing federal emergency declarations and appropriations laws that delegate to the president temporary and limited authority to reprogram already appropriated funding toward the creation of a border wall between the United States and Mexico. ...

"Trump is operating within the bounds of a clearly defined and narrow delegation of authority within the realm of appropriations law. He has not conjured funding from thin air (the military construction and Army Corps funding has already been appropriated), nor is he using funds for purposes explicitly prohibited by Congress (to the contrary, Congress explicitly authorized the construction of a border wall). A president who attempted to unilaterally levy taxes or confiscate lawfully owned property pursuant to some declaration would not be operating within the law, and Trump's use of limited appropriations transfer authority will have no legal bearing on potential attempts by future presidents to exercise presidential authority outside the bounds of the law.

"With all that said, the entire legal debate is almost academic at this point, as courts have repeatedly assumed for themselves authority that they do not have to prohibit Trump from exercising authority that clearly belongs to him. Regardless of what the law actually says, and how previous presidents have previously used it, a federal district court judge in Hawaii or California is surely champing at the bit for an opportunity to issue a nationwide injunction against Trump's latest move under the legal doctrine of Orange Man Bad."

Read entire article here.

— Sean Davis, The Federalist Co-Founder
— Sean Davis, The Federalist Co-Founder
Posted February 20, 2019 • 08:05 am
On Hoax Hate Crimes:

"Hoax hate crimes accomplish three main things, all of them bad.

"First, they cause (usually) minority populations to fear for their lives needlessly. People have every good reason to be scared if, say, it appears that someone is hanging nooses around to intimidate them. If there is no shadowy, violent and racist power making such overt displays, then what special place in hell can be reserved for the person who would make others believe there is one, and to fear for no reason? This result, all on its own, justifies throwing the book at those who fake hate crimes.

"Second, hoax incidents cause people to be suspicious of their neighbors. In falsely convincing people that there exists a large, hostile, and potentially violent population in their midst, it breeds distrust and divides communities. If the goal is to make people hate and distrust each other, hoax hate crimes will do the trick.

"Third, these hoax incidents cause everyone to view all hate-crime incidents, including the ones that turn out to be real, with cynicism and disbelief. This is a natural result of people seeing so many high-profile incidents that turn out to be hoaxes."

Read entire article here.

— David Freddoso, Washington Examiner
— David Freddoso, Washington Examiner
Posted February 19, 2019 • 08:07 am
On FBI and Justice Department Plot to Remove President Trump From Office:

"The most egregious anti-democratic actions ever taken by the what can now fairly be called the Deep State are confirmed with the publication of fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's new book detailing how the FBI and Justice Department plotted to remove President Trump from office for firing FBI Director James Comey.

"Justice Department and FBI officials spied on U.S. citizens with false warrants, gave a pass to one presidential campaign with a predetermined investigation, investigated another political campaign on the basis of no verified evidence, and illegally leaked information on investigations. They discussed wiretapping and using the 25th Amendment to the Constitution to remove President Trump, and appointed a special counsel as a retaliatory move for Comey's firing.

"It is now crystal clear that the highest echelons of the Justice Department and FBI had morphed from the world's most professional law enforcement organization into a Third World rump group. They had the hubris to believe that they -- not the American people or their duly elected representatives -- should decide who governs and how."

Read entire article here.

— Mark Penn, Stagwell Group Managing Director and 1996, 2000 and 2008 Clinton Campaign Chief Strategist
— Mark Penn, Stagwell Group Managing Director and 1996, 2000 and 2008 Clinton Campaign Chief Strategist
Posted February 18, 2019 • 07:30 am
On Amazon NOT Moving to NYC:

"Amazon does not need New York City. There are many advantages to operating in a city such as New York, which offers experiences and opportunities that well-paid tech-company executives are not going to find in such business-friendly alternatives as Houston or Las Vegas. But Amazon has decided that these are not worth the price of admission, which in this case would be subjecting itself to a political climate dominated by people who detest the company, its chief executive, and the model of business it stands for. There was a time when a major financial institution, publishing house, or media company simply had to have a New York City presence -- preferably a headquarters -- as a matter of course. But that time has passed. ...

"And that's the pity. A New York City with a functional subway system and schools you wouldn't mind sending your children to wouldn't need to bribe Amazon to set up shop there. It could hold its head a little higher, too."

— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
Posted February 15, 2019 • 08:08 am
On High-Tax States and Tax Reform:

"When Congress enacted President Trump's tax reform a little over a year ago, many economists, ourselves included, predicted that the lower tax rates would supercharge the national economy but could cause big financial problems for the tri-state region of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. ...

"The danger was clear: Unless these states cut their taxes sharply, they would witness an exodus of wealthy residents, who would migrate to low-tax states like Florida, Tennessee and Texas, taking their money with them and dramatically diminishing the tax base in their home states. ...

"The exodus may already be underway.

"The latest data from the United Van Lines, which are a good proxy for where Americans are moving to and from, show which states had the highest percentage of leavers in 2018. New Jersey was first. Connecticut came third and New York fourth. (Illinois came second -- also a very high tax state.)

"The irony: For years, liberals like Cuomo argued that firms and wealthy individuals don't make location decisions based on taxes. But now they are forced to admit that the SALT cap, which primarily affects the richest 1 percent, is depleting state coffers."

Read entire article here.

— Stephen Moore, Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow and Arthur Laffer, Chairman of Laffer Associates
— Stephen Moore, Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow and Arthur Laffer, Chairman of Laffer Associates
Posted February 14, 2019 • 08:01 am
On California's High-Speed Rail and the 'Green New Deal':

"The decision by Gov. Gavin Newsom, a dedicated progressive, to curtail California's high-speed rail project over cost concerns is a sign that the 'Green New Deal' is doomed. ...

"The $40 billion initial cost estimate eventually shot up to as high as $117 billion for the whole project. A scaled-back version focusing on linking Los Angeles to San Francisco was to cost $77 billion.

"In a Tuesday State of the State speech, Newsom, a former San Francisco mayor who ran on a bold progressive agenda, threw in the towel, saying, while they would be able to link Merced and Bakersfield in the Central Valley, 'there simply isn't a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to L.A.'

"According to the LA Times, he said, 'But let's be real. The project, as currently planned, would cost too much and take too long. There's been too little oversight and not enough transparency.'

"If high-speed rail can't make it in California, there is no way that liberals are going to be able to build a vast national high-speed rail network in many states that are less receptive to the idea."

Read entire article here.

— Philip Klein, Executive Editor, Washington Examiner
— Philip Klein, Executive Editor, Washington Examiner
Posted February 13, 2019 • 08:04 am
On Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-MN) Anti-Semitic Comments:

"Though it might be tough for progressives to understand, many Americans still prefer Israel over Hamas, the PLO, and Iran for reasons other than money. For example, a shared understanding of liberalism, theological reasons, historic ties, political realities, and practical geopolitical reasons."

— David Harsanyi, The Federalist
— David Harsanyi, The Federalist
Posted February 12, 2019 • 08:31 am
On Recycling the Same Old 'New' Green Deal:

"Speaking of bovine flatulence . . .

"Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was supposed to be the Democratic party's fresh new face -- so why is the honorable lady from the Bronx trafficking in ideas from the 1930s?

"The Left really has only one idea: control. At the end of the Cold War, when socialism stood discredited and the memory of its atrocities and repression were fresh in the minds of people who had just watched the dismantling of the Berlin Wall and much of what it stood for, the partisans of central planning found themselves in need of a new host, and what they found was the environmental movement -- another vehicle for supplanting liberalism and free markets with five-year plans and political discipline. Hence the joke about 'watermelons,' the new lefty activists who were green on the outside but red on the inside. The metaphor may occasion some eye-rolling and is prone to abuse, but it speaks to an undeniable truth: Environmentalism has been since the fall of the Soviet Union the world's most important vessel for anti-liberal and anti-market forces.

"Representative Ocasio-Cortez's brief public career offers testimony to a mind that never has been at risk of being violated by a coherent thought, much less an original one, and so she has settled upon the 'Green New Deal,' a concept and a marketing campaign that already was hackneyed and shopworn back when Barack Obama was pushing it years ago, and when Thomas Friedman was pushing it before him, and when the Communist Party USA was pushing it before him."

Read entire article here.

— The Editors, National Review
— The Editors, National Review
Posted February 11, 2019 • 08:10 am
On the 'Green New Deal':

"A number of Democratic Party presidential hopefuls -- including Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Julian Castro, and Beto O'Rourke, for starters -- have already endorsed or expressed support for the 'Green New Deal' (GND). Today, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Edward J. Markey dropped details about her plan.

"It is not hyperbole to contend that GND is likely the most ridiculous and un-American plan that's ever been presented by an elected official to voters. Not merely because it would necessitate a communist strongman to institute, but also because the societal cost are unfathomable. The risible historic analogies Markey and Ocasio-Cortez rely on, the building of the interstate highway system or moon landing, are nothing but trifling projects compared to a plan that overhauls modernity by voluntarily destroying massive amounts of wealth and technology. That is the GND."

Read entire article here.

— David Harsanyi, The Federalist
— David Harsanyi, The Federalist
Posted February 08, 2019 • 08:05 am
Question of the Week   
Prior to 2016, what was the last Presidential election year in which the candidate who won had never before held elected public office?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
"And so it has come to this.Two oil tankers were just attacked in the Gulf of Oman, presumably by Iran. The United States and China are facing off in a confrontation that is about far more than trade. The southern border remains anarchic and uncontrolled.And Congress is asking: 'Can I get the icon in cornflower blue?'Here is the situation: The president of these United States gets from place to place…[more]
—Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
Liberty Poll   

Should the 2020 U.S. Census add a multi-part question regarding U.S. citizenship, including specifically whether the respondent is or is not a U.S. citizen?