Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Saturday, January 17, 2026
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 1017)

[visualizer id=”7055″]

(Source: USASpending.gov)

Amid missed deadlines and still faulty site code endangering user information, PPD has decided to update our ObamaCare website cost tracker. When it first became evident that the site had serious problems, we released a fact-check report that calculated an approximate ObamaCare website cost to exceed $500 million.

The up-to-date ObamaCare website cost for the incomplete, fatally flawed ObamaCare website has topped $1 billion, far exceeding the nearly $400 million estimated by the Government Accountability Office and approximately double the original ObamaCare website cost calculated by People’s Pundit Daily in the month of October.

Our earlier projections were based upon the now-known to be flawed Government Accountability Office report, which is still used to identify the top 10 contractors hired for online exchanges in the 36 states where the federal government is either solely or predominantly responsible through 2014, at least.

But that isn’t the only mind-blowing revelation regarding the updated study calculating more accurate figures surrounding the total ObamaCare website cost.

(Also Read: ObamaCare Cost To Push Health Expenditures To $5 Trillion By 2022)

It must be noted that these figures, which are gathered from USASpending.gov, only cover contracts leading up to the rollout and just prior to the partial government shutdown, not money spent following the failed rollout.

Nevertheless, what is obvious from the contract issuance dates, is that spending was heavily increased leading up to the rollout, and in most cases, shifted from some companies to others. What this would seem to indicate is that the administration was fully aware of the problems headed their way, and attempted to correct them last minute. Of course, they were unsuccessful.

[table id=6 /]

As can be seen above in both the table and interactive graphic, the now-infamous company CGI Federal Inc., was awarded ObamaCare website-related contracts totaling $149.9 million during the final 6 months leading up to the failed rollout just after September 30. CGI Federal Inc. is a subsidiary of the Montreal-based CGI Group Inc., and is in large run by the senior vice president Toni Townes-Whitley, who also happens to be a Princeton University classmate of first lady Michelle Obama and a political donor for the president.

Interestingly, CGI Federal Inc. was one of the few companies that didn’t not see their funding redirected despite the massive failure and incompetence associated with the company’s work. In fact, the $149.9 million in contracts awarded in the final 6 months represents 35.5 percent of the whopping $421.8 million the company received since the government began awarding ObamaCare-related contracts in March 2010.

CGI designed large parts of the government’s healthcare.gov site, which is supposed to serve as a gateway to all of the exchanges and is the centerpiece of the federal exchanges. CGI has taken a substantial amount of the blame for the site’s troubles, which include locking up on consumers, erasing their data and sending multiple and confusing notices to insurers about who’s purchased their products.

The ObamaCare website cost burden shared by CGI Federal is most assuredly higher than current numbers show, because we know that it wasn’t until October 21 that the Department of Health and Human Services asked CGI to add the “A-Team” personnel in order to fix back-end site problems, which we still know exist today. The code necessary for relaying secure user information to insurers and building payments systems is being paid for with contracts that haven’t yet been made available for public scrutiny.

(Also Read: PPD Study: 145 Million Americans Will Lose Their Health Insurance Plans)

As is the case with CGI Federal, Quality Software Services Inc., which is a subsidiary of Minnetonka, Minnesota-based UnitedHealth Group Inc., the largest U.S. health insurer, was also awarded ObamaCare-related contracts representing a ramping up of efforts to fix the seemingly known problems with HealthCare.gov. However, unlike CGI Federal, they may actually be doing the work they are contracted to do.

QSSI was awarded contracts totaling $65.4 million during the final 6 months, an astonishing 42 percent of the total funding the government has awarded the company for ObamaCare-related contracts since 2010. The increase in contracts propelled QSSI to the second-highest beneficiary.

What exactly does QSSI do?

QSSI designed the programming that ensures consumers reporting financial status and citizenship status is correct when they apply for federal subsidies to buy coverage. In most cases, people return to the site after they have already shopped for specific plans, and when they return that information must again be validated.

Another big beneficiary of the last-minute spending spree to salvage the problem-plagued ObamaCare website, was National Government Services Inc. or NGSI. NGSI is a subsidiary of the Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc., which was awarded nearly 60 percent of its total ObamaCare-related contracts in the final 6 months.

NGSI is mostly responsible for the Small Business Health Options Program, dubbed the SHOP exchanges. We will not fully grasp the quality of their work until the end of 2014.

(Also Read: ObamaCare Fact HQ)

The biggest loser appears to be Navigant Consulting Inc., a company that was not awarded any new contracts in the final 6 months leading up to the failed rollout. Navigant Consulting Inc. will be featured in more detail in our next study, which looks solely at the amount of money the administration has spent on consumer outreach, general ObamaCare-related advertising and data collection.

Based on just these 10 firms’ contribution to the total ObamaCare website cost we can ascertain a few things. Whatever capacity each of these companies may be responsible for constructing the federal online health insurance marketplace, the original GAO projections, as well as our own, will far miss the mark.

Second, the shifting of money and last-minute surge in spending shows that the administration knew it was headed for a disaster and seemingly made an attempt to avoid it. Navigant Consulting Inc., for instance, probably did not receive any new money because they were not going to need the information gathered by the company to help push a website that didn’t work.

But most disturbing, mind-blowing revelation from the study is that money was not appropriated based upon performance. Despite the clear failure of CGI Federal Inc., they still received a ton of money leading up to the failed rollout. Apparently, it pays to bunk with Michele Obama in college.

While we will continue to update our figures, Chairman of the House Oversight on Government Reform Committee Darrel Issa, who is a Republican representative from California, said that information obtained by the committee shows the price tag likely topping $1 billion by the time all is said and done.

PPD has decided to update our ObamaCare

WASHINGTON — In his disproportionate praise of the six-month agreement with Iran, Barack Obama said: “For the first time in nearly a decade, we have halted the progress of the Iranian nuclear program.” But if the program, now several decades old, had really been “halted” shortly after U.S. forces invaded neighboring Iraq, we would not be desperately pursuing agreements to stop it now, as about 10,000 centrifuges spin to enrich uranium.

If Denmark wanted to develop nuclear weapons, we would consider that nation daft but not dangerous. Iran’s nuclear program is alarming because Iran’s regime is opaque in its decision-making, frightening in its motives (measured by its rhetoric) and barbaric in its behavior. “Manes,” writes Kenneth M. Pollack of the Brookings Institution, “from whose name the word manichean derives, was a Persian who conceived of the world as being divided into good and evil.” But Pollack says suicidal tendencies are not among the irrationalities of the Iranian leadership, who are not “insane millenarians.”

In “Unthinkable: Iran, the Bomb, and American Strategy,” Pollack argues that Iran’s nuclear program has been, so far, more beneficial to the United States than to Iran. Because of the anxieties and sanctions the program has triggered, Iran is more isolated, weak, impoverished and internally divided than at any time since it became a U.S. adversary in 1979. And one possible — Pollack thinks probable — result of Iran acquiring a nuclear arsenal would be Saudi Arabia doing so. Pollack considers this perhaps “the most compelling reason” for Iran to stop just short of weaponization.

Writing several months before the recent agreement was reached, Pollack said that, given Iran’s adamant refusal to give up all enrichment, it will retain at least a “breakout capability” — the ability to dash to weaponization in a matter of months, even weeks. Hence the need to plan serious, aggressive containment.

In September 2012, the Senate voted 90-1 for a nonbinding resolution “ruling out any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.” The implication was that containment is a tepid and passive policy. But it was not such during the 45 years the United States contained the Soviet Union. And containment can involve much more than mere deterrence of Iran, against which the United States has already waged cyber warfare.

Pollack believes that were it not for Israel “repeatedly sounding the alarm,” Iran “probably would have crossed the nuclear threshold long ago.” But if a nuclear Iran is for Israel unthinkable because it is uncontainable, Israel’s only self-reliant recourse — a nuclear attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure — is unthinkable. And, Pollack thinks, unnecessary. The existence of Israel’s nuclear arsenal is a sufficient deterrent: The Iranian leadership is “aggressive, anti-American, anti-status quo, anti-Semitic, duplicitous, and murderous, but it is not irrational, and overall, it is not imprudent.”

There will be no constitutional impropriety if Congress recoils against the easing of sanctions and votes to impose even stiffer ones on Iran. The president has primary but not exclusive responsibility for foreign policy. It is time for a debate about the role of sanctions in a containment policy whose ultimate objective is regime change. For many decades prior to 1989, humanity was haunted by the possibility that facets of modernity — bureaucracy and propaganda technologies — could produce permanent tyrannies impervious to change. (See Hannah Arendt’s “The Origins of Totalitarianism.”) In “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” George Orwell wrote, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — for ever.” Since 1989, however, tyrannies seem more brittle. And Pollack believes “the basic ingredients of regime change exist in Iran,” which “today is a land of labor protests and political demonstrations.”

Pollack may be too sanguine when he says that, since the brutal smashing of the Green Revolution of June 2009, “the Islamic Republic has been delegitimized and is starting to hollow out.” His fear is that even massive U.S. air strikes would only delay the danger that provoked them, and thus might “prove to be nothing more than a prelude to invasion, as they were in Iraq and almost were in Kosovo.”

The logic of nuclear deterrence has not yet failed in the 64 years since the world acquired its second nuclear power. This logic does not guarantee certainty, but, says Pollack, “the small residual doubt cannot be allowed to be determinative.” His basic point is: “Our choices are awful, but choose we must.” Containment is the least awful response to Iran’s coming nuclear capability.

George Will’s email address is [email protected].

George Will discusses the choices we have

Looks like all of those war on Christmas soldiers will be getting coal this year. According to a new survey by Rasmussen, the vast majority of Americans still prefer signs in stores that say Merry Christmas rather than ones reading Happy Holidays.

The Rasmussen Reports national survey found that 66 percent of American Adults prefer Merry Christmas, while just 21 percent like Happy Holidays instead and 13 percent are undecided.

When we dive a little deeper into the trend, it would appear that the anti-Christmas forces are losing ground. Last year, 60 percent of Americans said they celebrate Christmas primarily as a religious holiday and 57 percent said they attended religious service during the holiday season.

This year, however, 67 percent think Christmas should be more about Jesus Christ than about Santa Claus, while 17 percent believe the holiday should be more about the jolly fat man in red, and 17 percent are undecided.

To Christians, it is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ and according to both Rasmussen and Gallup, from 2010 to 2012, on average between 76 percent to 81 percent of American adults say that Christmas is a religious holiday celebrating the birth of their Christ. Worth noting, when combining the findings from the two notable pollsters, between 76 percent and 81 percent — on average — believe that their faith is important in their everyday lives, a trend that is rising again in America.

In terms of gauging religion in America, it gets ever worse for secular progressives, because many Christian denominations do not celebrate Christmas yet still believe in the Christ. In America, according to Rasmussen, 74 percent believe Jesus was the son of God and 77 percent believe he rose from the dead, which is of course celebrated on Easter.

Last year, Gallup found a whopping 95 percent of Americans celebrate Christmas, with 51 percent saying it is “a strongly religious” celebration, while 31 percent characterize it as “religious or somewhat religious.” Christmas consistently ranks first as Americans most-favored holiday in both pollsters’ surveys.

Taking the polling in concert, the findings do not leave very many who oppose or are offended by the holiday, yet we are still subjected to the War on Christmas every year through lawsuits and vocal protest and attacks, truly the quintessential tyranny of the minority.

I will update these numbers as we get more data throughout the final weeks of the Christmas season.

Merry Christmas America!

 

According to a new survey by Rasmussen,

rand paul

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) speaks to the Detroit Economic Club at the Motor City Casino Hotel on Friday, Dec. 6, 2013.
(Tanya Moutzalias | MLive.com)

Democrats are reacting to Rand Paul reaching out to minorities in Michigan, but in a state where the black population has been decimated by Democratic big government policies, they had little productive to add to the conversation.

“How are you supposed to make child support payments if you’ve been in prison, and the best job you can get is $9 an hour?” Sen. Rand Paul asked at the opening of a new GOP office on Livernois Avenue in Detroit.

State Rep. Thomas Stallworth (D), who leads the Michigan Legislative Black Caucus, said urban communities need more help than tax relief would provide for low-income residents.

“Detroit and other urban cities throughout Michigan don’t need this type of help,” Stallworth said in a statement. “We need investment in our communities that bring good paying jobs, and funding for education and training.”

Stallworth is exactly the kind of Democrat who has been overseeing the mass the exodus of productive taxpayers due to liberal policies, leaving poor black communities behind to sift through the rubble. Stallworth and other Democrats insist on funneling more money to corrupt officials in their party in order to keep funding their own pockets, while Detroit goes bankrupt, literally. Judge Steven Rhodes recently ruled that the city can go ahead with the filing.

The response by Democrats focused on Paul’s economic message and left issues that are of high importance to the black community, issues that Democrats have clearly failed the black community, off the table.

Though Sen. Rand Paul proposed to introduce legislation next week that would turn zip codes with unemployment rates over 1.5 times the average into zones where federal income taxes would be reduced to 5 percent, as well as eliminating capital gains taxes to attract potential residents and entrepreneurs, his focus was on child support, prison and the war on drugs.

“These are things you haven’t heard Republicans talking about,” he said. “So I’m glad to be part of this today, not only just to mean that Republicans are showing up where we haven’t been, but with a new message and policy.”

“Sen. Paul was a vocal opponent of the auto rescue, which saved over a million jobs, and led the Republican effort to shut down the government, costing Michigan’s economy hundreds of millions,” said state Democratic Party spokesman Josh Pugh.

What Pugh seems to have left out of his criticism, was that is was Democratic policies that bankrupted the auto-industry to begin with, as well as Ford and others who never accepted the bail-out money leading the industry comeback. It appears that Pugh is offering the same old ideas to fix the catastrophe those ideas caused, all to the detriment of the very people Rand Paul is reaching out to.

“Today’s opening of this office is the beginning of a new Republican Party,” Paul said. “This is going to be a Republican Party that is in big cities and small cities, in the countryside, in the city. It’s going to be about bringing a message that is popular no matter where you’re from, whether you’re rich or poor, whether you’re black, white or brown.”

Senator Paul talked also about how the war on drugs has disproportionately incarcerated blacks and Latinos, and said he was advocating that judges have more discretion over sentencing in drug cases. He highlighted that many convicted felons can’t vote yet have trouble finding jobs, which makes it near impossible to avoid dependence in their lives.

“Something has to change,” he said. “The war on drugs has gone awry.”

Paul said Friday that he asked retiring Sen. Carl Levin (D) to support the legislation. Levin’s open seat is the GOP’s first real chance at winning in the state since the 1990s, and now with the failed rollout of ObamaCare, the seat is rated a Toss-Up on the PPD 2014 Senate Map.

“Targeted tax incentives, or removing tax disincentives for those who live or work in the city, could help as part of a strategy for Detroit’s future,” Levin said in a statement.

“However, no plan can succeed unless it includes investments in public services and infrastructure, like education and neighborhood renovation, to help build a foundation for a safe and prosperous community.”

It is hard to imagine “a safe and prosperous community” without a police force that responds when it is called. The city has driven away so many people due to its tax burden that the funds to send police on emergency calls are simply not there. Levin and other Democrats refuse to admit, or perhaps comprehend, that it is their big government policies who are hurting those very citizens they claim to champion, inner city Americans.

Not all Democrats were close-minded in their response to Rand Paul making his proposals. Former Democratic Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm actually sounded as if she agreed with the plan. Granholm presided over the precipitous decline of prosperity in Detroit and greater Michigan, so perhaps she is just reacting to the political winds she sees starting to blow in a right-ward direction. She tweeted:

If the GOP hopes to make Granholm’s fear a reality, they must do better with urban, particularly black voters in 2016. Thus far, Sen. Rand Paul has made a concerted, serious effort to earn the trust and support of minority voters. Last spring, a leading black evangelical minister told PPD that he, “would support Senator Rand Paul with an enthusiasm never before for a Republican candidate,” should he choose to run in 2016.

When asked about his plans for 2016,  Paul joked. “There’s two votes in my family ” he said. “My wife has both of them. Both of them are ‘no’ votes right now.

“So if I’m a very able politician, I’ll tell you in a year whether I’m able to persuade my wife. Right now, I don’t know yet.”

Democrats had little productive to say about

In the latest example of the Obama administration picking who does and doesn’t have to follow the law, wind farms killing bald eagles will ensue without penalty.

The White House said Friday it will unilaterally allow the president’s green energy cronies to kill or injure bald eagles and golden eagles for a period up to 30 years, despite the law.

The lawless act, requested by the president’s supporters in the wind energy industry, will provide legal protection for the lifespan of wind farms and some other companies. In the past, it was required to obtain a permit and take precautions to avoid wind farms killing glad eagles and other birds.

An investigation by the Associated Press earlier this year documented the illegal killing of eagles due to wind farms not complying with legal requirements. Naturally, the Obama administration refused to prosecute these cases and was complacent in efforts to keep the news of winds farms killing bald eagles secret.

The White House, to the detriment of the taxpayer, has funneled public money to Obama’s campaign supporters who work in wind power, which is a pollution-free energy intended to slow down climate change. Wind power and solar power flops such as Solyndra, unprecedented control over water by questionable authority — with several instances of executive overreach — have been the hallmarks of President Barack Obama’s green energy plan.

This is not the first instance of the Obama administration showing their hypocritical tendencies as it relates to environmental projects, such as the government’s support for corn-based ethanol to reduce U.S. dependence on gasoline.

The White House has allowed the green industry to practice hypocritical anti-green methods, as shown in another recent AP investigation, which found that ethanol has proven to be far more damaging to the environment than leftist politicians promised and far worse than the Obama government will admit even today.

Under the lawless decision announced Friday, companies would have to commit to take additional measures if they kill or injure more eagles than they have estimated they would, or if new information suggests that eagle populations are being affected. The permits will only be reviewed every 5 years, as opposed to annually, and companies would have to submit reports of how many eagles they kill. Now such reporting is voluntarily, and the Interior Department refuses to release the information.

“This is not a program to kill eagles,” said John Anderson, the director of siting policy at the American Wind Energy Association. “This permit program is about conservation.”

Flying bald eagles and many other birds of prey scan the land below for food, but they don’t notice the industrial turbine blades, which can reach up to 170 mph at the tips, until it is too late. The blades create vortexes that pull the bird in, killing or severely injuring our national icons.

Obviously, because of policy implemented under the Obama administration, this is a relatively recent phenomena in such numbers. Wind energy company have been able to obtain 5-year permits since 2009, or the start of the Obama administration. These killings should put the companies at legal risk under any measure of the law, but that would discourage private investment in renewable energy, something Obama’s green cronies cannot afford.

The permits are a sham regardless, because the system of issuance of permits doesn’t protect the eagles, since without a permit, companies are not even required to take steps to reduce their impact on the birds or report when they kill them. This has led many scientists to question the estimates as to the number of deaths occur annually.

The new Obama administration’s policy clearly states that revoking a company’s permit – which would undermine future investment in wind power – is only to be done as a last resort and in the most extreme of cases.

“We anticipate that implementing additional mitigation measures … will reduce the likelihood of amendments to, or revocation of, the permit,” the rule states.

Conservation groups, which have been aligned with the wind industry on other issues, said the decision by the Interior Department sanctioned the killing of an American icon.

“Instead of balancing the need for conservation and renewable energy, Interior wrote the wind industry a blank check,” said Audubon President and CEO David Yarnold in a statement. The group said it will challenge the decision.

The wind energy industry has taken the position to two or more wrongs make a right, stating the policy mirrors other permitting policies already in place for other endangered species, which are apparently even more at risk than bald and golden eagles.

Bald eagles were removed from the endangered species list in 2007, however, but they still remain protected under two federal laws.

Shamefully, the regulation published Friday was not subjected to a full environmental review because, as with so many other unilateral administration decisions, they conveniently classified it as an administrative change.

“The federal government didn’t study the impacts of this rule change even though the (law) requires it,” said Kelly Fuller, who formerly headed up the wind campaign at the American Bird Conservancy. “Instead, the feds have decided to break the law and use eagles as lab rats.”

The Fish and Wildlife Service said the new rule enables it to better monitor the long-term environmental effects of renewable energy projects.

“Our goal is to ensure that the wind industry sites and operates projects in ways that best minimize and avoid impacts to eagles and other wildlife,” the agency said in a statement.

Last month, Duke Energy Corp. — who did not directly support either of the Obama campaigns — pleaded guilty to killing eagles and other birds at two wind farms in Wyoming, the first time a wind energy company has been prosecuted under a law protecting migratory birds.

A study by federal biologists in September found that wind farms have killed at least 67 bald and golden eagles since 2008, a number that the researchers experts say was underestimated.

It’s unclear what toll, if any, wind energy companies are having on eagle populations locally or regionally. But with the wind energy industry growing thanks to crony government funding, experts say that the toll will likely grow.

A recent study of status of the golden eagle in the western U.S. showed that populations have been decreasing in some regions.

In the latest example of the Obama

Sen. Mary Landrieu is going to have a tough reelection year in a state that supported Mitt Romney with 58 percent of the vote. Yet she doesn’t seem to feel as if her blatant ignoring of the people of Louisiana will cause her to lose her seat.

In a recent interview with a CBS affiliate in Baton Rouge, she said that she would support the bill again if given the chance. Well, to hell with the fact that ObamaCare is deeply unpopular in his state? Maybe the reporters should have asked her that question.

“The Affordable Care Act, as I said, the bill itself has very good concepts, and yes, I would support it again. But that doesn’t excuse the poor rollout of what should have happened. There should not have been a glitch in the software,” Sen. Mary Landrieu told WAFB-TV, a local CBS affiliate in Baton Rouge.

Mary Landrieu has been receiving plurality support in polling, but since the failed rollout of ObamaCare that support has slipped.

Also, in Louisiana a plurality isn’t good enough. The winner is required to get 50 percent plus one of the total votes. Louisiana’s election on Nov. 4, 2014 is actually a jungle primary, the only one in the country. If no candidate receives a majority of the vote that day, the top two finishers advance to a runoff election on December 6.

This is nothing new for Landrieu, who has been there a few times already. In fact, this is how Landrieu has managed to keep her seat in the past. Landrieu only managed to get a majority in the first round of balloting once out of her 3 election victories, in the 2008 Blue landslide.

As of now, the Republicans have yet to have learned their lesson from her past election victories. The GOP will have to consolidate their vote if they hope to unseat the senator and take the Senate in 2014. However, in the past, Landrieu has been able to rely on motivated troops come run-off time.

Next time, considering how motivated the anit-ObamaCare forces will most assuredly be, she may not be so lucky.

View all PPD races and ratings on the PPD 2014 Senate Map.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, the embattled LA senator,

WASHINGTON — Three crises, one president, many bewildered friends.

The first crisis, barely noticed here, is Ukraine’s sudden turn away from Europe and back to the Russian embrace.

After years of negotiations for a major trading agreement with the European Union, Ukraine succumbed to characteristically blunt and brutal economic threats from Russia and abruptly walked away. Ukraine is instead considering joining the Moscow-centered Customs Union with Russia’s fellow dictatorships Belarus and Kazakhstan.

This is no trivial matter. Ukraine is not just the largest country in Europe, it’s the linchpin for Vladimir Putin’s dream of a renewed imperial Russia, hegemonic in its neighborhood and rolling back the quarter-century advancement of the “Europe whole and free” bequeathed by America’s victory in the Cold War.

The U.S. response? Almost imperceptible. As with Iran’s ruthlessly crushed Green Revolution of 2009, the hundreds of thousands of protesters who’ve turned out to reverse this betrayal of Ukrainian independence have found no voice in Washington. Can’t this administration even rhetorically support those seeking a democratic future, as we did during Ukraine’s Orange Revolution of 2004?

A Washington Post headline explains: “With Russia in mind, U.S. takes cautious approach on Ukraine unrest.” We must not offend Putin. We must not jeopardize Obama’s precious “reset,” a farce that has yielded nothing but the well-earned distrust of allies like Poland and the Czech Republic whom we wantonly undercut in a vain effort to appease Russia on missile defense.

The second crisis is the Middle East — the collapse of confidence of US allies as America romances Iran.

The Gulf Arabs are stunned at their double abandonment. In the nuclear negotiations with Iran, the U.S. has overthrown seven years of Security Council resolutions prohibiting uranium enrichment and effectively recognized Iran as a threshold nuclear state. This follows our near-abandonment of the Syrian revolution and de facto recognition of both the Assad regime and Iran’s “Shiite Crescent” of client states stretching to the Mediterranean.

Equally dumbfounded are the Israelis, now trapped by an agreement designed less to stop the Iranian nuclear program than to prevent the Israeli Air Force from stopping the Iranian nuclear program.

Neither Arab nor Israeli can quite fathom Obama’s naiveté in imagining some strategic condominium with a regime that defines its very purpose as overthrowing American power and expelling it from the region.

Better diplomacy than war, say Obama’s apologists, an adolescent response implying that all diplomacy is the same, as if a diplomacy of capitulation is no different from a diplomacy of pressure.

What to do? Apply pressure. Congress should immediately pass punishing new sanctions to be implemented exactly six months hence — when the current interim accord is supposed to end — if the Iranians have not lived up to the agreement and refuse to negotiate a final deal that fully liquidates their nuclear weapons program.

The third crisis is unfolding over the East China Sea, where, in open challenge to Obama’s “pivot to Asia,” China has brazenly declared a huge expansion of its airspace into waters claimed by Japan and South Korea.

Obama’s first response — sending B-52s through that airspace without acknowledging the Chinese — was quick and firm. Japan and South Korea followed suit. But when Japan then told its civilian carriers not to comply with Chinese demands for identification, Washington told U.S. air carriers to submit.

Which, of course, left the Japanese hanging. It got worse. During Vice President Biden’s visit to China, the administration buckled. Rather than insisting on a withdrawal of China’s outrageous claim, we began urging mere nonenforcement.

Again leaving our friends stunned. They need an ally, not an intermediary. Here is the U.S. again going over the heads of allies to accommodate a common adversary. We should be declaring the Chinese claim null and void, ordering our commercial airlines to join Japan in acting accordingly, and supplying them with joint military escorts if necessary.

This would not be an exercise in belligerence but a demonstration that if other countries unilaterally overturn the status quo, they will meet a firm, united, multilateral response from the West.

Led by us. From in front.

No one’s asking for a JFK-like commitment to “bear any burden” to “assure the … success of liberty.” Or a Reaganesque tearing down of walls. Or even a Clintonian assertion of America as the indispensable nation. America’s allies are seeking simply a reconsideration of the policy of retreat that marks this administration’s response to red-line challenges all over the world — and leaves them naked.

Charles Krauthammer’s email address is [email protected].

Krauthammer: Three crises, one president, many bewildered

With flags lowered to half-staff a dozen doves were released into the sky as crowds of South Africans gathered at homemade shrines Friday to mourn the loss of their former president, Nelson Mandela, the man many call the father of their nation.

Since yesterday’s headlines read, Nelson Mandela Dead at 95, tributes have continuously poured in from around the world, tributes from both leaders and average citizens, all heralding the life of the former Nobel Peace Prize winner and anti-apartheid leader.

President Jacob Zuma said that Mandela, who was affectionately known by his clan name “Madiba,” had died “peacefully” at around 8:50 p.m., while in the company of his family. Throughout the year, Mandela had been receiving medical care at his home, where he had been in critical condition due to a lung infection.

A black SUV containing Mandela’s coffin pulled away from Mandela’s home after midnight, draped in South Africa’s flag and escorted by military motorcycle outriders to take the leader’s body to a military morgue in the capital of Pretoria.

South Africans are honoring the life of Mandelaaround the Soweto home where Mandela had once lived, as well as the Johannesburg home where he died, by dancing and singing tribal songs, the African national anthem, and Christian hymns. Many left flowers, candles, and signs in homemade shrines.

South African citizens across the nation honored Mandela with prayers and promises to adhere to the principles and values of unity and democracy that Mandela live by.

President Zuma ordered all flags to fly at half –staff until Mandela is laid to rest at his ancestral village of Qunu in the Eastern Cape on December 15. The funeral for Mandela will take place at the end of a week of national mourning, including an open-air memorial service at Johannesburg’s Soccer City stadium on December 10, according to a Reuters report.

Leaders and dignitaries from around the world are expected to pay their respects to the former president.

President Obama called him one of the “most influential, courageous and profoundly good” people to ever have lived. “He achieved more than could be expected of any man,” Obama said, in his comments from the White House, adding: “He no longer belongs to us, He belongs to the ages.”

Obama ordered U.S. flags to be lowered immediately to half-staff until Monday evening in tribute to Mandela.

nelson mandela dead

During church service in Cape Town the retired archbishop, Desmond Tutu, who is also a fellow Nobel Peace Prize laureate, said Mandela would want South Africans themselves to be his “memorial” by adhering to the principles and values of unity and democracy that he fought his whole life to establish.

“All of us here in many ways amazed the world, a world that was expecting us to be devastated by a racial conflagration,” Tutu said, remembering that Mandela unified South Africa as it reforms the apartheid state, which was the cruel system of white minority rule.

Instead of dividing and punishing the apartheid rulers and sympathizers, Mandela fought for a South Africa that included all races. Tutu recalled Mandela and the nation preparing for all-race elections in 1994. In those elections, the anti-apartheid leader who spent 27 years in prison, became South Africa’s first black president.

“God, thank you for the gift of Madiba,” said Tutu in his closing his prayer.

The grandson of the South African icon, Mandla Mandela, said he takes solace in knowing that his grandfather is finally at rest.

“All that I can do is thank God that I had a grandfather who loved and guided all of us in the family,” Mandla Mandela said in a statement. “The best lesson that he taught all of us was the need for us to be prepared to be of service to our people.”

“We in the family recognize that Madiba belongs not only to us but to the entire world. The messages we have received since last night have heartened and overwhelmed us,” the grandson said.

Zelda la Grange, who was Mandela’s personal assistant for almost 2 decades, said Mandela inspired people to forgive for past discrections, reconcile with your enemies, care for all, be selfless, tolerant to all, and to maintain dignity at all tomes no matter the challenge.

“His legacy will not only live on in everything that has been named after him, the books, the images, the movies. It will live on in how we feel when we hear his name, the respect and love, the unity he inspired in us as a country, but particularly how we relate to one another,” she said in a statement.

Many South Africans considered  Mandela a father to all people who inspired the world with his courage. “He came here to Soweto as a lawyer and he led us. When he came out of jail in 1994, after 27 years, he did not come out a bitter man and encourage us to fight. No, he came out with a message of peace,” said Mbulelo Radebe, 37.

Leaders around the world joined in praising Mandela, calling him a force for justice and towering figure who inspired people around the globe.

“Nelson Mandela was a giant for justice and a down-to-earth human inspiration,” U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told reporters, Reuters reported. “Nelson Mandela showed what is possible for our world and within each one of us if we believe, dream and work together for justice and humanity.”

Former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair praised Mandela as a “unique political figure at a unique moment” in history.

“Through his leadership, he guided the world into a new era of politics in which black and white, developing and developed, north and south, despite all the huge differences in wealth and opportunity, stood for the first time together on equal terms,” Blair said.

Former President Jimmy Carter, who had personal relationships with Mandela, said the people of South Africa and human rights advocates around the world have lost a great leader. President Carter, if nothing else, attempted to base U.S. foreign policy on the principle of human rights around the globe. He may have had better results, but he shared in many of the same goals with Nelson Mandela.

“His passion for freedom and justice created new hope for generations of oppressed people worldwide,” Carter said.

F.W. de Klerk, South Africa’s last apartheid-era president, said he and Mandela first met each other in 1989 and concluded they could do business with each other as the country embarked on its long-awaited transition to democratic rule.

“Although we were political opponents — and although our relationship was often stormy — we were always able to come together at critical moments to resolve the many crises that arose during the negotiation process,” de Klerk said in a statement.

Human rights advocate George Bizos told eNCA television that Mandela, a longtime friend, never wavered in his dedication to non-racial and democratic ideals.

“He was larger than life,” Bizos said. “We will not find another like him.”

With flags lowered to half-staff a dozen

The unemployment rate has fallen to the lowest level since 2008 and lower than economist expected, but critics are already pointed to conflicting data.

“Wall Street is shocked by this jobs report. Historically, the fourth quarter has been a weak period for hiring, with the lone exception occurring in seasonal retail positions,” said Todd Schoenberger, managing partner at LandColt Capital. “Even the whisper on the revision was ridiculously off.  The word of the day will be tapering, as the recent GDP report and today’s jobs metric is the most credible evidence to support a change to monetary policy.”

Thursday the Commerce Department reports the U.S. economy grew at an annual pace of 3.6 percent in the third quarter, which was the fastest rate of growth since the first quarter of 2012 and higher than a previous reading of 2.8 percent. Economists were expecting growth to come in at 3 percent.

The U.S. economy added 203,000 jobs in November, topping expectations and fueling speculation that the Federal Reserve could begin dialing back its easy-money policies later this month.

The labor force participation rate, which gauges the proportion of the population employed or seeking employment, rose to 63 percent from 62.8 percent in October, which was the lowest on record since the 1970s.

The headline unemployment rate fell unexpectedly to 7.0 percent, down from 7.3 percent a month earlier, according to data released by the U.S. Department of Labor. Economists had forecast 180,000 new jobs and a November unemployment rate of 7.2 percent.

The report has many on Wall Street looking ahead to the possibility that the Fed will begin to taper it’s bond-buying program, know as quantitative easing.

“A strong jobs report could be the clincher for the Fed starting to taper in December,” said Greg McBride, senior financial analyst at Bankrate.com, ahead of the report’s release.

“This week’s data therefore add to the sense that the Fed will be itching to pull the trigger to take the first shot at killing off its huge $85 billion per month asset purchase program at its December meeting, at least to fire a warning shot that the time has come to start slowly bringing about some normalization of policy. However, the most likely outcome still looks like a deferment of any decisions until the new year,” said Chris Williams, chief economist at research firm Markit.

The labor participation rate, a closely watched gauge of the percentage of working-age Americans currently employed, ticked slightly higher to 63 percent from 62.8 percent, a positive sign although the rate remains at its lowest level in three decades.

Sectors that saw particularly strong growth last month included manufacturing, construction, transportation and warehousing, according to the Labor Department’s figures.

Job growth at U.S. factories nearly doubled month-over-month, climbing to 27,000 in November, up from 16,000 a month earlier. The construction sector added 17,000 jobs. Employment in transportation and warehousing jumped by 31,000 in November, led by gains in couriers and messengers, truck transportation, warehousing and storage, and air transportation.

Average hourly earnings rose by 0.2 percent to $24.15 in November from the previous month, and climbed 2 percent from a year ago.

The unemployment rate has fallen to the

Fireworks erupted on CNN’s “Crossfire” Tuesday night when Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican Party, and Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party debated ObamaCare.

The two haven’t conducted an interview, or debate together in over a year. The obvious topic of discussion was ObamaCare, with Reince Priebus highlighting the now-infamous broken promise made by the president and Demcorats regarding Americans being able to keep their health care coverage.

“Just wait until the employers start having the option of dropping the insurance coverage,” Priebus said, going on the attack underscoring how ”millions of people are (already) getting their insurance dropped.”

Wasserman-Shultz tried to redirect attention to the Republicans lack of an alternative, which she didn’t give Priebus a chance to lay out. “I have yet to hear, nor has anyone in the Republican Party said, what is the solution to ensuring that everyone in America has access to affordable health care?” she said.

But Wasserman-Shultz got stopped in her tracks when Priebus quipped, “my plan is to stop lying to the American people.” After a pause, Wasserman-Shultz responded, “You obviously do not understand how the health insurance system works.

“You’re the one that promised that people would keep their health insurance and you promised that people would keep their doctor, but it turns out that it’s not true — so maybe you are the one that needs to learn what the effects are of Obamacare and this health care system,” Priebus said.

Fireworks erupted on CNN's "Crossfire" Tuesday night

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial