An unmanned U.S. plane crashed in northwest Pakistan

An unmanned U.S. plane crashed Saturday in tribal region of northwest Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan, an official source announced.
Unmanned aircraft crashed in mountainous Mishihel, about 30 kilometers west of Miranshah, the main town in the Waziristan region (north), often the target of strikes against the Taliban, said military officials.
"An unmanned U.S. plane crashed, apparently because of technical problems," said a military official in Peshawar. The incident was confirmed by authorities in the region.

Air Force One travel costs - How much is one hour by plane presidential

Costs of travel by U.S. presidential aircraft Air Force One amounts to 179,750 dollars for an hour flight, in fiscal year 2012, said Maj. Michelle Lai, for ABC News.
This includes fuel, flight supplies, repairs and maintenance of aircraft and engine. Salaries of pilots and attendants are not included because they are paid whether or not air is used, Lai explained to ABC News.
Therefore, the movement made ​​Thursday by President Barack Obama in Florida would cost at least 674,000 dollars just to fly Air Force One. In this state, the president gave a speech about the draft budget, then participated in three meetings fundraising.

Moving from three days last week, in three states, which included two occasions and eight fundraising in presidential campaign collected more than eight million dollars, the cost of flight generated 2.1 million dollars.
As the proportion of those costs covered by Obama's campaign, experts say the law is very unclear, and repayment takes practice to a certain degree of "honor". Obama's campaign reimbursed far more than 1.5 million travelers in this election cycle, according to Federal Election Commission.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said last week that the administration complies with all rules and previous examples for presidential trips with two goals.
Under the rules, official travel costs are borne by taxpayers President, while political movements are paid by the candidate's campaign committee. When you have dual-purpose trips, official and political costs must be divided.

New Post-Accident Chevy Volt Engine Fires Prompt Investigation

New fires involving the lithium-ion batteries in General Motors Co.'s Chevrolet Volt have prompted an investigation to assess the risk of fire in the electric car after a serious crash, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Friday.

One Volt battery pack that was being closely monitored following a government crash test caught fire Thursday, the safety administration said in a statement. Another recently crash-tested battery emitted smoke and sparks, the statement said.
GM, which was informed of the investigation on Friday, said in a statement that the Volt "is safe and does not present undue risk as part of normal operation or immediately after a severe crash."
The latest fires are in addition to a battery fire in a crash-tested Volt six months ago.
NHTSA learned of a possible fire risk involving damaged Volt batteries when a fire erupted in a Volt that was being stored in a parking lot a test facility in Burlington, Wis. The fire was severe enough to cause several other vehicles parked nearby to catch fire as well.
The car had been subjected to a side-impact crash test more than three weeks earlier, on May 12, during which the battery was punctured and its coolant line ruptured.
Last week's tests of three battery packs were designed to replicate the May test. In that test, the Volt was subjected to a simulated side-impact collision into a narrow object like a tree or pole followed by a rollover, the agency said.
The first battery tested last week didn't catch fire. But a battery test on Nov. 17 initially experienced a temporary temperature increase, and on Thursday caught fire. Another battery tested on Nov. 18, which was rotated 180 degrees within hours after the test, began to smoke and emit sparks shortly after the rotation.
The tests were conducted by NHTSA and the Energy and Defense departments at a defense facility near Hampton Roads, Va.
So far, no fires have been reported in Volts involved in roadway crashes, NHTSA said. More than 5,000 of the vehicles have been sold.
It's too soon to tell whether the investigation will lead to a recall of any vehicles or parts, but the government will ensure consumers are informed promptly if that occurs, the agency said.
With its OnStar safety communications systems a part of the car, "GM knows real time about any crash significant enough to potentially compromise battery integrity," the automaker said. "Since July, GM has implemented a post-crash protocol that includes the depowering of the battery after a severe crash, returning the battery to a safe and low-powered state."
Electric vehicles are critical to President Barack Obama's plans to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. He has called for putting 1 million of the vehicles on the road by 2015.
The Volt and Nissan's Leaf, with more than 8,000 cars on the road in the U.S., are among the first mass-marketed plug-in electric cars. They went on sale in the 2011 model year. Other automakers are also working on electric vehicles.
Safety testing hasn't raised concerns about electric vehicles other than the Volt, NHTSA said. But the agency is asking manufacturers who have electric cars on the market, or who plan to introduce electric vehicles in the near future, for more detailed information on their battery testing as well as what procedures they have established for discharging and handling batteries, including recommendations for reducing fire risks.
"NHTSA continues to believe that electric vehicles have incredible potential to save consumers money at the pump, help protect the environment, create jobs and strengthen national security by reducing our dependence on oil," the agency said.
After the first battery fire, GM officials complained that NHTSA did not drain the battery of energy as called for under the automaker's crash procedures. NHTSA normally drains fuel from gasoline-powered cars after crash tests, they said.
Lithium-ion batteries, which are rechargeable, have been the subject of several recalls of consumer electronics. Millions of laptop batteries made by Sony Corp. for Apple Inc., Dell Inc., Lenovo Group Ltd. and other PC makers were recalled in 2006 and 2007 after it was discovered that they could overheat and ignite.
The Federal Aviation Administration issued a warning to airlines about the potential for fires in cargo containing lithium-ion and non-rechargeable lithium metal batteries after a United Parcel Service plane crashed near Dubai last year, killing both pilots. The plane was carrying thousands of lithium batteries.
Incorrectly packaged, damaged or overheated batteries can catch fire, the FAA said. Fires involving lithium-ion batteries can reach 1,100 degrees, close to the melting point of aluminum, a key material in airplane construction. Lithium-metal battery fires are far hotter, capable of reaching 4,000 degrees.
GM and NHTSA have pointed out that cars with gasoline-powered engines are susceptible to fires after a crash.
In the event of a crash, NHTSA's advice to consumers is to do the same thing they would do in a gasoline-powered car -- get out of the vehicle and move a safe distance away. The agency also recommends against storing a severely damaged electric car in a garage or near other vehicles

Innovators and Creators Around the World Are Steve Jobs’ True Legacy

“Steve Jobs gave the best performance by a CEO in 50 years, maybe 100 years.” That’s how Google’s Eric Schmidt assessed the career of Apple’s Steve Jobs, who died on Wednesday. Schmidt, of course, served as the CEO of Google as it became one of the great corporate success stories in American history. Yet history

will agree with Schmidt’s assessment of Jobs. Not only did the Apple CEO create a company worth some $350 billion, he also changed the way Americans think about computers and, indeed, how they think about their lives.

To computer technology, known for its arcane complexity, he brought simplicity. To an industry known for its geeky/ugly functionality, he brought beauty. To a new generation of work-at-home-work-at-Starbucks creators and entrepreneurs, he brought a new kind of creative grace.

The U.S. economy is going through hard times now, but they would be even harder if not for Jobs’ vision of everyone being his or her own producer. 

If a big part of economic activity and growth comes from the human desire to grow, develop and flourish, it’s Jobs who made that personal empowerment possible for millions; go to any Apple store and you will see people learning how to do things they didn’t know how to do, and then going forth to do them in their own way.

That’s the essential Jobs vision: We can all do this, and more--with a Mac. 

And the consequence of that empowering vision was truly transformative. Some of us remember back to the famous “1984” advertisement for the new Macintosh computer, which ran just once on TV, during the 1984 Super Bowl. It ends with the words, “On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won’t be like ‘1984.’” That is, the future world will not belong to centralized bureaucracies and their mainframes, but rather, it will belong to creative individuals and their personal computers, each free to do their own thing. That emancipatory vision has stuck in our imagination ever since. 

Just three years ago, a Barack Obama campaign supporter used a brilliant parody of that ad to help the then-Illinois Senator defeat the Democratic favorite, Hillary Rodham Clinton, for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

Indeed, President Obama joined in the mourning for Jobs, issuing a statement less than two hours after his passing: “Steve was among the greatest of American innovators--brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe he could change the world, and talented enough to do it.” Yet while Obama deserves credit for taking note of Jobs’ passing, the comparison between Jobs’ legacy of changing the world and Obama’s ongoing effort at world-changing is not flattering to the President. 

After all, Jobs truly did succeed: He was that rare combination, a visionary who could see something better in the future, but who could then get down into the nitty-gritty to push projects through to triumphant completion. Obama, of course, might have some sort of U.S.-meets-U.N. vision for America, but he lacks the leadership capacity to actually get something done. And so with Obama, we suffered through a series of forgettable programs--“stimulus,” “green jobs,” “cap and trade.” Whereas with Jobs, we will all remember, “iMac,” “iPod,” “iPhone,” and “iPad.”

As Intel’s Andrew Grove has observed, the high-tech world operates at a speed three times faster than the federal government. The reason is simple: The high-tech world fully embraces the vision of endless transformation, while bureaucratic government is inherently conservative and even reactionary. 

And while savvy techsters are choosing among communications tools that include email, instant messaging, text messages, tweets and Facebook chats, the U.S. government, with Obama’s help, is still trying to prop up the Postal Service, the basic conception of which hasn’t changed much since Ben Franklin was appointed as the first Postmaster General back in 1775.

Entrepreneurs such as Jobs helped make Silicon Valley’s non-stop transformation possible.  Not everyone wins in the Jobs/Silicon Valley vision of an endless tech frontier that puts a premium on endless adaptability. But the imperative for such personal adaptability comes from the competitive reality of the globalized economy.

But Jobs’ greatest impact was not economic. His true impact was on the culture and on the conception of self in the 20th and 21st centuries. He offered a vision that was many things: It was capitalist, but it was also arty-liberal. And yet it was even more libertarian. And above all, it was cool.

More than two centuries ago, the poet William Blake declared, “I must create a system or be enslaved by another man’s . . . my business is to create.” That was Steve Jobs, who created a world that the rest of us can live in, long after his passing. It is we, the living and the creating, who are his true legacy.

Obama: Support gay troops(Photos)

A combative Obama on Saturday criticized Republican presidential candidates for staying silent when the crowd at a recent debate booed a gay soldier who asked a question of the contenders via videotape.

"You want to be commander in chief? You can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the

uniform of the United States, even when it's not politically convenient," Obama said during remarks at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights organization.

Referencing the boos at the Sept. 22 Republican debate, he said: "We don't believe in standing silent when that happens."

Obama touted his administration's efforts to repeal the military's ban on openly gay service members, as well as his orders to the Justice Department to stop enforcing a law defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

But, as expected, Obama stopped short of endorsing gay marriage, saying only that "every single American deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law."

Obama has said his views on gay marriage are "evolving", but for now he only supports civil union.

Obama's position on gay marriage has become a sore point for some gay activists who say they're otherwise pleased with the president's handling of issues important to them. Some of the president's backers say he could be wasting a chance to energize key segments of his base, including young people, if he doesn't publicly advocate for gay marriage.

"If he doesn't, he could be missing an opportunity to mobilize voters who need to be inspired to vote for him," said Doug Hattaway, a Democratic consultant.

The president's position on gay marriage puts him at odds with some of his supporters. Numerous recent polls suggest a slight majority of Americans favor giving same-sex couples the right to marry, and support is highest among Democrats and young people.

Obama has acknowledged that public support for gay marriage is building. During a meeting with liberal bloggers last October, he said "it's pretty clear where the trend lines are going."

Obama aides have given no indication of where the president's evolution on gay marriage stands. And some gay rights advocates believe political considerations could keep Obama from publicly backing gay marriage until after the November 2012 election.

Joe Sudbay, among a group of bloggers who met with Obama last year, said most gay rights advocates won't vote against Obama if he stops short of backing gay marriage. But he said they may be less likely to volunteer their time and money to the campaign.

"He might not lose votes, but he won't gain enthusiasm," said Sudbay, deputy editor of AmericaBlog.com.

While gay rights advocates may not be getting everything they want from the president, they see little support for their cause among the field of Republican primary contenders.

Most top Republican presidential candidates, including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, favor limiting marriage to unions between one man and one woman.

Fred Sainz, the Human Rights Campaign's vice president for communications, said he expects Obama to eventually declare his support for gay marriage. And even if that doesn't happen before next year's election, he said the president's other actions on gay rights issued should not be ignored.

"He really has been an incredible champion for the issues that are important to us," Sainz said. "It's fair to say we've made more progress in the past two years than we have in the past 40 years combined."

In his remarks Saturday night, Obama implored the supportive crowd of 3,200 to stand with him in his re-election campaign, declaring: "This is a contest of values."

Al-Qaeda releases 9/11 anniversary

Al-Qaeda has released a video marking the anniversary of 9/11 which includes a message from its slain leader Osama bin Laden to the American people, monitoring group SITE Intelligence said Tuesday.

SITE said the 62-minute video titled "The Dawn of Imminent Victory" also includes a speech by Al-Qaeda's

new chief Ayman al-Zawahiri who applauds the "Arab Spring" revolutions.

The US intelligence monitoring service said the footage of bin Laden appears to be the same material found in the US raid on his Pakistan hideout in May, which Washington released but without its soundtrack.

Bin Laden, who was killed by US Navy SEALs in the covert operation, warned Americans against "falling as slaves" to the control of major corporations and "Jewish money capital", SITE said.

He recommended that Americans read the book "Obama's War" by Bob Woodward which details wrangles over US military decision-making, and told them that US President Barack Obama?s campaign slogan "Yes, we can" is untrue.

Zawahiri, who is now Washington's most wanted man, makes a long speech about events in the past year including the revolutions in the Arab world and the death of bin Laden whom he replaced after a long period as Al-Qaeda number-two.

"Zawahiri... declared that contrary to what is reported in the media, Al-Qaeda supports the revolutions and hopes it will establish true Islam and sharia-based governance," SITE said.

"The popular revolutions, he stated, are a form of defeat for the United States, just as the 9/11 attacks and its alleged lack of success in Afghanistan and Iraq were also defeats."

Al-Qaeda has been absent from the popular protests that have swept the Arab world this year, leading to the fall of leaders in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia and provoking major unrest elsewhere.

Analysts argue that the phenomenon has left the global terror outfit weakened and increasingly irrelevant.

Zawahiri lauded his predecessor bin Laden as a fighter who had taken on the Russians in Afghanistan as well as the Americans, and who he said had sacrificed everything for his campaign.

"America is denying the fact that it is not facing individuals or groups but the whole ummah (Muslim community) of Islam. After the martyrdom of Sheikh Osama, the Islamic face of the revolutions was shown," he said.

"America?s arrogant nature will push it to deny the facts that it is facing a rising ummah and that it may be a cause of defeat and its fall, with permission from Allah."

Zawahiri was only shown in a still picture in the video, which was released by Al-Qaeda's media arm, as-Sahab, and posted on jihadist websites Monday, SITE said.

Like his slain Saudi-born co-conspirator, Zawahiri has been in hiding since the United States declared its war on terrorism after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

The US on Sunday marked the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 strikes in emotional ceremonies held under tight security after federal authorities warned of a new terrorism scare.

Washington shows off its progress in hurricane response(Photos)

President Obama's initial response to Hurricane Irene showed how thoroughly elected officials at all levels have absorbed the lessons of Hurricane Katrina six years ago.

Now — with the role of government already an issue in the 2012 campaign — the recovery phase offers

Obama an unexpected opportunity to restore at least a measure of public trust and goodwill at a time when being a part of the federal government has threatened to become a political millstone.

Disaster relief is one area where a large majority of voters endorse and expect a vigorous federal response.

"This is not over," Obama said Sunday afternoon as the storm battered New England. Standing in the sunny Rose Garden at the White House, where winds blew gale force overnight, the shirt-sleeved president called the handling of the disaster "an exemplary effort of how good government at every level should be responsive to people's needs."

Obama and several politicians with possible White House designs of their own faced that challenge last week: to avoid repeating President George W. Bush's mistake in 2005 of appearing disengaged from the government response to an impending natural disaster.

The day before Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana, Bush participated in a pre-storm briefing from his Crawford, Texas, ranch. He asked no questions and later pronounced that the government was "fully prepared."

By contrast, Obama flew back to Washington from his rented vacation house the night before Hurricane Irene hit the mainland. He had already delivered public warnings and signed disaster declarations for the affected states before the storm arrived, part of a system put in place after Katrina.

Shortly after the eye of the storm came ashore, Obama visited the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster command headquarters in Washington. FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate made a point of saying in national TV interviews Sunday that officials in Washington had reached out to their counterparts at local and state levels in an unprecedented effort to limit the loss of life.

"The big lessons after Katrina is we all have to work as a team," said Fugate, whose agency employed the term "federal family," instead of federal government, in news releases related to storm preparations.

But criticism will come if the administration stumbles in its efforts to get life back to normal. Already, Republican lawmakers in Congress have taken shots at the administration for not submitting an emergency funding request for FEMA, another issue that will become part of Washington's larger, and often rancorous, spending debate.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, regarded as a future Republican presidential candidate, praised the coordination between Washington and his state. FEMA officials, he said on NBC, are "working incredibly hard in providing things to us that we need."

That the storm did not reach the more dire dimensions that had been forecast prompted some second-guessing about the ordering of massive evacuations. But Christie said there would have been a "significant loss of life" if as many as 1 million people had not left the Jersey shore ahead of the high wind, heavy rain and tidal surges.

Two other officials often mentioned as future presidential contenders — New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo — also directed the mandatory evacuation of thousands of shoreline residents. The mayor, whose reputation suffered damage when he was out of town and appeared out of touch during a huge snowstorm last winter, ordered an unprecedented shutdown of New York's mass transit system, effectively closing much of the city's commerce for the weekend.

Up and down the East Coast, as life returned to normal for millions of unaffected residents, there were inevitable complaints — from those who lost business as a result of government action, as well as from those merely inclined to see this as one more topic for the country's polarized political discussion.

"The trend in our country is to call in the feds or the state for any problem," said Brad Davidson, a businessman and self-described libertarian in Annapolis, Md. "But for most of the life of this country, we have been rugged individualists, relying on our wits. That's a healthier attitude."

Annapolis writer Iris B. Krasnow, an Obama backer who was among those at the Metropolitan Kitchen and Lounge drinking coffee and swapping storm stories Sunday, expressed the opposite view.

"If this is what it means to live in the nanny state, I'm very content," Krasnow said. "As the mother of four kids, I am pleased the state issued warnings to stay off the streets, to get out of flood-prone areas and said, 'If you can't get out, we'll help you.' "

She said during a hurricane was the time when you wanted an active government: "There is debris everywhere. The phone lines and electric lines are down. I'll take all the help I can get during this type of situation."

Republican rebels force new delay in debt crisis

Urgent efforts to avoid an unprecedented U.S. debt default suffered a new blow on Thursday when some fiscally hardline Republicans blocked a budget deficit plan proposed by their own congressional leaders.

After hours of trying to get enough votes, the Republicans who control the House of Representatives put off

action for the night and scheduled an emergency meeting for Friday morning.

The Republican infighting further delays any compromise with Democrats to stop the countdown toward Tuesday when the government says it will run out of money to pay all its bills.

Lawmakers must lift the government's $14.3 trillion borrowing limit by August 2 or risk a devastating default and downgrade of the top-notch credit rating that helps make U.S. debt a pillar of the global financial system.

There was speculation House Speaker John Boehner, the top Republican in Congress, may revise his plan to attract more votes from rebels who want bigger cuts in spending than the roughly $900 billion over 10 years he has proposed.

"Republicans have taken us to the brink of economic chaos," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said. "The delay must end now so we can focus on the American people's top priority: creating jobs and growing the economy."

Even if it passes, the Boehner bill is certain to be killed in the Democratic-controlled Senate but could still feature in any possible compromise. Boehner's difficulties in securing votes weakens his bargaining position, Democrats said.

Investors, unnerved by the risk of a U.S. default or downgrade, are watching anxiously.

The dollar sank to a fresh four-month low against the yen and Asian stocks struggled after the announcement that the House would not vote on Thursday evening.

In U.S. trading earlier on Thursday, the stock market's broad S&P 500 index fell for a fourth day and interest rates soared on some Treasury bills that mature in August.

In a strongly worded commentary, China's state-run news agency Xinhua criticized U.S. lawmakers for flirting with a disastrous default, saying the world's largest economy has been "kidnapped" by "dangerously irresponsible" politics.

No policymakers in China, the largest foreign creditor to the United States, have commented on the crisis but Xinhua said "the ugliest part of the saga is that the well-being of many other countries is also in the impact zone.

International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde warned of the risks if Congress fails to act.

"One of the consequences could be a decline of the dollar as a reserve currency and a dent in people's confidence in the dollar," Lagarde told PBS NewsHour in an interview.

U.S. financial executives added their voices to calls from the business community for Congress to strike a deal.

ARM-TWISTING

Boehner has been grappling with lawmakers such as Mick Mulvaney, a supporter of the Tea Party movement that represents a new force on the Republican right flank.

"I'm still a no," Mulvaney said as he left Boehner's office to pray at the congressional chapel before the vote was canceled for the night.

Republicans changed procedural rules to allow them to bring up the bill for a vote quickly on Friday.

Many Americans are outraged that Washington cannot reach a deal after many weeks of polarized and acrimonious debate.

There were increasing calls by some Democrats for President Barack Obama to raise the debt ceiling on his own by invoking the 14th Amendment of the Constitution -- a clause dating from the Civil War era of the 1860s that the U.S. public debt "shall not be questioned."

The White House has resisted taking such a step.

Some wavering Republican House members were insisting on tying a debt limit increase to passage of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, according to a Republican aide.

The Senate rejected such an approach last week.

Even if a deal is reached to lift the debt ceiling, a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating is likely unless a big dent is made in the deficit. A downgrade would raise borrowing costs, hurt an already weak economy and rattle global markets.

Once the House acts one way or the other, action will move to the Democratic-controlled Senate. Boehner's plan is doomed in the Senate, where Democratic Leader Harry Reid is pushing his own deficit reduction plan.

But after both chambers have their say, frantic talks are expected this weekend to seek a compromise to permit a vote on raising the debt ceiling and staving off a default on Tuesday.

"I think there will be a whole new stage of the Senate and House having to come together to avoid August 2nd as being a day that has never happened in the U.S.," White House chief of staff William Daley told CNN.

Republican leaders were engaged in arm-twisting as they tried to secure the 217 votes needed to pass the Boehner bill in the House and avoid a humiliating defeat.

A stream of lawmakers who had decided to vote against the plan came and went from Boehner's office. Whatever was said did not seem to be changing many minds.

Republican Representatives Louie Gohmert and Joe Walsh said they would still vote against the bill. Trent Franks and Jeff Flake would not say where they stood.

ON TENTERHOOKS

Boehner's plan for about $900 billion in cuts is twinned with a short-term debt ceiling increase. Lawmakers would have to come up with further spending cuts to raise the debt ceiling again in several months -- just as the campaign heats up for congressional and presidential elections in November 2012.

Reid's plan, backed by Obama, would cut $2.2 trillion from the deficit over 10 years without raising taxes and extend the debt ceiling through next year.

At the White House, Obama and his team also worked late into the evening to avert a default that would scar his presidency, no matter who was at fault, as he prepares to ask Americans for a new four-year term in 2012.

Despite the gridlock, Congress could kick into higher gear as pressure to reach a deal mounts before Tuesday.

"The markets are going to be on tenterhooks until we get an understanding of what the quality of the package is," said Kevin Caron, market strategist at Stifel, Nicolaus & Co.

White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett told Reuters Insider the Treasury secretary would face very difficult decisions if the deadline is not met.

"Do we say to our servicemen and women serving abroad that we're not going to pay them and support their families? Do we say to the 70 million, 80 million people who receive Social Security that we're not going to pay them?" she said. "Or small businesses who are vendors of the United States government?"

ABC Sports says Pawlenty violated copyright with ‘Miracle on Ice’ footage(Video)

ABC Sports may slap presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty with a cease-and-desist letter for improperly using its footage in a political advertisement, a company official told The Des Moines Register today.

“It’s a violation of our copyright and exclusive proprietary rights,” said

Louise Argianas, director of rights and clearances for ABC Sports.

The struggling Pawlenty campaign launched “The American Comeback,” a television commercial with a down-but-not-out theme, in Iowa on Wednesday.

The 30-second spot uses TV footage from the so-called “Miracle on Ice,” the hockey game in which the U.S. team beat the supposedly invincible Soviet Union in the 1980 Winter Olympics.

Argianas said in a telephone interview that ABC Sports retains exclusive U.S. rights to that footage. She said she was upset when she saw Pawlenty’s ad for the first time this afternoon.

“And they used our announcer’s voice, which they are not allowed to do, either,” she said, referring to play-by-play announcer Al Michaels. “Which I’m going to have to call his agent about.”

Argianas initially said she intended to have a lawyer send the cease-and-desist letter Friday. But tonight, officials at ESPN, which oversees ABC Sports, walked back that statement saying that, after a larger conversation, they’re undecided about whether to send such a letter.

ESPN spokesman Chris LaPlaca said: “Neither ABC nor ESPN has asked the Pawlenty campaign to remove any footage from their video, although neither ABC nor ESPN licensed the video to them or authorized its use.”

Pawlenty spokesman Alex Conant defended the use of the footage, part of a much-revered piece of sports history.

“The campaign’s ‘Miracle on Ice’ advertisement was carefully reviewed for legal compliance, and we believe fully complies with the ‘fair use’ doctrine,” Conant said. “We respect ABC’s concern and look forward to responding to their inquiry.”

The rest of the ad features Pawlenty, who played high school hockey and still dabbles at an amateur level, in an ice arena in his hometown of South St. Paul. He talks about the country’s need for a leader with a proven record.

Three weeks out from the potentially make-or-break Republican straw poll in Ames on Aug. 13, Pawlenty is doing an 18-city “Road to Results” campaign tour in Iowa this week, aiming to rally support. He also has scheduled more Iowa events next week.

The political establishment and pundits have long considered Pawlenty a serious and well-qualified candidate to challenge Democratic President Barack Obama.

But Michele Bachmann, a fellow Minnesotan considered a fringe candidate just a few months ago, has ridden a wave of popularity after a strong performance in a June New Hampshire debate and a neck-and-neck finish with presumed national front-runner Mitt Romney in the Register’s June Iowa Poll.

Pawlenty placed sixth in the poll, he was panned for his performance in the debate, and his campaign fundraising numbers are considered mediocre.

It’s that narrative — that his chances of winning the Republican nomination are in peril — that Pawlenty addresses in this Iowa advertisement.

“Out here, you’re tested,” he says in the ad. “You face an opponent experts say can’t be beat. You fight, you bleed, you prevail.”

At the end, he adds, “Join me and prove the experts wrong.”

WRAPUP 1-"Gang of Six" provides hope for US debt talks

Armed with a new template, President Barack Obama and congressional leaders on Wednesday will try to see if an 11th-hour deal is still possible to avert a rapidly approaching default.

The ambitious new plan, unveiled by a group of senators known as the "Gang of Six," offers a ray of hope in

an increasingly grim standoff that has threatened the United States' top-notch credit rating.

As they study the details, congressional leaders will determine if the plan could point a way out of the impasse. A more modest proposal likely will be needed to avert the looming disaster but the Gang of Six plan could help lawmakers thrash out a broader budget deal in the coming months to address long-term fiscal problems.

Initial reaction was positive. Obama seized on the plan as a "very significant step" on Tuesday and urged congressional leaders to start discussing it. Senators from both parties embraced it while Republican leaders in the House of Representatives said it contained some good elements.

Investors welcomed the plan as well, driving up the price of 30-year Treasury bonds sharply and pushing U.S. stocks to their best day since March.

Obama and Republicans have been unable to forge an agreement that would raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling before the country runs out of money to cover all of its bills on Aug. 2.

Both sides agree that spending cuts should accompany a debt-limit increase to tame the rapidly mounting debt but have been unable to agree on the particulars. White House talks on a comprehensive deficit-reduction deal have stalled over tax increases, which Republicans oppose.

The Gang of Six plan includes many of the same politically risky remedies that have doomed other efforts but pairs them with incentives that could defuse opposition.

Republicans might object to the $1 trillion-plus in new tax revenue generated by closing an array of loopholes and breaks but they have welcomed the lower income tax rates that the plan also would provide.

Democratic distaste for the plan's $500 billion squeeze of Medicare and other health plans could be softened by assurances that their essential services would be maintained.

OBAMA'S HOPES

With less than two weeks until the Aug. 2 deadline, congressional aides say it is probably too late to use the Gang of Six as the basis for a debt-ceiling increase. But it could encourage a new round of discussions.

"My hope ... is that they tomorrow are prepared to start talking turkey and getting down to the hard business of crafting a plan," Obama told reporters on Tuesday.

It is not clear whether Obama would resume the high-profile White House meetings that ended inconclusively last week.

Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid will speak with Obama on Wednesday, an aide said, but a meeting with all of the top leaders in Congress did not appear likely.

Obama's schedule remains relatively open, according to the White House.

Meanwhile, Congress is moving ahead with other debt-limit measures.

The Republican-controlled House passed a bill on Tuesday that would tie a debt-ceiling increase to passage of a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution. That approach is expected to fizzle in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

In the Senate, leaders of both parties are crafting a complex compromise that would give Obama the authority -- and the blame -- for raising the debt ceiling.

Procedural hurdles could push a vote well into next week, meaning that final passage could come in the final days before Aug. 2.

Although that plan could avert a default, it is not likely to satisfy ratings agencies that are looking for a solution that would prevent the debt from growing out of control. Moody's Investors Service analyst said the Senate's compromise plan could result in a negative outlook on the U.S. credit rating, a sign of a possible downgrade in 12 to 18 months. 

Bank Challenger Picked to Run Consumer Agency

President Barack Obama said Sunday he would nominate former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to head the consumer finance watchdog agency created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.

During two years as Ohio's attorney general, Mr. Cordray was a leader among state regulators who challenged banks over their mortgage foreclosure practices. His nomination is expected to run into opposition from Senate Republicans and the financial services industry.
Mr. Cordray is currently the top enforcement officer at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the agency he would lead if approved by the Senate.
Mr. Obama chose Mr. Cordray instead of Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard professor who has been setting up the bureau as a special advisor. Ms. Warren, a longtime critic of the financial-services industry, pushed for its creation and is said by those who know her to have wanted the director post.
In the end, White House officials concluded that Ms. Warren was unlikely to win confirmation and that a battle over her nomination could hurt the fledgling bureau, people familiar with the matter said.
Mr. Cordray's nomination comes just ahead of the one-year anniversary on July 21 of the passage of the Dodd-Frank financial law, a milestone that is prompting many in Washington to assess the impact of the measure. The consumer agency is a hallmark of the law, created to tame risk taking on Wall Street, prevent taxpayer bailouts and protect consumers. The White House has come under criticism from lawmakers and consumer advocates for failing to nominate an agency head earlier, and the administration wanted to have a nominee before July 21, government officials said.
Mr. Cordray won't be confirmed without a fight. Republican senators have already said they would block confirmation of anyone to the post unless the White House agrees to structural changes, including turning the CFPB into a five-member commission. Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby reiterated that position Sunday. "Until President Obama addresses our concerns by supporting a few reasonable structural changes, we will not confirm anyone to lead it," Mr. Shelby said. "No accountability, no confirmation."
Administration officials indicated the White House may be willing to make some minor concessions to win confirmation of Mr. Cordray, but won't support a commission structure.
Ms. Warren, who lured Mr. Cordray to the CFPB, threw her support behind what she called a "stellar" choice. "Rich has always had my strong support because he is tough and he is smart—and that's exactly the combination this new agency needs," she said in a statement.
People close to Ms. Warren said she would return to Harvard University in the fall. She is considering exploring a 2012 Senate run in Massachusetts but discussions are just in the preliminary stages, these people said.
The CFPB is one of the most controversial components of the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul. The agency has the ability to write new consumer-protection rules, enforce more than a dozen existing federal consumer-finance laws, dispatch examiners to review banks' books and records and investigate consumers' complaints. Its rules can only be overturned by a super-majority of the new Financial Stability Oversight Council, which is headed by the Treasury Department, or by the courts.
Critics, including the financial-services industry, have expressed concern over how the new watchdog agency would wield its expansive authority. Supporters see the agency as providing critical protections against potentially deceptive and abusive consumer financial products, such as payday loans, mortgages and credit cards.
If confirmed, Mr. Cordray is expected to take an aggressive stance against the types of fraudulent and abusive practices he targeted as attorney general. He gained national attention for his leading role filing lawsuits against mortgage lenders accused of shoddy foreclosure practices.
Consumer groups and Democratic lawmakers said they were upset Ms. Warren hadn't been chosen for the post but indicated they planned to support Mr. Cordray. "While I am disappointed that Elizabeth Warren won't be at the top of the agency she envisioned, Cordray was one of her first hires as its director of enforcement, and was by all accounts a smart and tough attorney general in Ohio," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D., N.Y.).
Many in the banking industry support the structural changes being sought by Republican lawmakers and said they were withholding judgment on Mr. Cordray. "As we have stated repeatedly, we would prefer to see the bureau run by a commission like the FTC, the SEC, and even the Consumer Product Safety Commission," said Richard Hunt, president of the Consumer Bankers Association.

Adviser to Afghan President Karzai Shot and Killed

A senior adviser to Afghan President Hamid Karzai was shot and killed in his home in Kabul yesterday, less than a week after the assassination of Karzai’s half brother.
Militants last night stormed the Kabul home of Jan Mohammed Khan, a former governor of Uruzgan

province, killing him as well as parliamentary lawmaker Mohammed Hashem Watanwal, Kabul police spokesman Hashmatullah Stanekzai said by telephone. Afghan forces surrounded Khan’s home and “the attackers are still not dead,” he said.
The attack came five days after Karzai’s younger brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, was shot at home by a bodyguard in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar province, underscoring the security challenges as the U.S. begins pulling its troops from Afghanistan. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives in India later today for discussions that will include the Afghan withdrawal.
While a Taliban spokesman said the movement had secretly recruited the gunman who shot President Karzai’s brother, there was no immediate word on who might be behind Khan’s shooting. The Taliban in the past has claimed responsibility for attacks that it has been found later not to have conducted.
President Barack Obama last month said the U.S. will withdraw 10,000 troops from Afghanistan, where they are fighting the Taliban, before the end of this year and an additional 23,000 by September 2012. Other nations have announced their own troop reduction plans.
A suicide bomber detonated explosives hidden inside his turban at a Kandahar mosque on July 14, killing four people attending a memorial service for Ahmed Wali Karzai. At least 13 people were wounded.

Adviser to Afghan President Karzai Shot and Killed

A senior adviser to Afghan President Hamid Karzai was shot and killed in his home in Kabul yesterday, less than a week after the assassination of Karzai’s half brother. Militants last night stormed the Kabul home of Jan Mohammed Khan, a former governor of Uruzgan province, killing him as well as parliamentary lawmaker

Mohammed Hashem Watanwal, Kabul police spokesman Hashmatullah Stanekzai said by telephone. Afghan forces surrounded Khan’s home and “the attackers are still not dead,” he said. The attack came five days after Karzai’s younger brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, was shot at home by a bodyguard in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar province, underscoring the security challenges as the U.S. begins pulling its troops from Afghanistan. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives in India later today for discussions that will include the Afghan withdrawal. While a Taliban spokesman said the movement had secretly recruited the gunman who shot President Karzai’s brother, there was no immediate word on who might be behind Khan’s shooting. The Taliban in the past has claimed responsibility for attacks that it has been found later not to have conducted. President Barack Obama last month said the U.S. will withdraw 10,000 troops from Afghanistan, where they are fighting the Taliban, before the end of this year and an additional 23,000 by September 2012. Other nations have announced their own troop reduction plans. A suicide bomber detonated explosives hidden inside his turban at a Kandahar mosque on July 14, killing four people attending a memorial service for Ahmed Wali Karzai. At least 13 people were wounded.

Pentagon discloses largest-ever cyber theft

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon on Thursday revealed that in the spring it suffered one of its largest losses ever of sensitive data in a cyberattack by a foreign government. It's a dramatic example of why the military is pursuing a new strategy emphasizing deeper defenses of its computer networks, collaboration with private

industry and new steps to stop "malicious insiders."
William Lynn, the deputy secretary of defense, said in a speech outlining the strategy that 24,000 files containing Pentagon data were stolen from a defense industry computer network in a single intrusion in March. He offered no details about what was taken but in an interview before the speech he said the Pentagon believes the attacker was a foreign government. He didn't say which nation.
"We have a pretty good idea" who did it, Lynn said the interview. He would not elaborate.
Many cyberattacks in the past have been blamed on China or Russia. One of the Pentagon's fears is that eventually a terrorist group, with less at stake than a foreign government, will acquire the ability to not only penetrate U.S. computer networks to steal data but to attack them in ways that damage U.S. defenses or even cause deaths.
In his speech at the National Defense University, Lynn said that sophisticated computer capabilities reside almost exclusively in nation-states, and that U.S. military power is a strong deterrent against overtly destructive cyberattacks. Terrorist groups and rogue states, he said, are a different problem and harder to deter.
"If a terrorist group gains disruptive or destructive cybertools, we have to assume they will strike with little hesitation," he said.
The Pentagon has long worried about the vulnerability of its computer systems. The concern has grown as the military becomes more dependent not only on its own computers but also on those of its defense contractors, including providers of the fuel, electricity and other resources that keep the military operating globally.
At his Senate confirmation hearing last month, new Defense Secretary Leon Panetta cited "a strong likelihood that the next Pearl Harbor" could well be a cyberattack that cripples the U.S. power grid and financial and government systems. He said last weekend that cybersecurity will be one of the main focuses of his tenure at the Pentagon.
The Pentagon operates more than 15,000 computer networks and 7 million computers in dozens of countries.
"For the Department of Defense, our networks are really our lifeblood," Marine Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said before Lynn's release of the new strategy.
As shown by the March attack on a defense industry computer network that contained sensitive defense data, the military's vulnerability extends beyond its own computers. In a new pilot program, the Pentagon is sharing classified threat intelligence with a handful of companies to help them identify and block malicious activity.
Lynn said intrusions in the last few years have compromised some of the Pentagon's most sensitive systems, including surveillance technologies and satellite communications systems. Penetrations of defense industry networks have targeted a wide swath of military hardware, including missile tracking systems and drone aircraft, he said.
In Cartwright's view, a largely defensive approach to the problem is inadequate. He said the Pentagon currently is focused 90 percent on defensive measures and 10 percent on offense; the balance should be the reverse, he said. For the federal government as a whole, a 50-50 split would be about right, Cartwright argued.
"If it's OK to attack me and I'm not going to do anything other than improve my defenses every time you attack me, it's difficult" to stop that cycle, Cartwright said. "There is no penalty for attacking (the U.S.) right now." He added that a number of complex legal and cultural issues need to be sorted out before the Pentagon can devise a comprehensive offensive strategy.
In response to an audience member's question after his speech, Lynn the White House could be expected to consider using military force in response to a cyberattack "if there is massive damage, massive human losses, significant economic damage."
Earlier this year, President Barack Obama signed executive orders that lay out how far military commanders around the globe can go in using cyberattacks and other computer-based operations against enemies and as part of routine espionage. The orders detail when the military must seek presidential approval for a specific cyberattack on an enemy, defense officials and cybersecurity experts told the AP.
The strategy unveiled by Lynn is oriented toward defensive rather than offensive measures. It calls for developing more resilient computer networks so the military can continue to operate if critical systems are breached or taken down. It also says the Pentagon must improve its workers' cyber "hygiene" to keep viruses and other intrusions at bay. And it calls for fuller collaboration with other federal agencies, companies and foreign allies.
The strategy also is focused on insider threats. Without citing specifics, it says it will try to deter "malicious insiders" by "shaping behaviors and attitudes through the imposition of higher costs for malicious activity."
Stewart Baker, a former assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security, called the plan thoughtful but lacking in some aspects.
"It's an incomplete description of a defensive strategy," he said. "If the Pentagon announced that our nuclear warfare strategy centered on fallout shelters, we'd all hope that they had a real strategy that was better than that."

AP Exclusive: Israeli, Palestinian forces hope to thwart violence in September

Israeli and Palestinian security forces are already taking precautions to avoid an outbreak of violence after an expected U.N. vote for Palestinian independence in September, officials on both sides said Sunday, reflecting shared concerns about the possibility of renewed fighting this fall.

For now, Israeli and Palestinian officials said they do not want — or expect — armed hostilities to resume.
But both sides fear that one small incident could quickly spin out of control.
“We need only popular and peaceful struggle,” said Amin Makboul, a top official in Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party. “We want to show the world that we are responsible and deserve to be part of the international community.”
After the bitter lessons of last decade’s Palestinian uprising, the Palestinians do not want to give Israel any “pretext” to claim the Palestinians are not serious about creating a peaceful state, Makboul added.
A top Palestinian security official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Abbas recently issued a straightforward order to his commanders: “I don’t want any violent actions in September,” the official quoted Abbas as saying. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing a sensitive internal meeting.
Israeli and Palestinian officials both say the region is headed into uncharted waters if the Palestinians follow through on their pledge to turn to the United Nations.
Each side is trying to prepare for all scenarios. Mostly it is in closed forums whose deliberations are so tightly guarded as to suggest a fear that the mere mention of a new Palestinian uprising might somehow contribute to tensions. However, some preparations are more public.
Some 1,000 Israeli military officers held a two-day drill last week to prepare for September, discussing such issues as crowd-control tactics and the latest intelligence, officials say.
The army will use the coming months to fine-tune its preparations in hopes of avoiding bloodshed, they said.
Abbas has said he will seek an international endorsement of Palestinian independence if peace talks with Israel remain stalled, as they have been for nearly three years. The U.S. has stepped up efforts to find a formula for renewing negotiations in recent weeks, but there have been no signs of a breakthrough.
The Palestinians say they will not resume talks until Israel freezes all contruction in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem — areas captured in 1967 which they claim for a future state.
A senior Palestinian official has hinted the Palestinians will ease this demand if Israel accepts President Barack Obama’s formula of basing a future Palestinian state on Israel’s pre-1967 frontiers, with agreed land swaps. Setting the rough outlines of a future border at the outset, the thinking goes, would largely solve the settlement issue on its own — since Israel would know which of the communities it will ultimately be able to keep.
Israel has reacted coolly to Obama’s plan, saying that all issues, including settlements and final borders, should be reached in negotiations.

Analysis: Mitt Romney leaves GOP debate unscathed

If Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich and other Republican presidential hopefuls feel they need to close the gap on front-runner Mitt Romney, they didn't show it at the New Hampshire debate. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who leads in the early polls and fundraising efforts, had a surprisingly easy two hours Monday night. He looked calm and steady, criticizing President Barack Obama on the economy and health care while rarely being forced on the defensive despite some well-known vulnerabilities of his own.

With New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary half a year away, the seven GOP candidates seemed more eager to introduce themselves to voters in the televised event than to start ripping each other. They rarely differed on major policies. All agreed that Obama has botched the economy and doesn't deserve a second term. Near the end of the debate, Romney said anyone on the stage would be a better president than Obama. That was high praise for little-known candidate Herman Cain, libertarian hero Ron Paul and former Sen. Rick Santorum, who badly lost his last re-election bid in Pennsylvania. It also reflected how friendly everyone had been to Romney. If any candidate had nearly as pleasant an evening as Romney, it was Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. She made maximum use of CNN's live telecast to announce she was formally entering the race. And she showed a feisty but folksy style, perhaps grabbing an audience that many once thought would go to Sarah Palin, who was not present. Before the debate, there were signs that Romney might be pressed harder on his record, especially the Massachusetts health care law that requires people to obtain health insurance. On Sunday, Pawlenty had derided the state law as "Obamneycare," because it served as a model for Obama's 2010 health care overhaul, which many conservatives detest. Pawlenty, the former Minnesota governor, seemed loath to revisit the issue Monday. CNN moderator John King pressed him three times to explain why he had used the term "Obamneycare." Finally, Pawlenty replied somewhat weakly that it was "a reflection of the president's comments that he designed Obamacare on the Massachusetts health care plan." King had no more luck enticing the other six contenders to comment on Romney's former support for legalized abortion, gay rights and gun control. He has switched his position on all those issues since his days as a Senate candidate and one-term governor in liberal-leaning Massachusetts. King asked whether anyone on the stage felt Romney's authenticity was "an issue in the campaign." After a pause, Cain said, "Case closed," and the discussion turned to other topics. The crowded stage and tight time constraints made it difficult to tease out meaningful differences between the candidates. Bachmann said that as president, she would not interfere with states that recognize same-sex marriages. Santorum and Romney said they support a constitutional amendment limiting marriage in all the states to one man and one woman. Bachmann jumped back in, saying she supported that too. But she had been asked earlier whether she would try to challenge state laws on a one-by-one basis, a different question. Gingrich, the former House speaker who suffered a wholesale campaign staff defection last week, appeared rather grim and determined to show his toughness. In the opening greetings, when most candidates said little more than hello, Gingrich vowed "to end the Obama depression." That set the tone for an evening focused on the president, leaving Romney and his fellow Republicans unbruised. "It was a very friendly debate to say the least, which helps Romney," Republican adviser Greg Mueller said. "No one took center stage and emerged as the main challenger to Romney." A stiff challenge to Romney from the right "is there for the taking," Mueller said, "but did not happen tonight." Summer, fall and Christmas will pass before the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary take place. Romney's rivals have plenty of time to mount their attacks. But on Monday in Manchester, they showed they are not ready yet.

Mitt Romney finally shows up in Iowa

Mitt Romney made a belated 2012 campaign debut in Iowa on Friday, dipping a brown-loafered toe into the state that casts the first votes in the presidential contest. Romney, who will formally enter the Republican race next week, has largely shunned Iowa since falling short here in the 2008 caucuses. He spent much of the day bobbing and weaving around questions about his commitment to Iowa. "My guess is you'll have plenty of opportunity to see me. I care about Iowa," he told a midday audience in Des Moines,

after refusing to say whether he'd compete in a nonbinding straw vote this summer or go all-out in the caucuses next winter. But if there was any doubt about whether he'd abandon Iowa altogether, as some have speculated, Romney may have put it to rest when he answered affirmatively a quintessential Iowa caucus question: about government subsidies for ethanol, the fuel produced from corn and other farm products. "I support the subsidy of ethanol. I believe ethanol's an important part of our energy solution in this country," he told a supporter from West Des Moines. The former Massachusetts governor has been described as unusually weak for a candidate many see as the Republican front-runner. And his somewhat diffident approach to Iowa — and to campaigning in general — is part of an attempt to lower expectations in his second White House try. Romney told Iowans that his candidacy was tailored to these tough times. "I'm not going to be flying all over the country and making a big folderol," Romney said. "I know that keeping a lean campaign is part of winning in the final analysis." Four years ago, he invested heavily in Iowa organization and advertising, and his distant second-place finish was regarded as a setback. Though he is being cagier this time, his reluctance to compete fully is seen by Iowans as a potential threat to their state's status in the nomination process, a matter of considerable civic pride and local economic influence. Romney did predict he'd win the state, without specifying whether he meant the caucuses or the general election. "What you can know is, I'll be here debating, I'll be here being interviewed, and I'll be here speaking, and you'll get to know me even better than you did last time," he said to tepid applause from an audience that included some 2008 supporters. His remarks, at a presidential candidate series forum sponsored by the Greater Des Moines Partnership, were sharply critical of President Obama's economic leadership. Romney described Obama's election as a failed experiment in choosing a president without experience in private business. "They say that officially the recession is over, but the jobs haven't come back and the foreclosures are continuing," Romney said. "His agenda failed." Romney says he's positioned to do better in 2012 because voter concerns about jobs and economic growth are "right in my wheelhouse." He is selling his background as a businessman and venture capitalist, contending that creating jobs and making America more competitive in the world is "the sort of stuff I do and I know." GOP veterans say the contest is as wide-open in Iowa as elsewhere. "Any one of the top five or six candidates, with the right kind of organization, could surface and surprise everyone," said Marlys Popma, former executive director of the Iowa Republican Party and a leading evangelical Christian activist. She is neutral this year. There may be good reasons for Romney to give Iowa short shrift. The religious and social conservatives who dominate the state's Republican caucuses are considered less friendly to his establishment brand. And his early-state strategy centers on the leadoff primary in New Hampshire, where he has a vacation home and will declare himself a candidate on Thursday. But a decision to essentially skip Iowa would run the risk of reinforcing perceptions that he is less than a dominant contender for the nomination. And with his fundraising advantage — and the absence of 2008 caucus winner Mike Huckabee — Romney may be tempted. For the Republican candidates, the first test of Iowa strength will be the nonbinding straw vote in August. Romney spent lavishly on the event last time — winning it can cost in excess of $1 million — and managed to win. Though he dodged the issue Friday, he is not expected to compete. Some of his supporters from last time worry that a decision to bypass Iowa would hurt him down the road. "A fifth- or sixth-place finish in Iowa would be devastating," said Kim Schmett, 58, an attorney from Clive who said he might not back Romney again if he didn't compete here. "That's my concern with Romney. There are a lot of people who like him. But if they don't see him, it's hard to keep the support."

Parties See Obama’s Israel Policy as Wedge for 2012

WASHINGTON — Few issues in American politics are as bipartisan as support for Israel. Yet the question of whether President Obama is supportive enough is behind some of the most partisan maneuvering since the Middle East ally was born six decades ago, and that angling has potential ramifications for the 2012 elections.

The visit of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in the past week captured just how aggressively Republicans are stoking doubts about Mr. Obama. Republican Congressional leaders and presidential aspirants lavished praise on Mr. Netanyahu as quickly as they had condemned Mr. Obama for proposing that Israel’s 1967 borders, with mutually agreed land swaps, should be a basis for negotiating peace with the Palestinians.

Republicans do not suggest that they can soon break the Democratic Party’s long hold on the loyalty of Jewish-American voters; Mr. Obama got nearly 8 of 10 such voters in 2008. But what Republicans do see is the potential in 2012 to diminish the millions of dollars, volunteer activism and ultimately the votes that Mr. Obama and his party typically get from American Jews — support that is disproportionate to their numbers.

While Jewish Americans are just 2 percent of the electorate nationally, they are “strategically concentrated,” as Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster, put it, in several swing states that are critical in presidential elections. Those states include Florida — which in 2000 illustrated the potentially decisive power of one state — Ohio and Nevada.

A test of Mr. Obama’s support will come June 20, when he will hold a fund-raiser for about 80 Jewish donors at a private dinner.

John R. Bolton, the former United States ambassador to the United Nations and a possible Republican presidential candidate, argues that because of administration proposals, Republicans will be able to make gains not only among American Jews but also among evangelicals who are supportive of Israel on biblical grounds, and other voters.

Mr. Bolton said that he was on a cruise sponsored by the conservative magazine Weekly Standard last week in the Mediterranean, and that most of the people on the ship “reacted very strongly against” Mr. Obama’s speech outlining his Mideast vision. “As a Republican,” he said, “you can use this to show how radical the president’s policies are on a whole range of issues.”

The depth of Democrats’ worries was evident from the competition to out-applaud Republicans on Tuesday during Mr. Netanyahu’s speech to a joint meeting of Congress and from the speed with which Congressional Democrats led by Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, distanced themselves from Mr. Obama on Israel.

“Are there questions in the American-Jewish community? I think the answer is yes,” said Mr. Mellman, who is Jewish and has polled the community for Democrats in the past. “Has Obama been branded as not pro-Israel or anti-Israel? Not at all.”

“I think he is strongly pro-Israel, in fact,” he added. “But that is the political struggle in which the Republicans are engaged, which is to get him branded as not pro-Israel. And to the extent they’re successful in that, the likelihood is they would have some meaningful impact on the Jewish vote.”

J Street, the left-leaning alternative to the more established American Israel Public Affairs Committee, put out a statement of support for Mr. Obama on Wednesday. “To oppose the president without laying out a credible alternative basis for a two-state solution is to embrace a status quo leading to the eventual loss of Israel as we know and love it,” its statement said.

Mr. Obama’s proposal, the group said, is supported by many Jews in the United States and Israel. It is “the path that most of Israel’s recent prime ministers have attempted to blaze, from Rabin to Barak to Olmert.”

Republicans, however, are confident that their emphasis on unconditional support for Israel holds appeal both for many Jews and for conservative Christians.

Yet it is the Republican Party’s close identification with evangelical Christians in recent years that is perhaps its biggest hurdle to winning over significant numbers of Jewish voters and donors. On issues that are crucial to the conservative Republican base — like opposition to abortion, gay rights, liberalized immigration and much government spending — most American Jews are on the other side, and strongly so.

“If Republicans can mischaracterize this president as anti-Israel, they can distract from the fact that on every other issue their party is in disagreement with the American-Jewish community,” said David A. Harris, president of the National Jewish Democratic Council, a group of Jewish-American Democratic activists.

Mr. Netanyahu on Monday experienced first-hand the tension arising from that complaint among Democrats, and Republicans’ rejection of it, in a private meeting he held with representatives of the National Jewish Democratic Council and the Republican Jewish Coalition to underscore American Jews’ bipartisan consensus on Israel.

A partisan argument ensued after Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, whom Mr. Obama recently named as chairman of the Democratic Party, suggested they agree not to make support for Israel an election issue. Matt Brooks, executive director of the Republican group, objected, accusing her of proposing a “gag order.”

Queen fetes Obamas amid pomp of Buckingham Palace

LONDON — President Barack Obama will outline in a speech today how much the world has changed since the U.S.-British partnership emerged victorious from World War II, but also argue that the relationship remains the cornerstone of global security.

The theme, outlined by administration officials here Tuesday, is part celebration of the military partnership, which has waged war in three Muslim nations over the past decade, and part reassurance that the heavy cost has been essential.

Obama will deliver the address, characterized by advisers as "the anchor speech" of his six-day European trip, to the British Parliament at Westminster Hall, becoming the first American leader to do so in that historic venue.

"He'll speak to the fact that we've obviously come through a very difficult decade, but in some respects we're turning a corner," Ben Rhodes, a U.S. deputy national security adviser, told reporters.

His address at Westminster Hall will be the most substantive event of the trip so far after a start heavy with ceremony.

On Tuesday, Queen Elizabeth II welcomed Obama and the first lady, Michelle Obama, for his first state visit here. The official greeting took place just before noon at Buckingham Palace.

America's first couple walked up the red carpet to the palace door, where the queen, her ubiquitous handbag in the crook of her arm, greeted them with a handshake and smile. Prince Philip stood by her side.

The Obamas' gift to the queen was a handmade, leather-bound album containing original photographs of the June 1939 visit to the United States of her parents, King George VI and his consort Elizabeth, known more recently as the queen mother.

Inside the palace, the Obamas also met with Prince William and new wife Kate, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

Many lined the streets and gathered outside the Obamas' tour sites on a warm and clear afternoon.

The Obamas visited Westminster Abbey and laid a wreath at a tomb in memory of "the unknown warrior." Obama wrote in the guest book, "It is a great privilege to commemorate our common heritage and common sacrifice," but added the wrong date, "24 May 2008."

Obama also paid a courtesy call at 10 Downing Street to see Prime Minister David Cameron, with whom he will hold more extensive meetings today.

The evening ended with a state dinner at Buckingham Palace, where Obama, in white tie and tails, toasted the alliance as "a commitment that speaks to who we are."

Obama set for outreach to skeptical Arab world

President Barack Obama will lay out a new U.S. strategy toward a skeptical Arab world on Thursday, offering fresh aid to promote democratic change as he seeks to shape the outcome of popular uprisings threatening both friends and foes.

In his much-anticipated "Arab spring" speech, Obama will try to reset relations with the Middle East, but his outreach could falter amid Arab frustration over an uneven U.S. response to the region's revolts and his failure to advance Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking.

Obama is expected to unveil new economic aid packages to bolster political transitions in Egypt and Tunisia, nudge autocratic allies like Yemen and Bahrain to undertake reforms and harden his line against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Struggling to regain the initiative in a week of intense Middle East diplomacy, Obama is seizing what the White House called a "window of opportunity" in the wake of the death of Osama bin Laden at the hands of U.S. Navy SEALs.

"Having wound down the Iraq war ... and having taken out Osama bin Laden, we are beginning to turn the page to a more positive and hopeful future for U.S. policy in the region," a senior administration official told reporters in previewing parts of the president's speech.

Obama aims to articulate a more coherent approach for dealing with unprecedented political upheaval that has swept the Middle East and North Africa in recent months, upending decades of U.S. diplomatic assumptions.

His speech, set for 11:40 a.m. EDT at the State Department, is meant to counter criticism that he has been slow and inconsistent in responding to the swirl of events.

But he is not expected to stray far from his approach of balancing support for democratic aspirations with a desire to preserve longtime partnerships seen as crucial to fighting al Qaeda, containing Iran and securing vital oil supplies.

However, the risk for Obama is that his policy blueprint, calibrated for an audience ranging from the Arab masses to Middle Eastern leaders to the American public and lawmakers, will be too vague and nuanced to satisfy any of them.

Easier to predict is that he will stoke Arab disappointment with what will be left out -- fresh U.S. proposals for breaking the impasse between Israel and the Palestinians.

The decades-old conflict remains a central preoccupation of the Arab world.

GLOW FADES AFTER CAIRO SPEECH

While Obama will renew his call for the two sides to return to the table after talks broke down late last year over Israeli settlement building in the occupied West Bank, his push is not expected to be forceful enough to revive negotiations.

Neither is any significant progress expected when Obama holds talks on Friday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with whom he has had a strained relationship.

Obama had raised hopes with his 2009 speech in Cairo promising a "new beginning" with the Muslim world after years of estrangement under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

But the glow has faded and polls show anti-Americanism on the rise again.

Unlike Obama's Cairo speech, Thursday's address will focus on new flashpoints in the Arab world. He is not expected to use the chance to present an overarching strategy to supplant the case-by-case response he has applied so far, aides say.

"It won't be a one-size-fits all policy from the United States, but it will be a recognition that we need pragmatically to see that change is coming and try to shape it," said Brian Katulis of the Center for American Progress in Washington.

The administration's announcement on Wednesday of its first sanctions directly targeting Assad over Syria's violent crackdown on protests was seen in part as an attempt to quell criticism that Washington was responding too cautiously.

Obama's domestic opponents have also accused him of acting too timidly in Libya to break the stalemate between Muammar Gaddafi and rebels trying to oust him, and of not being tough enough with autocratic allies in Yemen and Bahrain.

Trying to show reform efforts will not go unrewarded, Obama will use his speech to unveil aid plans for Egypt and Tunisia, where longtime rulers were toppled by popular revolts.

Senior advisers to Obama said the United States would offer debt relief totaling roughly $1 billion over a few years to Egypt. Washington would also guarantee up to $1 billion in borrowing for Egypt to finance infrastructure development and boost jobs, the officials said.