The courage of Boehner and McConnell

By Walter Shapiro

If John Kennedy had not written “Profiles in Courage,” today we might have a more realistic understanding of political valor. But JFK’s 1957 Pulitzer Prize-winning book so raised the bar for bravery in public life that it now seems obvious that no modern figure can measure up.

Who in the 21st century could possibly match Daniel Webster’s oratory as he heroically struggled to save the Union? Or replicate Edmund Ross’ moral fortitude as he destroyed his political career to cast the decisive vote against impeaching Andrew Johnson? Where once legislators risked being burned in effigy and physically threatened, these days the likely consequence of a courageous vote in Congress is a new career as a high-priced lobbyist. 

This week’s ungainly legislative compromise that merely delayed the fiscal apocalypse until March can be ridiculed as a Profile in Timidity. Rather than ratify a grand bargain that would reform taxes and spending for a decade, Congress in predictable fashion did as little as possible as late as possible. No one, Republican or Democrat, is going to brag in their memoirs about the fortitude they displayed, dangling over the abyss, as they scaled the Fiscal Cliff.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner deserve credit for the last-minute fortitude they displayed in ending the dispiriting deadlock over extending the Bush tax cuts. It wasn’t Kennedy-defined courage—and it doesn’t erase the prior stubbornness on taxes by the Republican congressional leaders—but their political moxie should be noted.

[Join Walter Shapiro at 12:30 p.m. ET for a live chat about Congress in 2013]

On Sunday, with the countdown clock ticking, McConnell made a direct appeal to Joe Biden when his negotiations with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid reached a dead end. Rather than setting up secret back-channel talks with Biden, a longtime colleague, McConnell announced on the Senate floor, “I also placed a call to the vice president to see if he could help jump-start the negotiations on his side.”

The Biden-McConnell agreement challenged Republican orthodoxy in two major ways: It raised taxes on families earning more than $450,000, and it did not extract spending cuts from the Democrats. But the White House also made a big concession: Barack Obama abandoned his mantra since 2007 that families earning more than $250,000 should pay more in taxes. The difference between a $250,000 and a $450,000 threshold is about $200 billion in tax revenues over the next decade—enough to pay for the clean-up from three Hurricane Sandys.

As the Senate minority leader, McConnell presides over the more mainstream wing of Capitol Hill Republicans. While there are Tea Partiers and right-wing firebrands among Senate Republicans, there are also a few remaining moderates and old-guard legislators who remember when the word “bipartisan” was not considered hate speech.

Still, it was impressive that McConnell convinced all but five Senate Republicans to support the legislation. What was more politically ominous, though, is that the two Senate Republicans most likely to run for president in 2016 (Marco Rubio and Rand Paul) both voted “no.” Rubio’s and Paul’s votes were obviously shaped by ideology, but the two White House dreamers also presumably made a calculation that Republican presidential primary voters will demand litmus-test purity on taxes.

It has been a season of petty humiliations for John Boehner. As the congressional Republican most determined to negotiate a lasting deficit agreement with Obama, Boehner resumed talks with the president after the election in quest of the epic deal that eluded both of them in 2011. But once again, Boehner was not willing to produce enough tax revenue and Obama was not prepared to offer enough spending cuts to achieve a workable compromise.

Permanently breaking off talks with the White House, Boehner attempted to pass what he called “Plan B,” which would have preserved the Bush tax cuts for everyone earning less than $1 million a year. But the anti-tax fervor among House Republicans was so intense that Boehner abandoned “Plan B” when it became obvious that it would not pass.

Embarrassed by his failure at vote counting and left out of the Biden-McConnell negotiations, Boehner was a portrait in irrelevance until the Senate passed its own fiscal cliff legislation in the wee hours on New Year’s Day. Now it was up to Boehner’s House to determine whether the Senate compromise would be enshrined into law or whether a lingering fiscal uncertainty would have put a crimp in the economy all through January.

Up to now, Boehner had adhered to the decade-long Republican tradition that no legislation would reach the House floor unless it had the support of a majority of the GOP. But after the failure of “Plan B,” it was obvious that the only way to pass the Senate bill in the House was with an overwhelming majority of Democrats combined with a rump faction of end-the-crisis Republicans.

As the first rays of daylight hit the Capitol on New Year’s Day, Boehner confronted a series of unpalatable choices. He could try to pass the Senate bill with mostly Democratic votes, in violation of the majority-of-the-majority tradition. He could support an effort to add spending cuts to the Senate legislation, even though all signs suggested that this was a route to a new impasse. Or he could follow the Republican base right off the cliff—in effect, do nothing until the new Congress began work on Thursday.

Boehner chose legislating over posturing. Even though Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy (the No. 2 and No. 3 figures in the House GOP leadership) opposed the Senate bill, Boehner remained undaunted. By tradition, House speakers rarely vote on legislation, but Boehner put his gavel aside to vote for the Senate bill. Even more pointedly, Boehner had a friendly chat with Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer on the House floor just before the vote.

No one burned Boehner in effigy. But he was excoriated for his apostasy on right-wing websites. A few hours before the final House vote, the banner headline on the Drudge Report read, “Boehner Falls on the Sword. Tax on 77% of Households.” (Most of this tax increase, by the way, stemmed from the expiration of a temporary 2 percentage point cut in payroll taxes). A lead story Tuesday on the Breitbart Big Government website heralded Eric Cantor’s challenge to Boehner over the Senate bill.

For all the unnecessary pyrotechnics, for all the missed opportunities over the past 18 months, rationality triumphed over ideological extremism in Washington this week. And if this precedent helps prevent America from defaulting on its debts when the government runs out of borrowing power in March, so much the better. But, in the interim, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner deserve muted, but sincere, applause for bringing the anti-tax Republicans back from the brink. 


Read More..

Pakistanis bury slain teachers, aid workers


SWABI, Pakistan (AP) — Hundreds of villagers in northwest Pakistan turned out Wednesday to bury five female teachers and two health workers who were gunned down a day earlier by militants in what may have been the latest in a series of attacks targeting anti-polio efforts in the country.


The seven had worked at a community center in the town of Swabi that included a primary school and a medical clinic that vaccinated children against polio. Some militants oppose the vaccination campaigns, accusing health workers of acting as spies for the U.S. and alleging the vaccine is intended to make Muslim children sterile.


As mourners carried the coffins through the town for burial Wednesday, family and friends expressed horror that such an attack had struck their community.


"I told her many times at home 'be careful as we are poor people and take care of yourself all the time,'" said Fazal Dad, whose daughter was among the seven killed. "And always in response she said: 'Father, if I am not guilty, no one can harm me.'"


The group was on their way home from the community center where they were employed by a non-governmental organization when their vehicle was attacked Tuesday. The four militants on motorcycles spared the young son of one of the women who was riding in the van, pulling him from the vehicle before spraying it with bullets. The driver survived and was being treated at a Peshawar hospital.


There has been no claim of responsibility, and police have not made any arrests.


The director of the NGO said he suspected the attack might have been retribution for the group's work helping vaccinate Pakistani children against polio. Javed Akhtar said the community group has suspended its operations throughout the province.


Despite the killings, polio vaccination workers will be out in force this Saturday in four areas in the northwest considered at high risk for the disease in an effort to keep it from spreading.


Police will give extra protection to the workers taking part in the campaign in Peshawar, Nowshera, Charsadda and Mardan, said the commissioner of Mardan, Adil Khan.


Many local residents view the girls' primary school and medical clinic run by the NGO at the community center as saviors for the community's poor. Now many are worried about what will happen if those services are cut off.


Gul Afzal Khan, a villager whose children studied at a community center run by the group, said the attack was a big loss.


"What is their crime?" he asked. "They were just giving free education and health assistance to our children."


The attack also was another reminder of the risks to women educators and aid workers from Islamic militants who oppose their work.


Last month, nine people working on an anti-polio vaccination campaign were shot and killed. Four of those shootings were in the northwest where Tuesday's attack took place.


___


Associated Press writer Riaz Khan in Peshawar contributed to this report.


Read More..

Apple testing new iPhone, iOS 7: report






(Reuters) – Apple Inc has started testing a new iPhone and the next version of its iOS software, news website The Next Web reported.


Apple shares were up 2.6 percent at $ 546.06 in premarket trading. The stock closed at $ 532.17 on the Nasdaq on Monday.






Application developers have found in their app usage logs references to a new iPhone identifier, iPhone 6.1, running iOS 7 operating system, the website reported. (http://r.reuters.com/fyd94t)


Apple‘s iPhone 5 bears the identifiers “iPhone 5.1″ and “iPhone 5.2″ and is powered by iOS 6 operating system.


Developer logs show that the app requests originate from an internet address on Apple’s Cupertino campus, suggesting that Apple engineers are testing compatibility for some of the popular apps, the website said.


“Although OS and device data can be faked, the unique IP footprint leading back to Apple’s Cupertino campus leads us to believe this is not one of those attempts,” the website said.


Apple launched iPhone 5 in September and it has been reported that the new iPhone will be released in the middle of 2013.


(Reporting by Supantha Mukherjee in Bangalore)


Tech News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: Apple testing new iPhone, iOS 7: report
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/apple-testing-new-iphone-ios-7-report/
Link To Post : Apple testing new iPhone, iOS 7: report
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

Los Angeles photog killed shooting Bieber's car


LOS ANGELES (AP) — Justin Bieber says his thoughts and prayers are with the family of a paparazzo who was fatally struck by a car after taking pictures of the singer's Ferrari sports car in Los Angeles.


In a statement released Wednesday by Island Def Jam Music Group, Bieber says he hopes the tragedy will inspire legislation to protect the lives of celebrities, police, bystanders and photographers themselves.


Police Officer James Stoughton says the photographer died Tuesday evening at a hospital. Stoughton says Bieber was not in the Ferrari at the time.


Sgt. Rudy Lopez told the Los Angeles Times (http://lat.ms/ZTtuCt ) that the pop star's friend was driving the car when it was pulled over for a traffic stop.


Police say the paparazzo was struck by another motorist while returning to his own car.


Read More..

Brain image study: Fructose may spur overeating


This is your brain on sugar — for real. Scientists have used imaging tests to show for the first time that fructose, a sugar that saturates the American diet, can trigger brain changes that may lead to overeating.


After drinking a fructose beverage, the brain doesn't register the feeling of being full as it does when simple glucose is consumed, researchers found.


It's a small study and does not prove that fructose or its relative, high-fructose corn syrup, can cause obesity, but experts say it adds evidence they may play a role. These sugars often are added to processed foods and beverages, and consumption has risen dramatically since the 1970s along with obesity. A third of U.S. children and teens and more than two-thirds of adults are obese or overweight.


All sugars are not equal — even though they contain the same amount of calories — because they are metabolized differently in the body. Table sugar is sucrose, which is half fructose, half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup is 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose. Some nutrition experts say this sweetener may pose special risks, but others and the industry reject that claim. And doctors say we eat too much sugar in all forms.


For the study, scientists used magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, scans to track blood flow in the brain in 20 young, normal-weight people before and after they had drinks containing glucose or fructose in two sessions several weeks apart.


Scans showed that drinking glucose "turns off or suppresses the activity of areas of the brain that are critical for reward and desire for food," said one study leader, Yale University endocrinologist Dr. Robert Sherwin. With fructose, "we don't see those changes," he said. "As a result, the desire to eat continues — it isn't turned off."


What's convincing, said Dr. Jonathan Purnell, an endocrinologist at Oregon Health & Science University, is that the imaging results mirrored how hungry the people said they felt, as well as what earlier studies found in animals.


"It implies that fructose, at least with regards to promoting food intake and weight gain, is a bad actor compared to glucose," said Purnell. He wrote a commentary that appears with the federally funded study in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association.


Researchers now are testing obese people to see if they react the same way to fructose and glucose as the normal-weight people in this study did.


What to do? Cook more at home and limit processed foods containing fructose and high-fructose corn syrup, Purnell suggested. "Try to avoid the sugar-sweetened beverages. It doesn't mean you can't ever have them," but control their size and how often they are consumed, he said.


A second study in the journal suggests that only severe obesity carries a high death risk — and that a few extra pounds might even provide a survival advantage. However, independent experts say the methods are too flawed to make those claims.


The study comes from a federal researcher who drew controversy in 2005 with a report that found thin and normal-weight people had a slightly higher risk of death than those who were overweight. Many experts criticized that work, saying the researcher — Katherine Flegal of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — painted a misleading picture by including smokers and people with health problems ranging from cancer to heart disease. Those people tend to weigh less and therefore make pudgy people look healthy by comparison.


Flegal's new analysis bolsters her original one, by assessing nearly 100 other studies covering almost 2.9 million people around the world. She again concludes that very obese people had the highest risk of death but that overweight people had a 6 percent lower mortality rate than thinner people. She also concludes that mildly obese people had a death risk similar to that of normal-weight people.


Critics again have focused on her methods. This time, she included people too thin to fit what some consider to be normal weight, which could have taken in people emaciated by cancer or other diseases, as well as smokers with elevated risks of heart disease and cancer.


"Some portion of those thin people are actually sick, and sick people tend to die sooner," said Donald Berry, a biostatistician at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.


The problems created by the study's inclusion of smokers and people with pre-existing illness "cannot be ignored," said Susan Gapstur, vice president of epidemiology for the American Cancer Society.


A third critic, Dr. Walter Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health, was blunter: "This is an even greater pile of rubbish" than the 2005 study, he said. Willett and others have done research since the 2005 study that found higher death risks from being overweight or obese.


Flegal defended her work. She noted that she used standard categories for weight classes. She said statistical adjustments were made for smokers, who were included to give a more real-world sample. She also said study participants were not in hospitals or hospices, making it unlikely that large numbers of sick people skewed the results.


"We still have to learn about obesity, including how best to measure it," Flegal's boss, CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden, said in a written statement. "However, it's clear that being obese is not healthy - it increases the risk of diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and many other health problems. Small, sustainable increases in physical activity and improvements in nutrition can lead to significant health improvements."


___


Online:


Obesity info: http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html


___


Marilynn Marchione can be followed at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP


Mike Stobbe can be followed at http://twitter.com/MikeStobbe


Read More..

Despite deal, taxes will rise for most


WASHINGTON (AP) — While the tax package that Congress passed New Year's Day will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013.


That's because the legislation did nothing to prevent a temporary reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. In 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year.


The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington research group, estimates that 77 percent of American households will face higher federal taxes in 2013 under the agreement negotiated between President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans. High-income families will feel the biggest tax increases, but many middle- and low-income families will pay higher taxes too.


Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center's analysis. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will face an average tax increase of $822.


"For most people, it's just the payroll tax," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.


The tax increases could be a lot higher. A huge package of tax cuts first enacted under President George W. Bush was scheduled to expire Tuesday as part of the "fiscal cliff." The Bush-era tax cuts lowered taxes for families at every income level, reduced investment taxes and the estate tax, and enhanced a number of tax credits, including a $1,000-per-child credit.


The package passed Tuesday by the Senate and House extends most the Bush-era tax cuts for individuals making less than $400,000 and married couples making less than $450,000.


Obama said the deal "protects 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small business owners from a middle-class tax hike. While neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted, this agreement is the right thing to do for our country."


The income threshold covers more than 99 percent of all households, exceeding Obama's claim, according to the Tax Policy Center. However, the increase in payroll taxes will hit nearly every wage earner.


Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages up to $113,700, with employers paying half and workers paying the other half. Obama and Congress reduced the share paid by workers from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for 2011 and 2012, saving a typical family about $1,000 a year.


Obama pushed hard to enact the payroll tax cut for 2011 and to extend it through 2012. But it was never fully embraced by either party, and this time around, there was general agreement to let it expire.


The new tax package would increase the income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent on income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples. Investment taxes would increase for people who fall in the new top tax bracket.


High-income families will also pay higher taxes this year as part of Obama's 2010 health care law. As part of that law, a new 3.8 percent tax is being imposed on investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.


Together, the new tax package and Obama's health care law will produce significant tax increases for many high-income families.


For 2013, households making between $500,000 and $1 million would get an average tax increase of $14,812, according to the Tax Policy Center analysis. Households making more than $1 million would get an average tax increase of $170,341.


"If you're rich, you're almost certain to get a big tax increase," Williams said.


___


Follow Stephen Ohlemacher on Twitter: http://twitter.com/stephenatap


Read More..

Gunmen kill 5 female teachers in Pakistan


PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AP) — Gunmen in northwest Pakistan killed five female teachers and two aid workers on Tuesday in an ambush on a van carrying workers home from their jobs at a community center, officials said.


The attack was another reminder of the risks to women educators and aid workers from Islamic militants who oppose their work. It was in the same conservative province where militants shot and seriously wounded 15-year-old Malala Yousufzai, an outspoken young activist for girls' education, in October.


There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the latest shootings.


In another attack likely by militants in the southern city of Karachi, four people were killed and dozens injured when a bomb went off just as a large political rally was dispersing.


The teachers and aid workers in the northwest were killed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. It is an area where Islamic militants often target women and girls trying to get an education or female teachers.


Militants in the province have blown up schools and killed female educators. They have also kidnapped and killed aid workers, viewing them as promoting a foreign agenda.


Last month, nine people working on an anti-polio vaccination campaign were shot and killed. Four of those shootings were in the northwest as well.


Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, formerly called the Northwest Frontier province, borders the tribal areas of Pakistan along the frontier with Afghanistan to the west. Militant groups such as the Taliban have used the tribal areas as a stronghold from which to wage war both in Afghanistan and against the Pakistani government. Often that violence has spilled over into the mostly Pashtun province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.


In 2007, the Taliban led by Maulana Fazlullah took over the scenic Swat Valley, marking the height of their strength there. The Pakistani military later pushed the militant group from the valley but the Taliban has repeatedly tried to reassert itself.


The teachers were killed along with two health workers, one man and one woman. Their driver was wounded. They were on their way home from a community center in the town of Swabi where they were working at a primary school for girls and adjoining medical center.


The injured driver told investigators that the gunmen stopped the vehicle and removed a boy — the son of one of the women — before indiscriminately opening fire, said police officer Fazal Malik.


Swabi police chief Abdur Rasheed said most of the women killed were between the ages of 20 and 22. He said four gunmen who used two motorcycles fled the scene and have not been apprehended.


The gunmen on motorcycles opened fire with automatic weapons, said Javed Akhtar, executive director of the non-governmental organization Support With Working Solutions. The NGO conducts programs in the education and health sectors and runs the community center in Swabi, he said. The group has been active in the city since 1992, and started the Ujala Community Welfare Center in 2010, he added. Ujala means "light" in Urdu.


The center is financed by the Pakistani government's Poverty Alleviation Program and a German organization, said Akhtar.


He said the NGO also runs health and education projects in the South Waziristan tribal area, as well as health projects in the cities of Tank and Dera Ismail Khan and the regions of Lower Dir and Upper Kurram. All of those cities and regions are in northwest Pakistan, the area that has been most affected by the ongoing fight with militants opposed to the current government.


Aid groups such as Support With Working Solutions often provide a vital role in many areas of Pakistan where the government has been unable to provide services such as medical clinics or schools. In some areas like the northwest, they have had to work to overcome community fears that they are promoting a foreign agenda at odds with local traditions and values.


But many local residents in Swabi said the school and medical center provided a vital service to the community and mourned those who were killed.


Murad Khan said his daughter was studying at the primary school, which provided free books and uniforms to students. He said many people in the area are now worried that the school and clinic will close.


"This school is like a gift for all of us, the poor people of the village," he said. "People in our area are sad."


The NGO director said he has directed staff at all projects to stop working for the time being until security measures are reviewed but vowed that they would resume their work soon.


He said that the NGO had not received any threats before the attack.


In Karachi, senior police officer Asif Ejaz Shaikh said the bomb that killed four was planted in a motorcycle parked amid a crowd of buses for political workers returning from the rally held by the Muttahida Qaumi Movement. The MQM is the dominant political party in Karachi.


There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack.


The provincial health minister Dr. Saghir Ahmed said four people were killed and 41 injured.


__


Associated Press writers Zarar Khan in Islamabad and Adil Jawad in Karachi contributed to this report.


Read More..

Pasadena's Rose Parade kicks off on a cold morning


PASADENA, Calif. (AP) — The 124th Rose Parade in Pasadena kicked off on a chilly New Year's morning with the theme "Oh the Places You'll Go!" named in honor of the Dr. Seuss book.


Led by this year's grand marshal, British primatologist Jane Goodall, the parade features 42 floats covered with flowers and plant material, 23 marching bands and 21 equestrian units from across the country.


An estimated 700,000 spectators are lining the streets to view the 5-mile-long spectacle, which is broadcast around the world. This year's parade features the first-ever float entered by the Defense Department and a couple getting married on a float.


The $247,000 military float is a replica of the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington to commemorate the veterans from that conflict.


The float that scooped up the parade's grand "Sweepstakes" prize for the most beautiful floral presentation and design was "Dreaming in Paradise" by fruit and vegetable producer Dole.


Die-hard parade fans staked out their spots early Monday with folding chairs, hammocks and portable barbeque grills.


They brought in the new year by throwing marshmallows, shaving cream and tortillas, and then hunkered down to stay warm in sleeping bags during a particularly cold night for Southern California.


The wave of under-40-degree temperature spurred a number of cold-weather exposure calls to emergency personnel, police department spokeswoman Lisa Derderian told City News Service.


As of 8 a.m. Tuesday, police had made a total of 22 arrests along the parade route since 6 p.m. Monday, said police Lt. Rick Aversan.


All but one arrest were for public intoxication. The other was for possession of burglary tools that could have been used to break into cars, police said.


Read More..

Clinton receiving blood thinners to dissolve clot


WASHINGTON (AP) — Doctors treating Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for a blood clot in her head said blood thinners are being used to dissolve the clot and they are confident she will make a full recovery.


Clinton didn't suffer a stroke or neurological damage from the clot that formed after she suffered a concussion during a fainting spell at her home in early December, doctors said in a statement Monday.


Clinton, 65, was admitted to New York-Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday when the clot turned up on a follow-up exam on the concussion, Clinton spokesman Phillipe Reines said.


The clot is located in the vein in the space between the brain and the skull behind the right ear. She will be released once the medication dose for the blood thinners has been established, the doctors said.


In their statement, Dr. Lisa Bardack of the Mount Kisco Medical Group and Dr. Gigi El-Bayoumi of George Washington University said Clinton was making excellent progress and was in good spirits.


Clinton's complication "certainly isn't the most common thing to happen after a concussion" and is one of the few types of blood clots in the skull or head that are treated with blood thinners, said Dr. Larry Goldstein, a neurologist who is director of Duke University's stroke center. He is not involved in Clinton's care.


The area where Clinton's clot developed is "a drainage channel, the equivalent of a big vein inside the skull. It's how the blood gets back to the heart," Goldstein said.


Blood thinners usually are enough to treat the clot and it should have no long-term consequences if her doctors are saying she has suffered no neurological damage from it, Goldstein said.


Clinton returned to the U.S. from a trip to Europe, then fell ill with a stomach virus in early December that left her severely dehydrated and forced her to cancel a trip to North Africa and the Middle East. Until then, she had canceled only two scheduled overseas trips, one to Europe after breaking her elbow in June 2009 and one to Asia after the February 2010 earthquake in Haiti.


Her condition worsened when she fainted, fell and suffered a concussion while at home alone in mid-December as she recovered from the virus. It was announced Dec. 13.


This isn't the first time Clinton has suffered a blood clot. In 1998, midway through her husband's second term as president, Clinton was in New York fundraising for the midterm elections when a swollen right foot led her doctor to diagnose a clot in her knee requiring immediate treatment.


Clinton had planned to step down as secretary of state at the beginning of President Barack Obama's second term. Whether she will return to work before she resigns remained a question.


Democrats are privately if not publicly speculating: How might her illness affect a decision about running for president in 2016?


After decades in politics, Clinton says she plans to spend the next year resting. She has long insisted she had no intention of mounting a second campaign for the White House four years from now. But the door is not entirely closed, and she would almost certainly emerge as the Democrat to beat if she decided to give in to calls by Democratic fans and run again.


Her age — and thereby health — would probably be a factor under consideration, given that Clinton would be 69 when sworn in, if she were elected in 2016. That might become even more of an issue in the early jockeying for 2016 if what started as a bad stomach bug becomes a prolonged, public bout with more serious infirmity.


Not that Democrats are willing to talk openly about the political implications of a long illness, choosing to keep any discussions about her condition behind closed doors. Publicly, Democrats reject the notion that a blood clot could hinder her political prospects.


"Some of those concerns could be borderline sexist," said Basil Smikle, a Democratic strategist who worked for Clinton when she was a senator. "Dick Cheney had significant heart problems when he was vice president, and people joked about it. He took the time he needed to get better, and it wasn't a problem."


It isn't uncommon for presidential candidates' health — and age — to be an issue. Both in 2000 and 2008, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., had to rebut concerns he was too old to be commander in chief or that his skin cancer could resurface.


Two decades after Clinton became the first lady, signs of her popularity — and her political strength — are ubiquitous.


Obama had barely declared victory in November when Democrats started zealously plugging Clinton as their strongest White House contender four years from now, should she choose to take that leap.


"Wouldn't that be exciting?" House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi declared in December. "I hope she goes. Why wouldn't she?"


Even Republicans concede that were she to run, Clinton would be a force to be reckoned with.


"Trying to win that will be truly the Super Bowl," Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker and 2012 GOP presidential candidate, said in December. "The Republican Party today is incapable of competing at that level."


Americans admire Clinton more than any other woman in the world, according to a Gallup poll released Monday — the 17th time in 20 years that Clinton has claimed that title. And a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 57 percent of Americans would support Clinton as a candidate for president in 2016, with just 37 percent opposed. Websites have already cropped up hawking "Clinton 2016" mugs and tote bags.


Beyond talk of future politics, Clinton's three-week absence from the State Department has raised eyebrows among some conservative commentators who questioned the seriousness of her ailment after she canceled planned Dec. 20 testimony before Congress on the deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya.


Clinton had been due to discuss with lawmakers a scathing report she had commissioned on the attack. It found serious failures of leadership and management in two State Department bureaus were to blame for insufficient security at the facility. Clinton took responsibility for the incident before the report was released, but she was not blamed. Four officials cited in the report have either resigned or been reassigned.


___


Associated Press writer Ken Thomas in Washington and AP Chief Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione in Milwaukee contributed to this report.


Read More..

Senate passes 'cliff' deal, House up next


With 2013 just over two hours old, the Senate voted 89-8 on Tuesday to
approve a last-minute deal to avert income tax hikes on all but the
richest Americans and stall painful spending cuts as part of a
hard-fought compromise to avoid the economically toxic “fiscal cliff.”


The country had already technically tumbled over the cliff by the time the gavel came down on the vote at 2:07 a.m.. The House of Representatives was not due to return to work to take up the measure until midday on Tuesday. But with financial markets closed for New Year's Day, quick action by lawmakers would likely limit the economic damage.


The lopsided margin belied anxiety on both sides about the deal, which emerged from barely two days of talks between Vice President Joe Biden and Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Among the “no” votes: Republican Senator Marco Rubio, widely thought to have his eye on the 2016 presidential race.


In remarks just before the vote, McConnell repeatedly called the agreement “imperfect” but said it beat allowing income tax rates rise across the board.


“I know I can speak for my entire conference when I say we don’t think taxes should be going up on anyone, but we all knew that if we did nothing they’d be going up on everyone today,” he said. “We weren’t going to let that happen.”


“Our most important priority was to protect middle-class families. This legislation does that,” Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said. But Reid cautioned that “passing this agreement does not mean negotiations halt. Far from it.”


Compromises on tax rates

Under the compromise arrangement, taxes would rise on income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for households, while exemptions and deductions the wealthiest Americans use to reduce their tax bill would face new limits. The accord would also raise the taxes paid on large inheritances from 35% to 40% for estates over $5 million. And it would extend by one year unemployment benefits for some two million Americans. It would also prevent cuts in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients and spare tens of millions of Americans who otherwise would have been hit with the Alternative Minimum Tax.

The middle class will still see its taxes go up: The final deal did not include an extension of the payroll tax holiday. And the overall package will deepen the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars by extending the overwhelming majority of the Bush tax cuts. Many Democrats had opposed those measures in 2001 and 2003. Obama agreed to extend them in 2010.


Efforts to modify the first installment of $1.2 trillion in cuts to domestic and defense programs over 10 years -- the other portion of the “fiscal cliff,” known as sequestration -- had proved a sticking point late in the game. Democrats had sought a year-long freeze but ultimately caved to Republican pressure and signed on to just a two-month delay while broader deficit-reduction talks continue.


Debt-limit battle looms


That would put the next major battle over spending cuts right around the time that the White House and its Republican foes are battling it out over whether to raise the country's debt limit. Republicans have vowed to push for more spending cuts, equivalent to the amount of new borrowing. Obama has vowed not to negotiate as he did in 2011, when a bruising fight threatened the first-ever default on America's obligations and resulted in the first-ever downgrade of the country's credit rating. Biden sent that message to Democrats in Congress, two senators said.


Experts had warned that the fiscal cliff's tax increases and spending cuts, taken together, could plunge the still-fragile economy into a new recession.


Biden, evidently in good spirits after playing a central role in crafting the deal, said little on his way into or out of a roughly one hour and 45 minute meeting behind closed doors with Senate Democrats. "Happy New Year," he said on the way in. Asked on the way out what his chief selling point had been, the vice president reportedly replied: "Me."


Biden's intervention; hurdles in the House


Hours earlier, a Democratic Senate aide told Yahoo News that "the White House and Republicans have a deal," while a source familiar with the negotiations said President Barack Obama had discussed the compromise with Reid and Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and "they both signed off."


But the House’s Republican leaders, including Speaker John Boehner, hinted in an unusual joint statement that they might amend anything that clears the Senate – a step that could kill the deal.

“Decisions about whether the House will seek to accept or promptly amend the measure will not be made until House members -- and the American people -- have been able to review the legislation,” they said.

Biden, a 36-year Senate veteran, worked out the agreement with McConnell after talks between Obama and Boehner collapsed and a similar effort between McConnell and Reid followed suit shortly thereafter. With the deal mostly done, Obama made a final push at the White House.


“Today, it appears that an agreement to prevent this New Year's tax hike is within sight, but it's not done,” Obama said in hastily announced midday remarks at the White House. “There are still issues left to resolve, but we're hopeful that Congress can get it done – but it’s not done.”


"One thing we can count on with respect to this Congress is that if there is even one second left before you have to do what you’re supposed to do, they will use that last second," he said.


Obama’s remarks – by turns scolding, triumphant, and mocking of Congress – came after talks between McConnell and Biden appeared to seal the breakthrough deal.


“I can report that we’ve reached an agreement on all of the tax issues,” McConnell said on the Senate floor moments later. “We are very, very close to an agreement.”


The Kentucky Republican later briefed Republicans on the details of the deal. Lawmakers emerged from that closed-door session offered hopeful appraisals that, after clearing a few last-minute hurdles, they could vote on New Year’s Eve or with 2013 just hours old.


“Tonight, I hope,” Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee told reporters. “It may be at 1, 2, 3, 4 in the morning. Oh, I guess that’s technically tomorrow.”


Reckoning with the 'sequester'


Republican Senators said negotiators were still working on a way to forestall two months of the “sequester” spending cuts, about $20 billion worth. And some expressed disquiet that the tentative compromise ran high on tax increases and low on spending cuts -- while warning that failure to act, triggering some $600 billion in income tax increases on all Americans who pay it and draconian spending cuts, was the worse option.


McConnell earlier had called for a vote on the tax component of the deal.

“Let me be clear: We’ll continue to work on finding smarter ways to cut spending, but let’s not let that hold up protecting Americans from the tax hike,” McConnell urged. “Let’s pass the tax relief portion now. Let’s take what’s been agreed to and get moving.”

House passage was not a sure thing: Both the AFL-CIO labor union and the conservative Heritage Action organization argued against the package.


The breakthrough came after McConnell announced Sunday that he had started to negotiate with Biden in a bid to "jump-start" stalled talks to avoid the fiscal cliff.


Under their tentative deal, the top tax rate on household income above $450,000 would rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent -- where it was under Bill Clinton, before the reductions enacted under George W. Bush in 2001 and 2003.


Some congressional liberals had expressed objections to extending tax cuts above the $250,000 income threshold Obama cited throughout the 2012 campaign. Democrats were huddling in private as well to work out whether they could support the arrangement.


Obama responds to critics


Possibly with balking progressives in mind, Obama trumpeted victories dear to the left of his party. "The potential agreement that’s being talked about would not only make sure the taxes don’t go up on middle-class families, it also would extend tax credits for families with children. It would extend our tuition tax credit that’s helped millions of families pay for college. It would extend tax credits for clean energy companies that are creating jobs and reducing our dependence on foreign oil. It would extend unemployment insurance to 2 million Americans who are out there still actively looking for a job."


Obama said he had hoped for "a larger agreement, a bigger deal, a grand bargain," to stem the tide of red ink swamping the country’s finances – but shelved that goal.


"With this Congress, that was obviously a little too much to hope for at this time," he said. "It may be we can do it in stages. We’re going to solve this problem instead in several steps."


The president also looked ahead to his next budgetary battle with Republicans, warning that “any future deficit agreement” will have to couple spending cuts with tax increases. He expressed a willingness to reduce spending on popular programs like Medicare, but said entitlement reform would have to go hand in hand with new tax revenues.


“If Republicans think that I will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone … then they’ve another thing coming,” Obama said defiantly. “That’s not how it’s going to work.”


“If we’re serious about deficit reduction and debt reduction, then it’s going to have to be a matter of shared sacrifice. At least as long as I’m president. And I’m going to be president for the next four years, I hope,” he said.

The other “no” votes were: Michael Bennet (D-Col.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rand Paul (R-Ken.), and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.). Republicans Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Mark Kirk of Illinois as well as Democrat Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey did not vote.
Read More..