Saturday, February 2, 2013

Source: Religious get new opt-out on birth control

(AP) ? The Obama administration is announcing a broader opt-out for religious nonprofits that object to providing health insurance that covers birth control.

The administration is allowing religious nonprofits to offer coverage that does not include contraception. In such a case, a third-party issuer will handle all business related to providing birth-control coverage for women, according to a source familiar with the changes who spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Religious groups had said the old birth-control coverage rule violated their religious beliefs. Many filed lawsuits or said they would simply not comply.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2013-02-01-US-Birth-Control-Religious-Groups/id-24e08a3a97254d398ba7a54e6a8aae0a

west memphis three taxes game of thrones season 2 trailer sag award winners girl scout cookies screen actors guild royal rumble results

Friday, February 1, 2013

South East Radio's Business Matters celebrates 12 months on air ...



South East Radio?s Business
Matters celebrates 12 months on air

This Saturday (February 2nd), marks the first anniversary of South East
Radio?s flagship business programme, Business Matters. The show, presented by
local entrepreneur Karl Fitzpatrick and sponsored by Wexford Insurances, has
become a focal point for local businesses.

Speaking about the success of the show, Liam Dwyer, General Manager of South East Radio
said ?We are delighted that South East Radio?s Business Matters has been so
well received by our listeners and we would like to thank Wexford Insurances,
who have renewed their sponsorship for a second year.?

Having featured interviews with all local and national funding agencies, South East
Radio?s Business Matters has provided listeners with comprehensive information
on a wide range of supports and grants available to businesses across County
Wexford. The show is also renowned for featuring interviews with high profile
companies and providing access to industry leaders that listeners want to know
more about.

Karl Fitzpatrick, presenter of South East Radio?s Business Matters, also shared his
thoughts on this milestone for the show, stating that ?Over the last 12 months,
I have thoroughly enjoyed sharing business success stories with our listeners and
providing practical solutions to the everyday challenges facing local
businesses. The quality of our guests has been instrumental in making the show
a success and I am committed to bringing more exclusive interviews to our
listeners in the year ahead.?

So tune into South East Radio?s Business Matters in association with Wexford Insurances
every Saturday morning from 10.30am to 11.30am.

Source: http://www.wexfordceb.ie/south-east-radio%E2%80%99s-business-matters-celebrates-12-months-on-air/

Kevin Clash Walmart Black Friday 2012 Paula Broadwell Tilted Kilt Barbara Palvin Yahoo Fantasy Football Nick Foles

Metro PCS gets the LG Spirit 4G

Metro PCS LG Spirit

Metro PCS has announced it'll carry the LG Spirit, a 4.5-inch Android 4.0 smartphone with 4G LTE data. It's powered by a dual core processor running at 1.2GHz, has a 2150 mAh battery and sports a 5-megapixel rear camera and a 1.3MP shooter up front. The Spirit is available online and in stores today for $199 (after a $70 mail-in rebate). Metro PCS' no-contract plans start at $40 a month.

More: Metro PCS



Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/androidcentral/~3/CTtHMlfeTvE/story01.htm

global payments eli young band wrestlemania country music awards 2012 wrestlemania 28 results earl scruggs game of thrones

Americans would pay more to fund Social Security

By Allison Linn, TODAY

Most Americans think it?s important to preserve adequate Social Security benefits for younger generations ? and they may even be willing to pay more taxes to get that assurance, a new survey finds.

The survey, released Thursday by the nonprofit National Academy of Social Insurance, found that about eight in 10 Americans think it is critical to support Social Security even if it means that working Americans have to pay more in taxes. A slightly higher percentage of the 2,000 people surveyed said they think it?s critical to save Social Security even if wealthy people have to pay more.

But here?s the thing: Many Americans also want something in return.

The study found broad-based support among both younger and older Americans for a plan that would gradually increase the amount of payroll taxes everyone pays and also eliminate the cap on the amount of income that can be taxed for Social Security. In return, that plan would call for raising minimum benefits and increasing cost-of-living-adjustments.

The survey comes as many Americans are growing more worried about whether they will see any Social Security benefits at all. Under current government estimates, Social Security could face funding shortfalls in about two decades because the U.S. population is aging and generally living longer.

Experts say it?s not too surprising to find that older people are heavily in favor of retaining Social Security benefits even if it means paying more taxes, but it?s a little more surprising to find that younger Americans also seem to? support it generally.

Still, after five difficult years in which many people have struggled financially, many workers may see the allure of a plan that would give them some financial certainty late in life.

?Social Security wasn?t designed to be a sole major source of retirement income, but for many people who haven?t saved enough ? it certainly looks attractive,? said Alan Auerbach, director of the Robert D. Burch Center for Tax Policy and Public Finance at UC Berkeley.

Jasmine Tucker, income security research associate with the National Academy of Social Insurance, said she thinks the results show that people are willing to pay extra taxes for Social Security because they know that they will see a return on that investment later in life.

?People seem to be very resistant to raising any taxes, but I think Social Security is different,? she said.

Other studies have found support for raising taxes more narrowly on wealthy Americans to help fund Social Security. A Pew Research Center survey released in December found that 66 percent of Americans would support raising payroll taxes on high-income earners, while 55 percent would support reducing benefits for high-income seniors.

Related: Are you struggling in the suburbs? We want to hear from you.

Still, Auerbach ? who was not involved in the study ??noted that it?s one thing for people to say they would be willing to pay more taxes to help fund Social Security, and quite another for them to actually commit to a plan that would effectively shrink their current paycheck.

?Do people really know what this would mean in terms of their take-home pay? Have they really thought through what the implications are?? Auerbach asked.

Many Americans are seeing that real-world effect right now, because the end to the payroll tax holiday has resulted in an effective tax hike equal to about 2 percent of their wages. This survey was conducted in September, before the payroll tax holiday ended.

Critics also argue that it may not be feasible to fix Social Security?s funding woes just by raising taxes. Many other plans have called for a mix of raising taxes and reducing benefits either by curtailing cost-of-living adjustments or increasing the age at which people can get full benefits.

?There?s no attractive way to do this. There?s just a variety of less attractive ways,? said Andrew Biggs, resident scholar with the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute.

Biggs also argued that despite what the findings show, it would be difficult for politicians to garner support for a plan that involved raising taxes on all Americans.

?If this stuff was so popular, somebody would have proposed it by now,? he said.

It is clear that Americans are anxious for Congress and President Barack Obama to find some way to overhaul Social Security and other programs designed to help older Americans.

A Gallup poll?released just days after the 2012 presidential election found that nearly nine in 10 Americans thought it was important for? Obama to take major steps to ensure the long-term stability of Social Security and Medicare.?

Related: Yes, we can fix Social Security (but it won't be pretty)?

Would you pay more in taxes to help avoid a Social Security funding shortfall?

?

Source: http://lifeinc.today.com/_news/2013/02/01/16795417-americans-like-social-security-and-are-willing-to-pay-to-keep-it?lite

affirmative action helicon zac efron and taylor swift real housewives of orange county bloom energy franklin graham jambalaya

Syria warns of "surprise" response to Israel attack

BEIRUT/AMMAN (Reuters) - Syria warned on Thursday of a possible "surprise" response to Israel's attack on its territory and Russia condemned the air strike as an unprovoked violation of international law.

Damascus could take "a surprise decision to respond to the aggression of the Israeli warplanes", Syrian ambassador to Lebanon Ali Abdul-Karim Ali said a day after Israel struck against Syria.

"Syria is engaged in defending its sovereignty and its land," Ali told a website of the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. Syria and Israel have fought several wars and in 2007 Israeli jets bombed a suspected Syrian nuclear site, without a military response from Damascus.

Diplomats, Syrian rebels and regional security sources said on Wednesday that Israeli jets had bombed a convoy near the Lebanese border, apparently hitting weapons destined for Hezbollah. Syria denied the reports, saying the target had been a military research center northwest of Damascus.

Hezbollah, which has supported Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as he battles an armed uprising in which 60,000 people have been killed, said Israel was trying to thwart Arab military power and vowed to stand by its ally.

"Hezbollah expresses its full solidarity with Syria's leadership, army and people," said the group which fought an inconclusive 34-day war with Israel in 2006.

Israel has remained silent on the attack and there has been little reaction from its Western backers, but Syria's allies in Moscow and Tehran were quick to denounce the strike.

Russia, which has blocked Western efforts to put pressure on Syria at the United Nations, said that any Israeli air strike would amount to unacceptable military interference.

"If this information is confirmed, then we are dealing with unprovoked attacks on targets on the territory of a sovereign country, which blatantly violates the U.N. Charter and is unacceptable, no matter the motives to justify it," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Iranian deputy foreign minister Hossein Amir Abdullahian said the attack "demonstrates the shared goals of terrorists and the Zionist regime", Fars news agency reported. Assad portrays the rebels fighting him as foreign-backed, Islamist terrorists, with the same agenda as Israel.

"It is necessary for the sides which take tough stances on Syria to now take serious steps and decisive stances against this aggression by Tel Aviv and uphold criteria for security in the region," Abdullahian said.

An aide to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Saturday that Iran would consider any attack on Syria as an attack on itself, but Abdullahian made no mention of retaliation.

Hezbollah said the attack showed that the conflict in Syria was part of a scheme "to destroy Syria and its army and foil its pivotal role in the resistance front (against Israel)".

BLASTS SHOOK DISTRICT

Details of Wednesday's strike remain sketchy and, in parts, contradictory. Syria said Israeli warplanes, flying low to avoid detection by radar, crossed into its airspace from Lebanon and struck the Jamraya military research centre.

But the diplomats and rebels said the jets hit a weapons convoy heading from Syria to Lebanon, apparently destined for Assad's ally Hezbollah, and the rebels said they - not Israel - hit Jamraya with mortars.

The force of the dawn attack shook the ground, waking nearby residents from their slumber with up to a dozen blasts, two sources in the area said.

"We were sleeping. Then we started hearing rockets hitting the complex and the ground started shaking and we ran into the basement," said a woman who lives adjacent to the Jamraya site.

The resident, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity over Israel's reported strike on Wednesday morning, said she could not tell whether the explosions which woke her were the result of an aerial strike.

Another source who has a relative working inside Jamraya reported that a building inside the complex had been cordoned off after the attack and that flames were seen rising from the area after the attack.

"It appears that there were about a dozen rockets that appeared to hit one building in the complex," the source, who also asked not to be identified, told Reuters. "The facility is closed today."

Israeli newspapers quoted foreign media on Thursday for reports on the attack. Journalists in Israel are required to submit articles on security and military issues to the censor, which has the power to block any publication of material it deems could compromise state security.

Syrian state television said two people were killed in the raid on Jamraya, which lies in the 25-km (15-mile) strip between Damascus and the Lebanese border. It described it as a scientific research centre "aimed at raising the level of resistance and self-defense".

Diplomatic sources from three countries told Reuters that chemical weapons were believed to be stored at Jamraya, and that it was possible that the convoy was near the large site when it came under attack. However, there was no suggestion that the vehicles themselves had been carrying chemical weapons.

"The target was a truck loaded with weapons, heading from Syria to Lebanon," said one Western diplomat, echoing others who said the convoy's load may have included anti-aircraft missiles or long-range rockets.

The raid followed warnings from Israel that it was ready to act to prevent the revolt against Assad leading to Syria's chemical weapons and modern rockets reaching either his Hezbollah allies or his Islamist enemies.

A regional security source said Israel's target was weaponry given by Assad's military to fellow Iranian ally Hezbollah.

"This episode boils down to a warning by Israel to Syria and Hezbollah not to engage in the transfer of sensitive weapons," the source said. "Assad knows his survival depends on his military capabilities and he would not want those capabilities neutralized by Israel - so the message is this kind of transfer is simply not worth it, neither for him nor Hezbollah."

Such a strike or strikes would fit Israel's policy of pre-emptive covert and overt action to curb Hezbollah and does not necessarily indicate a major escalation of the war in Syria. It does, however, indicate how the erosion of the Assad family's rule after 42 years is seen by Israel as posing a threat.

Israel this week echoed concerns in the United States about Syrian chemical weapons, but its officials say a more immediate worry is that the civil war could see weapons that are capable of denting its massive superiority in airpower and tanks reaching Hezbollah; the group fought Israel in 2006 and remains a more pressing threat than its Syrian and Iranian sponsors.

(Additional reporting by Mariam Karouny and Oliver Holmes in Beirut, Gabriela Baczynska in Moscow and Marcus George in Dubai; editing by David Stamp)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/syria-warns-surprise-response-israel-attack-144911693.html

adele lyrics best new artist 2012 grammys foo fighters nikki minaj grammys album of the year

Endowment returns flat for universities

After two strong years, college and university endowments lost ground slightly during the fiscal year ending last June 30, with their investments declining 0.3 percent on average, according to a new study.

U.S. stock markets have risen around 10 percent since then, and many global markets are also higher, so recent performance is likely stronger.

Endowments are the assets owned and invested by universities, who typically spend about 4 to 5 percent of their values annually to support things like financial aid, faculty salaries and other expenses ? and then try to replenish the payouts through fundraising and investment returns.

The survey of 831 schools, conducted by NACUBO, a university business officers group, and investment adviser Commonfund, found that at the average university, the endowment kicks in about 9 percent of the operating budget.

But the figure is higher at richer universities, averaging more than 16 percent at institutions with endowments of at least $1 billion. The endowment provides about one-third of the budget at Harvard, whose endowment of $30.4 billion is the largest of any university in the world ? though still well off its peak of nearly $37 billion before the recession hit.

To beat inflation (higher for the goods and services colleges purchase than for the overall economy) and replenish payouts to support university spending, endowments have needed to return about 7.4 percent annually, said Verne Sedlacek, president and CEO of Commonfund.

Larger endowments, over $1 billion, have managed that, averaging 7.6 percent over the last decade, the survey found. But endowments under $100 million have returned on average less than 6 percent (the average return for all schools in the survey was 6.2 percent).

Returns averaged 19.2 percent in fiscal 2011. Poor performances in international equities and hedge funds dragged down returns last year, the report found.

Overall, there are 71 U.S. universities with endowments higher than $1 billion, down from 76 in the survey a year ago.

Here are the top 10 university endowments, their 2012 value and the percentage change from 2011:

1. Harvard University, $30.44 billion, down 4.1 percent.

2. Yale University, $19.35 billion, down 0.1 percent.

3. University of Texas System, $18.26 billion, up 6.5 percent.

4. Stanford University, $17.04 billion, up 3.2 percent.

5. Princeton University, $16.95 percent, down 0.9 percent.

6. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, $10.15 billion, up 4.5 percent.

7. University of Michigan, $7.69 billion, down 1.8 percent.

8. Columbia University, $7.65 billion, down 1.7 percent.

9. Texas A&M University System, $7.64 billion, up 9.1 percent.

10. Northwestern University, $7.12 billion, down 0.9 percent.

Changes from 2011 reflect combined impact of fundraising, investment returns and spending out of the endowments.

___

Follow Justin Pope at http://www.twitter.com/JustinPopeAP

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/f70471f764144b2fab526d39972d37b3/Article_2013-02-01-University%20Endowments/id-37b8d10bcd5b407ba00cb01ccbb24321

buckyballs buckyballs awake mario batali lone ranger aaron brooks dave matthews band

MCain hammers Hagel on Iraq troop surge

Republican Sen. John McCain angrily dismissed defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel as stubbornly camped ?on the wrong side? of history when it comes to Iraq, and he openly doubted whether he could support the confirmation of his former comrade and fellow Republican. The heated exchange between the two men, both decorated Vietnam War veterans, was the most notable in a series of testy verbal duels as Hagel faced some of his fiercest critics in the Senate.

McCain welcomed the former senator by saying he was ?pleased to see an old friend? before the Senate Armed Services Committee, but he immediately ripped into ?the quality of your professional judgment.? (Politico?s David Chalian noted on Twitter that the Arizona lawmaker?s tone suggested that ?old friend? really meant ?ex-friend.?)

McCain, a champion of the troop surge in Iraq, hammered Hagel over his opposition to that escalation of the war and demanded Hagel admit that he was wrong to warn it could turn out to be a Vietnam-level debacle. After labeling Hagel?s concerns ?bizarre? and ?nonsense,? McCain demanded to know whether the nominee stood by his criticisms and asked, ?Were you right or wrong about the surge??

?I stand by 'em because I made 'em,? Hagel replied. ?I would defer to the judgment of history.?

As Hagel offered to ?explain? his remarks, McCain cut him off. ?I want to know whether you were right or wrong. That?s a direct question; I expect a direct answer.?

?The surge assisted in the objective,? Hagel said. ?But if we review the record a little bit ..."

?Will you please answer the question?? McCain jumped in. ?Were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam? Were you correct or incorrect? Yes or no?

?Were you right or wrong? That?s a pretty straightforward question,? McCain said.

?I?m not going to give you a yes or no answer,? Hagel said. ?If you would like me to explain why ...?

?No, I actually would like an answer, yes or no,? McCain said, cutting him off.

?I?ll defer that judgment to history,? Hagel repeated. But he added that his Vietnam comments referred to ?the overall war of choice, going into Iraq? and he called the March 2003 invasion ?the most fundamentally bad, dangerous decision since Vietnam.?

?History has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you?re on the wrong side of it,? McCain said. ?And your refusal to answer whether you were right or wrong about it is going to have an impact on my judgment as to whether to vote for your confirmation or not.?

?I hope you will reconsider,? McCain said.

Both McCain and Hagel voted in favor of going to war in Iraq, but Hagel later turned sharply against the conflict, often echoing then-Sen. Barack Obama's accusation that the invasion diverted resources from Afghanistan.

Earlier, Hagel pleaded with senators not to judge him based on controversial past remarks?like his warning against the ?Jewish lobby??or on single votes he cast during his Senate career.

?No one individual vote, no one individual quote, no one individual statement defines me, my beliefs, or my record,? Hagel said in his opening remarks.

The former senator from Nebraska faces fierce opposition from some Republicans who say he would undermine America?s national security ties to Israel and does not take the threat posed by Iran?s nuclear program seriously enough. Hagel is expected to be confirmed?but not without a fight.

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told Yahoo News in an exclusive interview on Wednesday that he disagreed with Hagel on a range of issues, but he called Hagel a ?smart, capable guy? who deserves a full hearing. And even some of Hagel's most forceful opponents, like Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, have to date stopped short of vowing to filibuster his nomination.

Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the committee, charged that Hagel would promote "a worldview that is predicated on appeasing our adversaries while shunning our friends" and bluntly called him "the wrong person to lead the Pentagon at this perilous and consequential time."

In his remarks, Hagel took aim directly at some of his critics?and sought to reassure lawmakers who might be on the fence.

?I will ensure our friend and ally Israel maintains its Qualitative Military Edge in the region and will continue to support systems like Iron Dome, which is today saving Israeli lives from terrorists' rocket attacks,? he said.

"I am fully committed to the president?s goal of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and?as I?ve said in the past, many times?all options must be on the table to achieve that goal," he said, using diplomatic language that refers to the use of military force. "My policy has always been the same as the president?s?one of prevention, and not one of containment?and the president has made clear that is the policy of our government."

Hagel's years in the Senate haven't endeared him to many Republican lawmakers still smarting over his outspoken criticism of the Iraq war even after he voted to authorize the U.S. invasion. Hagel's position on the war sealed his reputation as a party outsider and led him to lend tacit support to President Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign.

Hagel has been criticized for opposing unilateral U.S. sanctions against Iran in the past?a position he now embraces?and calling for direct talks between Tehran and Washington without preconditions. He has also raised questions about his support for Israel and at one point criticized the "Jewish lobby? as having too much clout in Washington.

"Like each of you, I have a record. A record I am proud of, not because of any accomplishments I may have achieved or an absence of mistakes, but rather because I?ve tried to build that record by living my life and fulfilling my responsibilities as honestly as I knew how and with hard work," the former senator said.

"My overall worldview has never changed: that America has and must maintain the strongest military in the world; that we must lead the international community to confront threats and challenges together; and that we must use all tools of American power to protect our citizens and our interests. I believe, and always have, that America must engage?not retreat?in the world. My record is consistent on these points."

Hagel, who earned two Purple Hearts in Vietnam and still carries shrapnel in his chest, would be the first former enlisted soldier to head the Pentagon.

He was introduced by two retired senators with long careers on the committee: Democrat Sam Nunn of Georgia and Republican John Warner of Virginia. After a lengthy opening tribute, Warner got laughs from the room when he turned to Hagel and declared: "You're on your own. Good luck!"

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/hagel-don-t-judge-jewish-lobby-quote-151318895--politics.html

kevin love think like a man world peace world peace lakers colorectal cancer metta kashi