Obama to Congress: 'We Are Not a Deadbeat Nation'

President Obama says the U.S. economy is "poised for a good year" but that progress could be threatened by political brinksmanship over the nation's debt limit.

"While I'm willing to compromise and find common ground over how to reduce our deficits, America cannot afford another debate with this Congress about whether or not they should pay the bills they've already racked up," Obama said at a White House news conference.

"We are not a deadbeat nation," he said. "The consequences of us not paying our bills would be disastrous."

Lawmakers have until the end of February to raise the nation's $16.4 trillion debt limit and address the delayed $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts to defense and domestic spending.

Failure to raise the debt limit would set the stage for a U.S. default on its loan obligations or force immediate cuts to government spending that could threaten hundreds of thousands of federal employees and beneficiaries of government aid, including Social Security recipients and active-duty military personnel.

Republican congressional leaders have said they plan to use the debate on a debt-limit increase to extract spending cuts from the Obama administration. They note a legislative precedent, including most recently in 2011, of coupling the debt limit increase with deficit-reduction legislation.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Obama: Responsible Gun Owners Have Nothing to Worry About Watch Video

"The president and his allies need to get serious about spending, and the debt-limit debate is the perfect time for it," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in response to Obama's remarks.

"We are hoping for a new seriousness on the part of the president with regard to the single biggest issue confronting the country," he said. "And we look forward to working with him to do something about this huge, huge problem."

Obama says he will "not negotiate" on an increase to the debt limit, which covers spending obligations that have already been passed into law, insisting that the issue should be independent of a debate on new limits on future spending.

"The financial well-being of the American people is not leverage to be used," Obama said. "The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip."

Obama Weighs Gun Control Steps

The White House said the news conference would be Obama's last of his first term, coming six days before the inauguration and at a critical juncture in the ongoing fight with Congress on federal deficits and debt.

It also comes as Vice President Joe Biden presents Obama with his task force's recommendations for curbing gun violence in the wake of the deadly Newtown, Conn., shooting.

Obama said he has received a list of "sensible, common-sense steps" that could be taken through executive action or legislation to reduce violence and plans to give the public a "fuller presentation" later this week.

As for the surge in gun sales across the country, including in Connecticut, the president said it was a trend driven by irrational fear about what he's going to do.

"Those who oppose any common-sense gun control or gun-safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that, somehow, the federal government's about to take all your guns away," Obama said.

"And you know, there's probably an economic element to that. It obviously is good for business."

Obama said his administration has not infringed on gun rights and would continue to uphold the rights of responsible gun owners, "people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship. They don't have anything to worry about."

Read More..

Quest: U.S. economy to dominate Davos

The United States and the sorry state of its political and budgetary process will be the center of attention at Davos, writes Quest

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Quest: Davos is a chance to see where the political and economic landmines are in 2013


• Quest: People will be speculating about how dysfunctional the U.S. political process has become


• Quest: Davos has been consumed by eurozone sovereign debt crises for three years

Editor's note: Watch Quest Means Business on CNN International, 1900pm GMT weekdays. Quest Means Business is presented by CNN's foremost international business correspondent Richard Quest. Follow him on Twitter.

(CNN) -- It is that time of the year, again. Come January no sooner have the Christmas trees been taken down, as the winter sales are in full vicious flood the world of business start thinking about going to the world economic forum, better known as Davos.

For the past three years Davos has been consumed by the eurozone sovereign debt crises.

As it worsened the speculation became ever more frantic.....Will Greece leave the euro? Will the eurozone even survive? Was this all just a big German trick to run Europe? More extreme, more dramatic, more nonsense.

Can China be the biggest engine of growth for the global economy. Round and round in circles we have gone on these subjects until frankly I did wonder if there was anything else to say short of it's a horrible mess!

This year there is a new bogey man. The US and in particular the sorry state of the country's political and budgetary process will, I have little doubt, be the center of attention.

Read more: More 'cliffs' to come in new Congress

Not just because Congress fluffed its big test on the fiscal cliff, but because in doing so it created many more deadlines, any one of which could be deeply unsettling to global markets... There is the $100 billion budget cutbacks postponed for two months by the recent agreement; postponed to the end of February.

At exactly the same time as the US Treasury's ability to rob Peter to pay Paul on the debt ceiling crises comes to a head.

Read more: Both Obama, GOP set for tough talks ahead

The Treasury's "debt suspension period" is an extraordinary piece of financial chicanery that if we tried it with our credit cards would get us locked up!! Then there is the expiration of the latest continuing resolution, the authority by which congress is spending money.

There is the terrifying prospect that all these budget woes will conflate into one big political fist fight as the US faces cutbacks, default or shutdown!!

I am being alarmist. Most rational people believe that the worst sting will be taken out of this tail....not before we have all been to the edge...and back. And that is what Davos will have on its mind.

People will be speculating about how dysfunctional the US political process has become and is it broken beyond repair (if they are not asking that then they should be...)

They will be pondering which is more serious for risk...the US budget and debt crises or the Eurozone sovereign debt debacle. A classic case of between the devil and the deep blue sea.

The official topic this year is Resilient Dynamism. I have absolutely no idea what this means. None whatsoever. It is another of WEF's ersatz themes dreamt up to stimulate debate in what Martin Sorrell has beautifully terms "davosian language" In short everyone interprets it as they will.

What I will enjoy, as I do every year, is the chance to hear the global players speak and the brightest and best thinkers give us their take on the global problems the atmosphere becomes febrile as the rock-stars of finance and economics give speeches, talk on panels and give insight.

Of course comes of these musings, it never does at Davos. That's not the point. This is a chance to take stock and see where the political and economic landmines are in 2013. I like to think of Davos as the equivalent of Control/Alt/Delete. It allows us to reboot.

We leave at least having an idea of where people stand on the big issues provided you can see through the panegyrics of self congratulatory back slapping that always takes place whenever you get like minded people in one place... And this year, I predict the big issue being discussed in coffee bars, salons and fondue houses will be the United States and its budgetary woes.

Read More..

Assad's removal from power 'impossible': Russia

MOSCOW: Russia said Sunday that removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power was not part of past international agreements on the crisis and was impossible to implement.

"This is a precondition that is not contained in the Geneva communique (agreed by world powers in June) and which is impossible to implement because it does not depend on anyone," news agencies quoted Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying.

Lavrov conceded that a defiant speech Assad delivered on January 6 calling for peace in Syria on his own terms probably did not go far enough and would not appease the armed opposition.

But he also urged Assad's enemies to come out with a counterproposal that could get serious peace talks started between the two sides for the first time.

"President Assad has forwarded initiatives aimed at inviting all in the opposition to dialogue. Yes, this initiative probably does not go far enough," said Lavrov.

"They will probably not look serious to some. But these are offers. And if I were in the opposition's place, I would present my counter-ideas about establishing dialogue."

Russia on Saturday reiterated its support for a transition plan that was agreed in Geneva on June 30 but never implemented because of the fighting.

The accord is now being heavily promoted by Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN-Arab League envoy for the 21-month crisis in Syria.

The Geneva deal calls for power to be handed to an interim government but offers no clear guidance about Assad's future role.

But Moscow is deeply worried that Brahimi is getting ready to back a firmer version of the Geneva pact that specifically precludes the possibility of Assad or his closest advisers serving on the transition team.

Russia argues that only the Syrian people themselves can oust Assad through either elections or some form of negotiated settlement.

It also accuses Washington of using its armed forces more freely to depose unfriendly regimes -- a practice that Russia says breaches international law.

Western powers and Arab states -- as well as the armed opposition -- counter that the Geneva plan promoted by Brahimi can only work if Assad steps down.

Russia's firm stance comes despite a series of recent assurances by President Vladimir Putin that Moscow was not interested in propping up Assad.

Putin even noted in his annual press conference last month that he understood Syrians' impatience for change after more than 40 years of rule by the Assad family.

But Lavrov -- enjoying unparalleled access to the regime -- argued that a broader international call on Assad to step down would have no effect on the Syrian leader and would only incite further unrest.

"If you make the Syrian president's ouster the main precondition, then -- and I have said this before -- the price for this approach is new fatalities," said Lavrov.

"And those who support such an approach must bear the responsibility for it."

- AFP/jc

Read More..

Making job stress worth enduring

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta swears in reenlisting troops in Turkey. A survey found that military jobs tend to be the most stressful.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Marci Alboher: Annual list of most stressful jobs drew attention


• She says the right issue is whether job rewards compensate for stress


• People who take on stressful jobs that help others report satisfaction, she says

Editor's note: Marci Alboher, is a Vice President of Encore.org, a nonprofit making it easier for people to pursue second acts for the greater good. Her latest book is, "The Encore Career Handbook: How to Make a Difference and a Living in the Second Half of Life" (Workman: January 2013).

(CNN) -- A recent study with a catchy headline about the most stressful jobs of 2013 found its way to the soft hour of news this week.

The annual study by careercast.com created some buzz in the online water cooler and I was asked to appear on the "Today" show to talk about it. Colleagues e-mailed me and posted on my Facebook page about where their chosen professions ranked. My media friends couldn't help noticing that public relations professionals, reporters and photojournalists all made it into the top 10 for stress.

The "study," referred to in quotes in some of the commentary, considered some logical criteria to come up with these rankings. Proximity to risk of death (yours or others'), travel, deadlines, working in the public eye and physical demands all racked up points on the stress scale. And there's no arguing that military personnel, firefighters and police officers -- all high-rankers on the most-stressed list -- are exposed to higher stakes than your typical seamstress (holder of the second-least stressful job slot).

Marci Alboher

The job that snagged the "least stressful" slot, according to the survey, was "university professor," a designation that caused outrage among people who actually hold that job. One commenter conceded that most academic jobs don't put you in personal danger (though you can argue that point), but anyone who's ever been around professors knows that faculty politics, difficult students and pressure to "publish or perish" can cause even the most calm character to crack.

We could debate whether these designations make any sense. And whether every police officer, firefighter and member of the military faces the same amount of stress.

But let's make sure we are having the right conversation. How many people choose a profession based on how high the stress level is? And how can you measure stress objectively? If you're prone to stress, perhaps you're just as likely to feel stressed out whether you work as a librarian, a massage therapist or a commercial airline pilot (No. 4 on the stress list).

People choose their line of work for a lot of reasons. For those who are committed to making our communities and the world safer and healthier for the rest of us, minimizing stress is probably not so high on their list of criteria. And it shouldn't be. Folks who choose helping jobs that may have a high level of stress are fueled by other motivators, like wanting their work to have meaning.

They aren't deterred by the fact that their job will likely come with stress. And some people are simply by their own nature and personalities drawn to work that may be to others, dauntingly stressful. How many FBI agents do you think would prefer a gig as an audiologist (sixth-least stressful job)?

When I talk to men and women in their 50s and 60s who've decided to take on encore careers as teachers, they tell me that the work is often exhausting and stressful. They are on their feet all day, often with inadequate resources, with kids who are themselves highly stressed; even those who come from leadership roles in other sectors say they've never worked harder. Yet they almost always tell me that doing something that matters to others -- and that puts them in touch with young people every day -- compensates for the added stress.

The same is true of those tackling some of the world's most intractable problems. When I talk to Stephen and Elizabeth Alderman, whose foundation trains health-care professionals around the world to work with victims of trauma, or Judith Broder, who founded The Soldiers Project, which works with returning veterans, they rarely talk about stress. Instead they talk about how they are compelled to do what they do, because moving the needle even a fraction is better than doing nothing.

Rather than discouraging people to take on jobs that might have a lot of stress, let's instead encourage those who are designed for those jobs to do them. And let's make sure to support our friends and family members who go down these paths.

It's hard to grab headlines in the crowded space of morning television, but a good survey with a catchy title will always do that. So let's use these kinds of surveys to have the right kinds of conversations. Like why so many jobs that keep us safe and healthy, and that care for our children and the environment rarely show up on lists of the most highly compensated jobs. Now there's a conversation I'd most like to be having.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Marci Alboher.

Read More..

McChrystal: I regret not finishing the job in Afghanistan

(CBS News) Amid news that the White House is pushing for a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal said today on "Face the Nation" he regrets that he didn't get to finish the job there.

"I have regrets that some of the things I was responsible for, I didn't finish," he said, referring to his forced resignation in 2010 over a Rolling Stone article that quoted members of his team making disparaging remarks about President Obama. "I didn't finish the job in Afghanistan. I let down a lot of people that worked for me, 150,000 troops worked for me, the Afghan people, many of them believed deeply in me."

McChrystal said he doesn't believe the Rolling Stone piece "was particularly accurate in the way it represented my team but, you know, I was in command. And the simple elegance of command is, you assume responsibility." In his new book, "My Share of the Task," he said he chose not to devote time pointing fingers over the incident because "I'm not sure Washington needs another book like that."

Though he wouldn't comment on how many U.S. troops - if any - should remain in Afghanistan, McChrystal said while Afghan forces are "improving," they've "got a long way to go."

"When I got [to Afghanistan] in 2002, the country was physically devastated, and morally and mentally traumatized. The society was in tatters," he said. "There's been an awful lot of... progress, but Afghanistan is hard. It's always hard. If you study their history, it's complex and difficult. [Now] there are females in school, there are opportunities, there are places that are secure that were not secure just a few years ago.

"...My question on the future is what do we want in the region; this is not just a case of, al Qaeda was in Afghanistan, and now they largely are not," McChyrstal continued. "I believe Afghanistan can be stable. I think they must take responsibility for their security, the vast lion's share, but I think the strategic partnership that President Obama offered to President Karzai is critical. Not just physically. It's not how many troops and how much money, it's the idea in the minds of Afghans that they have a reliable partner."

As for former Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., who will face immediate decisions about troop levels in the region if he is confirmed as Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's replacement, McChyrstal said while he's only met him once, "I certainly have no problem with him."

Hagel, a Vietnam War veteran, "certainly has a great record, not just as a soldier, but as a senator," he said.

Read More..

Poisoned Lottery Winner's Kin Were Suspicious

Urooj Khan had just brought home his $425,000 lottery check when he unexpectedly died the following day. Now, certain members of Khan's family are speaking publicly about the mystery -- and his nephew told ABC News they knew something was not right.

"He was a healthy guy, you know?" said the nephew, Minhaj Khan. "He worked so hard. He was always going about his business and, the thing is: After he won the lottery and the next day later he passes away -- it's awkward. It raises some eyebrows."

The medical examiner initially ruled Urooj Khan, 46, an immigrant from India who owned dry-cleaning businesses in Chicago, died July 20, 2012, of natural causes. But after a family member demanded more tests, authorities in November found a lethal amount of cyanide in his blood, turning the case into a homicide investigation.

"When we found out there was cyanide in his blood after the extensive toxicology reports, we had to believe that ... somebody had to kill him," Minhaj Khan said. "It had to happen, because where can you get cyanide?"

In Photos: Biggest Lotto Jackpot Winners

Authorities could be one step closer to learning what happened to Urooj Khan. A judge Friday approved an order to exhume his body at Rosehill Cemetery in Chicago as early as Thursday to perform further tests.

Lottery Winner Murdered: Widow Questioned By Police Watch Video

Moments after the court hearing, Urooj Khan's sister, Meraj Khan, remembered her brother as the kind of person who would've shared his jackpot with anyone. Speaking at the Cook County Courthouse, she hoped the exhumation would help the investigation.

"It's very hard because I wanted my brother to rest in peace, but then we have to have justice served," she said, according to ABC News station WLS in Chicago. "So if that's what it takes for him to bring justice and peace, then that's what needs to be done."

Khan reportedly did not have a will. With the investigation moving forward, his family is waging a legal fight against his widow, Shabana Ansari, 32, over more than $1 million, including Urooj Khan's lottery winnings, as well as his business and real estate holdings.

Khan's brother filed a petition Wednesday to a judge asking Citibank to release information about Khan's assets to "ultimately ensure" that [Khan's] minor daughter from a prior marriage "receives her proper share."

Ansari may have tried to cash the jackpot check after Khan's death, according to court documents, which also showed Urooj Khan's family is questioning if the couple was ever even legally married.

Ansari, Urooj Khan's second wife, who still works at the couple's dry cleaning business, has insisted they were married legally.

She has told reporters the night before her husband died, she cooked a traditional Indian meal for him and their family, including Khan's daughter and Ansari's father. Not feeling well, Khan retired early, Ansari told the Chicago Sun-Times, falling asleep in a chair, waking up in agony, then collapsing in the middle of the night. She said she called 911.

"It has been an incredibly hard time," she told ABC News earlier this week. "We went from being the happiest the day we got the check. It was the best sleep I've had. And then the next day, everything was gone.

"I am cooperating with the investigation," Ansari told ABC News. "I want the truth to come out."

Ansari has not been named a suspect, but her attorney, Steven Kozicki, said investigators did question her for more than four hours.

Read More..

Abandoning Afghanistan a bad idea

U.S. Marines from the 3rd Battalion 8th Marines Regiment start their patrol in Helmand Province on June 27.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• White House aide suggested all U.S. troops could be withdrawn from Afghanistan


• Peter Bergen said the idea would be dangerous and send the wrong message


• He says U.S. has abandoned Afghanistan before and saw the rise of the Taliban


• Bergen: U.S. is seeking agreement that military will have immunity from prosecution

Editor's note: Peter Bergen is CNN's national security analyst and the author of "Manhunt: The Ten-Year Search for bin Laden, from 9/11 to Abbottabad."

(CNN) -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai will meet with President Barack Obama on Friday to discuss the post-2014 American presence in Afghanistan.

The U.S. military has already given Obama options under which as few as 6,000 or as many as 20,000 soldiers would remain in Afghanistan after 2014. Those forces would work as advisers to the Afghan army and mount special operations raids against the Taliban and al Qaeda.

Read more: U.S. may remove all troops from Afghanistan after 2014

Peter Bergen

But on Tuesday, Ben Rhodes, the White House's deputy national security adviser, told reporters that the Obama administration is mulling the idea of removing all U.S. troops from Afghanistan after the NATO combat mission finishes at the end of 2014.

This may be a negotiating ploy by the Obama administration as it gets down to some hard bargaining with Karzai, who has long criticized many aspects of the U.S. military presence and who is likely to be reluctant to accede to a key American demand: That any U.S. soldiers who remain in Afghanistan after 2014 retain immunity from prosecution in the dysfunctional Afghan court system. It was this issue that led the U.S. to pull all its troops out of Iraq in December, 2011 after failing to negotiate an agreement with the Nuri al-Maliki government.

Read more: Defense officials to press Karzai on what he needs

Or this may represent the real views of those in the Obama administration who have long called for a much-reduced U.S. presence in Afghanistan, and it is also in keeping with the emerging Obama doctrine of attacking al Qaeda and its allies with drones but no American boots on the ground. And it certainly aligns with the view of most Americans, only around a quarter of whom now support the war in Afghanistan, according to a poll taken in September.

Security Clearance: Afghanistan options emerge

In any case, zeroing out U.S. troop levels in the post-2014 Afghanistan is a bad idea on its face -- and even raising this concept publicly is maladroit strategic messaging to Afghanistan and the region writ large.

Why so? Afghans well remember something that most Americans have forgotten.

After the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan, something that was accomplished at the cost of more than a million Afghan lives and billions of dollars of U.S. aid, the United States closed its embassy in Afghanistan in 1989 during the George H. W. Bush administration and then zeroed out aid to one of the poorest countries in the world under the Clinton administration. It essentially turned its back on Afghans once they had served their purpose of dealing a deathblow to the Soviets.

As a result, the United States had virtually no understanding of the subsequent vacuum in Afghanistan into which eventually stepped the Taliban, who rose to power in the mid-1990s. The Taliban granted shelter to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda organization from 1996 onward.

Read more: Court considers demand that U.S. release photos of bin Laden's body

After the overthrow of the Taliban, a form of this mistake was made again by the George W. Bush administration, which had an ideological disdain for nation building and was distracted by the Iraq War, so that in the first years after the fall of the Taliban, only a few thousand U.S. soldiers were stationed in Afghanistan.

The relatively small number of American boots on the ground in Afghanistan helped to create a vacuum of security in the country, which the Taliban would deftly exploit, so that by 2007, they once again posed a significant military threat in Afghanistan.

In 2009, Obama ordered a surge of 30,000 troops into Afghanistan to blunt the Taliban's gathering momentum, which it has certainly accomplished.

Read more: Inside the Taliban

But when Obama announced the new troops of the Afghan surge, most media accounts of the speech seized on the fact that the president also said that some of those troops would be coming home in July 2011.

This had the unintended effect of signaling to the Taliban that the U.S. was pulling out of Afghanistan reasonably soon and fit into the longstanding narrative that many Afghans have that the U.S. will abandon them again.

Similarly, the current public discussion of zero U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan after 2014 will encourage those hardliner elements of the Taliban who have no interest in a negotiated settlement and believe they can simply wait the Americans out.

It also discourages the many millions of Afghans who see a longtime U.S. presence as the best guarantor that the Taliban won't come back in any meaningful way and also an important element in dissuading powerful neighbors such as Pakistan from interference in Afghanistan's internal affairs.

Read related: Afghanistan vet finds a new way to serve

Instead of publicly discussing the zero option on troops in Afghanistan after 2014, a much smarter American messaging strategy for the country and the region would be to emphasize that the Strategic Partnership Agreement that the United States has already negotiated with Afghanistan last year guarantees that the U.S. will have some form of partnership with the Afghans until 2024.

In this messaging strategy, the point should be made that the exact size of the American troop presence after 2014 is less important than the fact that U.S. soldiers will stay in the country for many years, with Afghan consent, as a guarantor of Afghanistan's stability.

The United States continues to station thousands of troops in South Korea more than five decades after the end of the Korean War. Under this American security umbrella, South Korea has gone from being one of the poorest countries in the world to one of the richest.

It is this kind of model that most Afghans want and the U.S. needs to provide so Afghanistan doesn't revert to the kind of chaos that beset it in the mid-1990s and from which the Taliban first emerged.

Read more: What's at stake for Afghan women?

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion

Read More..

Football: Everton waste chance to boost top-four bid

LIVERPOOL: Everton wasted a chance to boost their challenge for a top-four finish in the Premier League as Swansea held on for a 0-0 draw at Goodison Park on Saturday.

David Moyes' fifth-placed side would have moved within one point of fourth-placed Tottenham with a victory, but the visitors delivered a composed display to frustrate the Toffees in front of Spain coach Vicente del Bosque, who was in England to check on the form of influential Swansea forward Michu.

Del Bosque stated before Christmas that Michu will be handed a place in his squad for the friendly clash with Uruguay at the start of February, recognition for the outstanding first half of the season enjoyed by the 26-year-old.

The former Real Madrid boss will have left Merseyside equally impressed by Spanish centre-back Chico Flores and the other Swansea defenders as they kept Everton at bay.

Playing almost exclusively on the counter attack, the visitors came closest to breaking the first half deadlock when Nathan Dyer intelligently played Michu clear, threading a pass between two Everton defenders after 35 minutes.

Michu instantly attempted an audacious chip, from 20 yards, which the Everton goalkeeper Tim Howard did well to push onto his crossbar via a fingertip save.

That opening aside, the game was one of almost exclusive Everton domination, although Swansea defended the chances with relative comfort.

Steven Pienaar sent over an accurate ninth minute cross which the lively Nikica Jelavic placed just the wrong side of the left-hand post, then Leighton Baines' corner was met by a twisting header from Jelavic, with full-back Dwight Tiendalli required to clear off the Swansea line.

Just before the half hour, Ashley Williams made another goal-line clearance for the visitors, this one from Victor Anichebe's effort after Marouane Fellaini had nodded down a Phil Jagielka through-ball.

The second half opened in similar fashion with Everton midfielder Phil Neville making a rare foray close to the opposition goal and winning a corner after Michel Vorm saved his effort at the foot of his near post.

Anichebe also threatened, rising powerfully to meet a left-flank Baines corner and heading just over the Swansea goal.

Pienaar almost managed to play Jelavic clean through, at the end of a neat passing move by Everton, but Swansea's defensive organisation was first-class and the Welsh side looked well capable of ending the home side's run of having scored in 18 consecutive Premier League games.

The home crowd's growing frustration saw them join Jelavic in appealing loudly for a penalty after the forward went down following contact with Williams, an appeal which referee Phil Dowd rejected.

Seamus Coleman's deep cross from the right was headed goalwards by Jelavic and controlled by Fellaini on his chest, just two yards from the line. But the Belgian international was unable to turn and more solid defending cleared the threat.

Del Bosque had seen enough, leaving his seat in the Goodison directors' box after 77 minutes, and it proved the right call as the match petered out.

-AFP/ac

Read More..

How the holidays gave you the flu

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• David Zich: This flu season definitely ranks as one of the worst I've seen


• Zich: This outbreak is worse than average due to, more than anything, poor timing


• He says the holiday period was the perfect storm for the spread of influenza


• Zich: The peak onset of the flu coincided with a time when our immunity was down

Editor's note: David Zich, an internist and emergency physician at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, is an assistant professor of medicine at Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University.

(CNN) -- I started to see influenza-like illnesses starting roughly around mid-December, and within a week knew that 2013 was going to be a bad year. In my 12 years of practice in Chicago, this flu season definitely ranks as one of the worst I've seen. However, I also see no reason to be alarmed that we have a public health threat. What we are dealing with is a well-known virus. This outbreak is worse than average due to, more than anything, poor timing.

There are three main factors to consider in evaluating the intense flu activity across the country.

One is the virus itself. Both the medical community and the general public alike worry someday we will encounter a "superbug." We fear a virus that is extremely potent at causing disease, replicating, resisting our treatment and killing the host. Though the predominant strain this year may be slightly more potent than average based on the number of cases we are seeing, there is no indication that this virus is markedly different from what we've seen in other years.

David Zich

Opinion: Next time, get vaccinated earlier

The percentage of influenza-related deaths is not higher than in previous outbreaks. The CDC also has found no viral strains this season that are resistant to neuraminidase inhibitors, the drugs that we use to treat patients once they develop the flu. So, we need not worry too much about the virus.

The second factor to consider is the effectiveness of the flu shot. This year's flu vaccine is well matched to the strains of flu that have been circulating. According to the CDC, more than 90% of the identified viral types are covered by the current vaccine. In other words, we cannot blame an ineffective vaccine for the bad outbreak.

Finally, we need to look at environmental factors. The unusually warm weather this winter should not be contributing to the severity of the outbreak. Why? Because last year, it was also unusually warm, and at the time we hypothesized the weather was partly responsible for a milder than normal flu season. Clearly, warm weather can't both enhance and suppress the spread of influenza. Instead, we must focus on what's different from previous years.

Unlike last year, when the flu showed up late, this flu season came early. Most importantly, the peak incidence of illness happened to coincide almost exactly with the onset of the holiday season, which is critical to take into account.

If someone were trying to develop a way to disseminate an illness, he would first devise a way to weaken the population's immune system, and then bring people together to spread the disease. In essence, that is what the holiday season does.

Opinion: America flunks its health exam

Because of holiday preparations and parties, people tolerate less sleep. Stress around the holidays generally goes up. Combine those with poor eating habits and overindulgences that are typical in festive times, and the immune system gets weakened.

Once a person contracts the flu virus, he or she is contagious approximately 12 to 24 hours before the peak onset of symptoms, and is often contagious up to 24 hours after resolution of fever. During this very social time of year, many of these sick people are either tolerating their symptoms to join big groups of friends or family, or coming together honestly unaware that they are contagious. As a result, we have the perfect storm for the spread of influenza.

In sum, our flu season this year is simply a product of poor timing.

Health: Your top flu questions answered

The peak onset of the flu just happened to coincide with a period when we have weakened our immune system and congregated in large gatherings to, among other things, disseminate disease. There is no supervirus. The flu strains have been well anticipated and carry no resistance to our treatment. We have no reason to panic.

I recommend that everyone de-stress from the holiday stresses, wash their hands, eat healthy, exercise and get plenty of sleep. Stay home if you are sick. And in good time, this too shall pass.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Zich.

Read More..

France ups terror threat level after Mali strike

Last Updated 1:13 p.m. ET

PARIS The French president says the country will raise its domestic terror threat level after military action in Mali and Somalia, promising to increase protection at public buildings and transportation networks.

President Francois Hollande said Saturday he had ordered increased security after the French military operations in the two African countries against Islamist forces.

France has some of the world's most recognizable monuments and a wide-ranging national transportation network; like the U.S., it also has an organized government response if there are specific fears of a terrorist attack.

French airstrikes overnight in Mali drove back Islamic rebels from a key city and destroyed a militant command center, the French defense minister said Saturday.

The al Qaeda-linked militants, who have carved out their own territory in the lawless desert region of northern Mali over the past nine months, recently pressed closer to a major base of the Malian army, dramatically raising the stakes in the battle for the vast West African nation.

"The threat is a terrorist state at the doorstep of France and Europe," said French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian.

The French operation, which started Friday in the former French colony, came after an appeal for help from Mali's president.

A French special forces helicopter pilot was killed in the fighting, which involved hundreds of French troops and overnight airstrikes on three rebel targets, said Le Drian. He said a rebel command center outside the key city of Konna was destroyed.

A military official in Mali said Islamist militants were driven out of Konna, but that the city captured by the extremists earlier this week was not yet under government control.

"We are doing sweeps of the city to find any hidden Islamist extremist elements," said Lt. Col. Diarran Kone. "The full recovery of the city is too early to determine as we do not yet control the city, and we remain vigilant."

Sanda Abu Mohammed, spokesman for Islamist group Ansar Dine, told The Associated Press he could not confirm if his fighters were still in Konna. "I cannot tell you if our fighters are still in the city of Konna or if they are not, because since yesterday afternoon I have not had contact with them as the telephone network has been down in this zone," Mohammed said Saturday.

Al Qaeda's affiliate in Africa has been a shadowy presence for years in the forests and deserts of Mali, a country hobbled by poverty and a relentless cycle of hunger. Most Malians adhere to a moderate form of Islam.

In recent months, however, the terrorist group and its allies have taken advantage of political instability, taking territory they are using to stock weapons and train forces.

Turbaned fighters control major towns in the north, carrying out amputations in public squares just as the Taliban did. And as in Afghanistan, they are flogging women for not covering up. Since taking control of Timbuktu, they have destroyed seven of the 16 mausoleums listed as world heritage sites.

President Hollande said the "terrorist groups, drug traffickers and extremists" in northern Mali "show a brutality that threatens us all." He vowed that the operation would last "as long as necessary."

1/2

Read More..