News article:

WASHINGTON—The Senate unveiled final details of a broad tax bill—and its 10-year price tag of $858 billion—and began debate Thursday night on the package, a significant step after two years of gridlock over how to treat expiring tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush. Without action, income taxes on nearly every American are due to rise on Jan. 1.

 The Senate has moved quickly after Mr. Obama and Republican leaders unveiled the package Monday, with a key test vote now scheduled for Monday. The bill is expected to pass with support from most Senate Republicans and a substantial number of Democrats, after lawmakers agreed to extend expiring subsidies for ethanol and other alternative-energy sources. Backers now include Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.), who had been withholding support over the bill's tax cuts for upper-income taxpayers.

 House Democrats continued to voice opposition to a tax deal between the White House and Republicans on Thursday and urged leaders not to bring the agreement up for a formal vote. Jerry Seib has the latest from Washington

 But in the House, Democrats were in open revolt. In a closed-door gripe session, they chanted "Just Say No," capping a remarkable day of political theater before passing a nonbinding resolution that said the tax agreement shouldn't be considered in the House unless changes were made.

 That resolution isn't seen as a threat to the tax deal, which includes a two-year extension of current tax rates for all income brackets, not just for income up to $250,000, as Democrats want. But the rebellion represented essentially a "no confidence" vote in the White House on a crucial issue.

 Anger focused on the tax treatment of wealthier Americans and the fact that House Democratic lawmakers were frozen out of negotiations that produced the agreement. "This is not an acceptable package. We want a better deal,'' said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D., Ore.). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) suggested that she didn't want to kill the tax package, just change it. "We will continue discussions with the president and our Democratic and Republican colleagues in the days ahead to improve the proposal before it comes to the House floor for a vote," she said in a written statement.

 The rebellion among House Democrats reflected more than opposition to the legislation. It also showed the frustrations of a party bruised by heavy midterm election losses, and signaled that Mr. Obama may spark significant turbulence within his party as he tries to work with a newly empowered GOP next year. "A number of us are very frustrated. It is finally time for us to stop being spear-carriers here," Mr. DeFazio said. "It's time to tell the White House they are wrong.'' But House Democrats may have little power to change the basic framework of the tax deal.

 Republicans generally support the package, though several conservative GOP lawmakers say it will add too much to the nation's budget deficit. Michael Steel, spokesman for House Republican Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio), said: "President Obama has said that failing to stop all of the job-killing tax hikes scheduled for January 1 will have serious consequences for our economy. House Republicans agree."

 Enlarge Image Close Associated Press Obama meets with the Export Council as House Democrats rebel on taxes.

 Tax provisions in the package will cost $801 billion over 10 years, according to Congress's bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. A 13-month extension of enhanced benefits for the long-term unemployed adds $57 billion. Because the bill identifies no offsetting cuts in federal spending, the entire amount, which is close to earlier estimates, will add to the deficit.

 In unveiling the bill, the Senate added details to its treatment of inheritances. The federal tax on estates expired at the end of 2009 and is set to be reinstated from 2011 at a top rate of 55%, charged on estates over $1 million. The legislation would renew the tax at a top rate of 35% on estates over $5 million. In the bill released Thursday, the $5 million would be indexed for inflation, so it's real value wouldn't shrink over time. House Democrats want the tax to be set at a higher rate. Some are collecting signatures on a letter urging the tax be set at 45% for estates above $3.5 million.

 In a sweetener for many Democrats, the package extends a program of cash grants for wind and solar projects, as well as tax credits for energy-efficient appliances, although at reduced, pre-stimulus levels. It includes favorable tax treatment for mass-transit benefits for employees. It also includes a one-year extension of a 45-cent-a-gallon tax credit for fuel made from ethanol, a provision sought by farm-state lawmakers.

 Jim Manley, a spokesman for Mr. Reid, said the House Democrats' protest would have no impact on the bill's progress in the Senate. "This vote demonstrates they may be irrelevant to this process," said Mr. Manley. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he still believed the agreement would pass this year without substantial changes.

 —Jonathan Weisman and Patrick O'Connor contributed to this article.

 Write to Janet Hook at Janet.Hook@dowjones.com ||||| The White House and key lawmakers cleared the way Thursday night for swift Senate action to avert a Jan. 1 spike in income taxes for nearly all Americans, agreeing to extend breaks for ethanol and other forms of alternative energy as part of the deal.

 Sen. Bernard Sanders, D-Vt., heads for the Senate floor for cloture votes on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. (AP Photo/Harry Hamburg) (Associated Press)

 Budget Director Jacob Lew, second from right, gestures during a meeting of the Deficit Commission in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. From left are, Commission... (Associated Press)

 Vice President Joe Biden, left, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi talk as they leave a Democratic Caucus meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 8, 2010. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) (Associated Press)

 Tax provisions aimed at increasing production of hybrid automobiles, biodiesel fuel, energy-efficient homes, coal and energy-efficient household appliances would be extended through the end of 2011 under the bill.

 Debate on the expanded measure began almost immediately. While there is no precise timetable for passage, a test vote was set for Monday afternoon that appears likely to demonstrate overwhelmingly support for the legislation, which supporters say would help accelerate a sluggish recovery from recession.

 The events unfolded as the White House predicted that the agreement between President Barack Obama and top Republicans would clear by year's end _ even though House Democrats voted Thursday not to allow it to reach the floor without changes to scale back tax relief for the rich.

 "If it's take it or leave it, we'll leave it," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, after a closed-door meeting in which rank-and-file Democrats chanted, "Just say no."

 "The deal will get passed," said presidential press secretary Robert Gibbs. There were no predictions to the contrary among senior Democrats on either side of the Capitol.

 As announced by Obama on Monday, the deal would extend tax breaks at all income levels that are due to expire on Jan. 1, renew a program of jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed that is due to lapse within days and implement a one-year cut in Social Security taxes.

 At the insistence of Republicans, it also includes a more generous estate tax provision. That, in turn, infuriated Democrats already unhappy with Obama for agreeing to extend personal tax cuts at incomes over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples.

 The two-year cost of the plan, estimated at about $850 billion, would further swell record federal deficits.

 Despite significant criticism from fellow Democrats, Obama has said the sweeping measure is necessary to help the struggling economy recover from the worst recession in decades. With unemployment at 9.8 percent, a top White House official warned Democratic critics Tuesday they risk sending the economy back into recession if they block the measure.

 In the Senate, the emergence of bipartisan legislation also indicated progress for the White House and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., toward possible year-end passage of other major items on their agenda.

 Obama has made ratification of a new arms control treaty with Russia a top priority. The White House is also pressing Reid to try once more to end the Pentagon's 17-year ban on openly gay members of the military.

 Republicans have vowed to block action on all legislation until a tax bill and a year-end government spending bill have been resolved.

 Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has said he expects most of his rank and file to support the huge tax bill. Prominent House Republicans back it, too, although they have generally refrained from speaking out at a time when doing so would divert attention from the spectacle of Obama at odds with lawmakers of his own party.

 Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, in line to become House speaker when Republicans take power in January, "supports the framework as agreed to by" Obama and McConnell and spoke with the president about it over the weekend, a spokesman said Thursday.

 Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, whose views on economic issues are influential among House Republicans, also swung behind it. "While I have concerns with some specific aspects of the plan, I support the proposed framework to avert further economic hardship and provide a first step to restore the foundations for sustained growth and job creation," he said in an interview.

 Among the energy tax provisions added was an extension of the current 45-cent per gallon subsidy for ethanol, at a cost to the Treasury estimated at nearly $5 billion. The issue is of particular interest to lawmakers from Midwestern states with grain crops.

 The changes did nothing to ease the opposition among some critics, though. Liberal Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., attacked the measure's tax breaks for the wealthy as a threat to the middle class.

 The energy-related tax provisions will presumably increase support for the measure in the House, officials said Democrats there are eager to see a scaling back of a provision that would allow estates as large as $5 million escape taxation.

 Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, "That was a bridge too far for many of our members" already upset about Obama's decision to bow to Republican demands for extending tax cuts on individuals making over $200,000 and couples earning more than $250,000.

 Under the estate tax provision, the first $5 million of a couple's estate could pass to heirs without taxation, and an additional $5 million for the spouse. The balance would be subject to a 35 percent tax rate.

 According to a Tax Policy Center estimate based on census data, that would mean only about 3,500 estates would be liable for taxes in 2011, out of more than 2.5 million forecast to be filed. Barring legislation, about 44,000 estates would be subjected to taxation in 2011, the groups said.

 Some Democratic officials suggested a relatively minor change to the estate tax portion of the Obama-GOP deal might assuage critics of the plan. If accepted, however, it could come at a price in the form of additional concessions to Republicans, several officials said.

 Vice President Joe Biden has told Democrats in closed-door meetings this week that they are free to oppose the agreement but it might unravel if they do, according to officials familiar with the discussions.

 Whatever the disagreement over the economic wisdom of renewing tax cuts for the wealthy, the legislation also marks the emergence of a new era of divided government following midterm elections in which the Republicans won power in the House and gained seats in the Senate.

 Privately, several House Democrats complained that the White House had not consulted them while negotiating a deal with McConnell.

 The House passed a measure last week that would have let the tax cuts lapse at higher incomes, but Senate Republicans blocked it on Saturday _ with the knowledge the president had already agreed he was ready to sign a measure that was more to their liking.

 Democrats and Republicans have spent two years gridlocked over the question of extending the expiring tax cuts, and Obama has characterized his compromise with Republicans as a temporary, two-year concession on a policy he opposes.

 House and Senate Democrats debated privately in the weeks before the elections whether to hold votes on the issue. They decided not to at that time after lawmakers who were seeking re-election said they would prefer not to have go on record if it meant Republicans would attack them for raising taxes on small businesses.

 ___

 Associated Press writers Charles Babington and Stephen Ohlemacher contributed to this report. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– The Senate voted to begin debate on a bill based on Barack Obama’s tax cut deal last night, with the final vote expected to be held Monday. The Senate’s version of the bill will add $858 billion to the deficit over 10 years, the Wall Street Journal reports. Though the bill largely follows the White House outline, lawmakers tacked on an extension of subsidies for ethanol and alternative energy sources to sweeten the deal for Democrats. The previously-reticent Harry Reid is now behind the bill, and predicts it'll pass with nearly all Republicans and many Democrats supporting it. The House, on the other hand, is in open revolt; yesterday, in a closed-door session, Democrats were actually chanting “Just Say No,” as they voted against bringing the proposal to the floor. "If it's 'take it or leave it,' we'll leave it," one Democrat told the AP. But a Reid spokesman had this to say about the House: “This vote demonstrates they may be irrelevant to this process."


Summarize this article:

The seed for Wide00014 was:

 - Slash pages from every domain on the web:

 -- a ranking of all URLs that have more than one incoming inter-domain link (rank was determined by number of incoming links using Wide00012 inter domain links)

 -- up to a maximum of 100 most highly ranked URLs per domain

 - Top ranked pages (up to a max of 100) from every linked-to domain using the Wide00012 inter-domain navigational link graph ||||| The Other Guys (2010)

 Is it possible to run a bait-and-switch scam in reverse? I can’t think of another way to describe the odd trick pulled off by “The Other Guys,” a new goofballs-and-fireballs comedy directed by Adam McKay . The closing credit sequence is, in effect, a tease for a movie quite different from the one that has just concluded.

 Bold, brightly colored charts and graphs fill the screen with enraging data about bloated chief-executive bonuses, billion-dollar bank bailouts, Ponzi schemes and other entries in the encyclopedia of modern financial infamy. Looking at these shocking numbers in isolation, you might be tempted to think that you had just watched an angry populist satire skewering the powerful and the privileged. But such topical provocation has been missing from commercial American comedy for a very long time, and “The Other Guys” is no exception. Its plot does feature a devious equity-fund manager (played by the reliable British weasel-for-hire Steve Coogan) and a Wall Street vixen, but the plot is neither the movie’s point nor its most memorable feature.

 Instead, Mr. McKay plays to his strengths and those of his frequent collaborator and the movie’s star, Will Ferrell. In other words, “The Other Guys” is most authentically itself when it indulges in a free-form but nonetheless highly disciplined silliness that has the effect of dissolving, rather than piquing, whatever worldly anger or frustration you may be harboring. Once again, and for the first time in a while, Mr. Ferrell uses his big body, his quick mind and his infinitely fungible voice to yoke disparate and ridiculous traits into a brand new and yet instantly archetypal comic character.

 Allen Gamble, Mr. Ferrell’s mild-mannered, desk-bound police detective, lacks the pompous aggression of Ron Burgundy in “Anchorman,” the aw-shucks aggression of Ricky Bobby in “Talladega Nights” or the infantile aggression of Brennan Huff in “Step Brothers” (all directed by Mr. McKay). Instead, he is aggressively, ostentatiously, explosively passive — a combustible milquetoast. Gamble is timid, gullible, irresistible to gorgeous women and yet oblivious to their interest. He makes no sense at all, except in the absurd context of the movie’s craziest moments.

 Gamble’s foil is Terry Hoitz, an unlucky detective played by Mark Wahlberg, who looks like an inflamed bantam rooster next to Mr. Ferrell’s timorous ostrich. Actually, the two of them supply a more vivid — if less comprehensible — zoological metaphor in the film’s funniest scene, a rhetorical sparring match in which lions battle tunas for animal-kingdom supremacy.

 When it operates in this nonsensical zone of verbal riffing and broad slapstick (the most inspired example of which is a brawl at a funeral conducted in respectful whispers), “The Other Guys” provides some pretty good laughs. Dwayne Johnson and Samuel L. Jackson make fun of their action-hero personae and then step aside to let Mr. Ferrell and Mr. Wahlberg do their thing. Those two are gracious enough to cede a little room to Michael Keaton, as the leathery precinct captain, and to Rob Riggle and Damon Wayans Jr., as Gamble and Hoitz’s obnoxious squad room rivals. ||||| You searched for: [X]The Other Guys

 [X]Sunday, August 8 Start over

 Now Showing… Movie title Select a movie 100 Voices: A Journey Home Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein Albert Schweitzer Beauty and the Beast Sing-a-Long Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Black History: Lost and Found The Blind Side Blue Hawaii Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore 3D Charlie St. Cloud Cinderella - Live Clambake Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs Clue Coco Chanel & Igor Stravinsky The Concert Countdown to Zero Cuba: An African Odyssey Cyrus DCI 2010: Big, Loud & Live 7 Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid Despicable Me Despicable Me 3D Dinner for Schmucks Don't Think About It Eat Pray Love Elvis: Aloha From Hawaii The Exorcist Director's Cut Event The Expendables Farewell Fingers 48 Hour Film Project Four Seasons Lodge G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra Get Him to the Greek Get Low The Girl Who Played With Fire The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo Grown Ups Hancock The Harder They Come How to Train Your Dragon Hubble 3D I Am Love Inception Inception: The IMAX Experience India of K-Town Inglourious Basterds Invictus Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work The Kids Are All Right Kung Fu Panda Ladies and Gentlemen, the Rolling Stones The Last Airbender Libertador Morales, El Justiciero Life During Wartime The Littlest Rebel The Longshots Made in L.A. A Matter of Principles Metropolis Middle Men Mingus More of Loesser Moulin Rouge My American Nurse 2 The Nature of Existence New Muslim Cool Ondine The Other Guys Our Daily Bread Our Man Flint Over and Over Again Pee-wee's Big Adventure The Penalty Petropolis Please Give Poor Little Rich Girl Predators Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time Ramona and Beezus The Red Machine Restrepo RiffTrax Live: Reefer Madness Rubin and Ed Rude Boy Salt The School of Rock Searching for Bobby Fischer The Secret in Their Eyes Sex and the City 2 Sherlock Holmes Shorts Small Fish Solitary Man The Sorcerer's Apprentice Spoken Word Step Up 3 Step Up 3D Stonewall Uprising Taking the Heat: The First Women Firefighters of New York City Terror in the Aisles 6 Terror of the Mad Doctor The Thousand Eyes of Dr. Mabuse Top Gun Toy Story 3 Toy Story 3 3D Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen Twelve The Twilight Saga: Eclipse The Twilight Saga: New Moon UFC 118: Edgar vs. Penn 2 Wet Hot American Summer Where the Wild Things Are The Wildest Dream: Conquest of Everest Will You Marry Us? Winter's Bone

 Theater/Venue Select a location 600 N. Michigan Augusta Park Bank of America Cinema Beverly Arts Center Century 12 and CineArts 6 Chicago Cultural Center Chicago Filmmakers Chicago History Museum Churchill Field Playlot Park Cicero ShowPlace 14 City North 14 Clarendon Park Clark (John) Park Crown Village 18 Cutting Hall Davis Delilah's Dunbar Park DuSable Museum of African American History Facets Cinematheque Ford City Foster Park Fulton River District Gardens 1-6 Gardens 7-13 Gene Siskel Film Center Harrison Park Highland Park Indian Boundary Park Joseph Smith Park Kosciuszko Park Lake Landmark's Century Centre Lincoln Park, Cricket Hill Lincoln Park Cultural Center Logan Lorraine Dixon Park Moore Park Music Box Navy Pier IMAX New 400 Niles ShowPlace 12 Norridge Northbrook Public Library Pickwick Pipers Alley Portage Renaissance Place River East 21 Schreiber Playground Park Showplace 14 - Galewood Crossings ShowPlace ICON Skinner Park South Shore Cultural Center Tilton Park Tivoli Touhy Park Trebes Park Univ. of Chicago Doc Films the Vic Webster Place 11 Wilmette Theatre Winnemac Park

  ||||| A desk-jockey detective and his tough-talking partner get their moment to shine in this buddy police comedy starring Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg, and directed by Adam McKay (Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby). New York City detective Allen Gamble (Ferrell) is more comfortable pushing pencils than busting bad guys. A meticulous forensic accountant, his numbers are never off. Detective Terry Hoitz (Wahlberg) is Gamble's reluctant partner. Try as Detective Hoitz might to get back on the streets, an embarrassing encounter with Derek Jeter has left a sizable black mark on his permanent record. Detectives Danson (Dwayne Johnson) and Highsmith (Samuel L. Jackson) are the complete opposites of Gamble and Hoitz: unwaveringly confident, they always get their man, and they do it with style to spare. When the time comes for Gamble and Hoitz to prove their mettle and save the day, their incompetence becomes the stuff of legend. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi ||||| Starting in 1996, Alexa Internet has been donating their crawl data to the Internet Archive. Flowing in every day, these data are added to the Wayback Machine after an embargo period. |||||

– Despite a few reviewers who think it’s basically an extended Saturday Night Live sketch, The Other Guys snagged a high score on the Tomatometer—and some are calling the Will Ferrell/Mark Wahlberg cop comedy the funniest movie of 2010: If you’re tired of Ferrell's typical “clueless blowhard,” never fear: director Adam McKay “shrewdly varies the formula," making Ferrell the “square” and Wahlberg the “aspiring alpha dog,” writes Joe Williams in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. “The Other Guys is the funniest movie of the year.” Ferrell and McKay "have collaborated on three other movies, but they've never been so slyly funny as they are in The Other Guys, a buddy-cop satire so hilarious that even longtime Ferrell haters (me) can't resist it,” admits Connie Ogle in the Miami Herald. “The humor is that rare perfect balance of broad and satiric.” Fun cameos include “Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson in a hilarious send-up of badass cops,” and Michael Keaton, who nearly steals the show “as an emasculated police captain moonlighting as a retail store manager,” writes Joshua Katzman in the Chicago Reader. Rather than a full-length film, “the movie’s best bits would stand alone nicely on YouTube, or on Funnyordie.com, the comic video boutique of which Mr. McKay is an owner and where he sometimes dabbles in short-form hilarity,” writes AO Scott in the New York Times.


Article:

Hilary Rosen, a Democratic operative with SKD Knickerbocker, touched off a Twitter storm tonight after she went on CNN and said that Ann Romney has "never worked a day in her life."

 The statement was tweeted and retweeted, with a number of people condemning the statement as an attack on the candidate's wife, who was a stay-at-home mom who also raised the couple's five boys, and who has suffered from MS and breast cancer.

 Ann Romney, who is widely praised as her husband's most effective surrogate, took to Twitter herself for her first-ever post, saying, "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work."

 (See also: 10 things about Hillary Rosen)

 A number of people leapt to her defense, and President Obama's campaign manager Jim Messina and top adviser David Axelrod tweeted out disavowals of a statement that seemed insensitive to stay-at-home moms and sounded like a devaluation of what Ann Romney's life was like.

 “I could not disagree with Hilary Rosen any more strongly. Her comments were wrong and family should be off limits. She should apologize,” Messina tweeted.

 "Also Disappointed in Hilary Rosen's comments about Ann Romney. They were inappropriate and offensive," Axelrod tweeted.

 Rosen's firm also employs Anita Dunn, former White House communications director, and worked on the Obama campaign in 2008. Her critics on Twitter described her as an "Obama adviser," just a bit of a stretch in description, but not enough of one for some critics, especially after Democrats have hit Republicans for guilt by association with people like Rush Limbaugh for months.

 Regardless, Rosen doubled down — tweeting back at Ann Romney, "I am raising children too. But most young American women HAVE to BOTH earn a living AND raise children. You know that don't u?"

 Earlier, she tweeted in her own defense, "When I said @AC360 Ann Romney never worked I meant she never had to care for her kids AND earn a paycheck like MOST American women! # Truth"

 And she went further in a Huffington Post blog item, saying Mitt Romney has to stop hiding behind his wife's "skirt," and condemned the "faux outrage" from the right.

 Ann Romney, according to Dylan Byers, will be on Fox News tomorrow morning, giving the issue fresh life. And Ann Romney is known for giving strong interviews. Her husband is also guaranteed to be asked about it — and if the perception is she is being unfairly attacked, he will have won the cycle, and potentially many more to come. For Romney, who polls show facing a large gender gap with women and who has been trying to move away from social issues conversations, it could help him.

 The flip side is that Rosen's comments are now getting oxygen beyond the Twitterverse (and the CNN-verse), letting Democrats underscore, without doing much to push it out themselves, the notion that Ann Romney, whose husband was a success in business, may not have had a life similar to some swing voters' lives, despite how hard she worked raising her kids.

 Also worth noting — Messina's line that family should be "off limits." Given the criticisms that Michele Obama has received over the years, it seems likely that Rosen's comment will be highlighted by Democrats if something comes up in the future.

 UPDATE: Rosen appears to have rewritten her Huffington Post blog post last night; the line about Romney hiding behind his wife's skirt is no longer there, and now the column mirrors one that ran on CNN's website. ||||| 7 years ago

 (CNN) - Democratic Strategist Hilary Rosen generated instant bipartisan criticism Wednesday night for her statement that Ann Romney has "actually never worked a day in her life."

 The reaction on Twitter from high level politicos was instant and virtually unanimous: Rosen had gone too far.

 - Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

 Rosen: Ann Romney and working moms

 Rosen's comment also prompted Ann Romney herself to make her twitter debut.

 "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys," Romney tweeted. "Believe me, it was hard work."

 Rosen, also a CNN political contributor and a working mother, made her comments on CNN's "AC360."

 "What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country, saying, 'Well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when I listen to my wife, that's what I'm hearing.' Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life," Rosen said.

 "She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing, in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and why do we worry about their future," Rosen continued, adding that Romney "just seems so old fashioned when it comes to women."

 Her comments drew instant criticism on Twitter from campaign advisers on both sides of the aisle, as well as one of Romney's sons.

 Josh Romney posted that his mother "is one of the smartest, hardest working woman I know. Could have done anything with her life, chose to raise me."

 The senior adviser to President Barack Obama's reelection bid also took to Twitter to distance the campaign from the comments.

 "Also Disappointed in Hilary Rosen's comments about Ann Romney," David Axelrod wrote. "They were inappropriate and offensive."

 Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter posted, "Families must be off limits on campaigns, and I personally believe stay at home moms work harder than most of us do."

 Several press aides to Romney's campaign - Andrea Saul, Ryan Williams, and Amanda Henneberg - posted links tying Obama to Rosen, such as her appointment as a DNC adviser and her appearance at a White House event.

 Romney campaign strategist Eric Fehrnstrom wrote: "Obama adviser Hilary Rosen goes on #CNN to debut their new "kill Ann" strategy, and in the process insults hard-working moms."

 Eric Erickson, a CNN political contributor and editor of a conservative website, appeared on the same panel as Rosen, and tweeted, "If raising 5 sons through breast cancer and MS isn't a real job, I'm not sure what is."

 The comment drew criticism from a Republican member of Congress, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, who posted, "Wrong. Being a mom is a full-time job."

 Rosen explained her comments in a post on the social networking site.

 "When I said @AC360 Ann Romney never worked I meant she never had to care for her kids AND earn a paycheck like MOST American women! #Truth," she wrote.

 She later posted a direct comment to Romney.

 "Please know, I admire you. But your husband shouldn't say you are his expert on women and the economy."

 Also see:

 Romney on Santorum: 'This has been a good day for me'

 Louisiana governor endorses Romney

 Crossroads GPS to drop $1.7 million against Obama ||||| My Twitter feed was on fire after an appearance last night on CNN's AC360, where I said that I thought it was wrong for Mitt Romney to be using his wife as his guide to women's economic struggles when she "had never worked a day in her life." Oh my, you should read the tweets and the hate mail I got after that. The accusations were flying. I don't know what it means to be a mom (I have 2 children). I obviously don't value the work that a mother does and how hard it is (the hardest job I have ever had); and I absolutely hate anyone who doesn't have the same views as I do (hate is a strong word).

 Spare me the faux anger from the right who view the issue of women's rights and advancement as a way to score political points. When it comes to supporting policies that would actually help women, their silence has been deafening. I don't need lectures from the RNC on supporting women and fighting to increase opportunities for women; I've been doing it my whole career. If they want to attack me and distract the public's attention away from their nominee's woeful record, it just demonstrates how much they just don't get it.

 My favorite tweet was from someone who said that Republicans like Ann Romney so much more than Mitt that by attacking her (which I didn't), I got people to defend him in a way they never would.

 That last one I can actually understand.

 Now let's be clear on one thing. I have no judgements about women who work outside the home vs. women who work in the home raising a family. I admire women who can stay home and raise their kids full-time. I even envy them sometimes. It is a wonderful luxury to have the choice. But let's stipulate that it is NOT a choice that most women have in America today.

 Why does this even matter? It matters purely because Mitt Romney put the issue of his wife's views squarely on the table.

 As Ruth Marcus noted in her column yesterday in the Washington Post, Romney, when asked last week about the gender gap, twice said he wished his wife could take the question.

 "My wife has the occasion, as you know, to campaign on her own and also with me," Romney told newspaper editors, "and she reports to me regularly that the issue women care about most is the economy."

 So it begs the question, is Ann Romney Mitt's touchstone for women who are struggling economically or not? Nothing in Ann Romney's history as we have heard it -- hardworking mom she may have been -- leads me to believe that Mitt has chosen the right expert to get feedback on this problem he professes to be so concerned about.

 I have nothing against Ann Romney. She seems like a nice lady who has raised nice boys, struggled with illness, and handles its long-term effects with grace and dignity. I admire her grit in talking about her illness publicly.

 What is more important to me and 57% of current women voters is her husband saying he supports women's economic issue because they are the only issues that matter to us and then he fails on even those.

 Let's put aside for a moment his views on women's health issues -- such as his pledge to repeal funding for Planned Parenthood or repeal title X -- which provides important health services for poor women, and true anecdotes (such as when he was a Bishop in his church, he actually went to a congregant's hospital room and told a young single mother who had just given birth that she was shaming the church and should give her baby away). Let's put those issues of respect and health dignity away.

 Let's just focus on his economic record on behalf of women. When Romney ran Bain Capital, less than 10% of the senior workforce were women. And he said in his 1994 Senate race that it was because he had trouble finding qualified women to be executives. Is there a woman alive who believes that? I personally believe that women hate the way our health issues were made a political football by the Republicans in the last several months. But I am pragmatic enough to believe that the economic issues do matter greatly to women and men alike. But the only way that Mitt Romney will succeed in closing the wide gender gap between him and President Obama is if he stops pretending that it doesn't exist.

 Follow Hilary Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hilaryr |||||
What is a summary?

– Democratic operative Hilary Rosen set off a Twitter tempest yesterday when she said on CNN that Ann Romney has "actually never worked a day in her life," making her a poor adviser on women's economic issues. The backlash was fierce, Politico reports. Ann Romney joined Twitter to respond, using her first tweet to say, "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work." But the condemnation was bipartisan; Obama campaign director Jim Messina said he "could not disagree with Hilary Rosen any more strongly," while David Axelrod said he was "disappointed" by her comments. But Rosen hasn't backed down. "Spare me the faux anger," she wrote on the Huffington Post. She explained that she had nothing against stay-at-home moms, but "that is NOT a choice that most women have in America today."


Write a summary based on this article:

DINERS in a busy cafe watched as movie idol Ewan McGregor and actress Mary Elizabeth Winstead sat deep in conversation, shared a passionate kiss — then left on his motorbike.

 Married Trainspotting star Ewan, 46, spent more than an hour at the fashionable establishment with Mary Elizabeth, 32, who plays his lover in US telly show Fargo.

 The Sun 17 Married actor Ewan McGregor shares a passionate kiss with his on-screen lover in a busy London cafe

 And fellow customers at The Good Life Eatery in St John’s Wood, North West London, insisted the pair appeared comfortable together.

 One said: “Ewan and Mary Elizabeth were there together and seemed relaxed in each other’s company.

 "There’s always lots of celebrities around in that area.

 “The cafe was really busy with people including delivery drivers coming in and out the whole time.

 The Sun 17 American actress Mary Elizabeth, 32, sits down next to her co-star and places her left hand on his cheek

 The Mega Agency 17 Ewan sits in the West London cafe looking up at his Fargo co-star

 “You cannot reserve a table in there and have to go to the counter to order food, so people are up and down constantly.

 “They were deep in conversation and were there together for more than an hour. As they left she got on to the back of Ewan’s motorbike and they sped off together.”

 US actress Mary Elizabeth announced her split from husband Riley Stearns in May while Ewan, 46 — who played Obi-Wan Kenobi in the Star Wars movie prequels — has been married since 1995.

 In recent months he and French wife Eve Mavrakis, 51, have posted pictures of themselves without their wedding rings on their public social media sites.

 Getty - Contributor 17 Ewan, 46, with his French wife Eve Mavrakis, 51, at an LA gala last November

 AFP 17 The pair have been married since 1995 and have four children together

 Mary Elizabeth met Ewan as they starred together on crime show Fargo and — in one episode — the pair were seen sharing a steamy bath scene.

 Both had joined the FX Network cult hit for its third series, filmed on location in Calgary, Canada.

 In the programme, Mary Elizabeth plays femme fatale Nikki Swango — a recently-released prisoner.

 Her character enjoys an affair with probation officer Ray Stussy, portrayed by Ewan, who also appears as Stussy’s twin brother Emmit.

 Talking about her character in an interview, Mary Elizabeth said previously: “This is a very interesting person with a complicated moral compass.”

 Ray Collins - The Sun 17 Onlookers who saw Ewan and Mary Elizabeth smooch said the pair looked comfortable around each other at The Good Life Eatery in St John's Wood, North West London

 Planet Photos 17 The pair play lovers Ray Stussy and Nikki Swango in cult US show Fargo

 Planet Photos 17 The pair embrace each other while filming a racy bath scene

 Getty - Contributor 17 Mary Elizabeth split from her husband and teenage sweetheart Riley Stearns in May

 The programme was shot between the end of last year and the beginning of this year and was screened in the US between April and June.

 Ewan and Mary Elizabeth sat next to each other at a Fargo cast dinner at the end of March.

 And the actress told in an interview with Time Magazine how the show’s director Noah Hawley assured her that her screen character’s feelings for Ray Stussy were genuine.

 She added: “Once I knew that their love was real, then I was able to really move forward with this sort of sweet, bubbly, optimistic version of a femme fatale.”

 2017 Invision 17 Onlookers said Ewan was deep in conversation with Mary Elizabeth for over an hour in the cafe

 Getty - Contributor 17 Mary Elizabeth jumped on the back of Ewan's motorbike after the kiss

 Getty Images - Getty 17 She met the married star while filming the third series of the US crime drama last year

 Getty - Contributor 17 Ewan and his wife have been red-carpet regulars

 Mary Elizabeth — a distant relative of Hollywood screen siren Ava Gardner — announced her separation from 31-year-old Riley, her teenage sweetheart, five months ago.

 Writing on her Instagram page, she told fans: “We’ve decided to move on from our marriage, but we will stay best friends and collaborators for all our days.

 “We are still ride or die, just in a different way now. I love you always, Riley.”

 But in June Riley closed his Twitter account saying: “Keep almost tweeting stuff I shouldn’t so I am saying bye for a while.”

 Druggie Renton sent him sky-high By Michael Hamilton EWAN McGregor’s first TV role was as a 22-year-old in the 1993 mini-series Lipstick on Your Collar. He starred in Danny Boyle’s film Shallow Grave a year later. But it was his role as druggie Mark Renton in Boyle’s 1996 classic Trainspotting which rocketed him to superstardom.

 The Scot, born in Crieff, Perthshire, said: “I think it’s a brilliant movie and a very important one for me. It was the one that put me in the public eye more than any of the others.”

 Offers poured in, including the part of Obi-Wan Kenobi in Star Wars: Episode 1 – The Phantom Menace in 1999. He also has a clutch of theatre performances under his belt, including Shakespeare’s Othello.

 The star, who quit booze in 2000, moved to California with wife Eve in 2008.

 But he returned to Scotland for the Trainspotting sequel released this year.

 Ewan and Eve’s eldest daughter Clara — a model — was born in February 1996, the same month that the Scottish actor’s breakthrough film Trainspotting was released.

 Earlier this year, Ewan and Eve were pictured on a night out at a tenpin bowling alley in New York.

 In July 2015 they were pictured together at the Serpentine Gallery’s summer party in London’s Hyde Park.

 Stay Still 17 Ewan nabbed his first TV role in the 1993 mini-series Lipstick On Your Collar when he was 22

 Alamy 17 Ewan made his big break in Danny Boyle's hit cult film Trainspotting back in 1996

 Getty - Contributor 17 His oldest daughter Clara was born in the same month of his big breakthrough

 Lucas Films 17 Ewan played Obi-Wan Kenobi in the Star Wars movie prequels

 Mary Elizabeth has been seen in a series of horror flicks, but is most famous for her role as Lucy in Die Hard.

 She also appeared in oddball comedy Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and Smashed, a sombre drama about alcoholism.

 The actress, who is from North Carolina, hit the headlines in 2014 when she became a victim of the iCloud hack.

 The incident saw intimate photos taken for her husband leaked online.

 Hilarious scene from TV show Fargo where Ray proposes to Nikki before they film a sex tape ||||| After 22 years of marriage and four children together, actor Ewan McGregor and his wife Eve Mavrakis have called it quits.

 A family source confirms to PEOPLE that the couple has been separated since May — amid news that McGregor was spotted kissing his costar Mary Elizabeth Winstead. A rep for McGregor did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for additional comment.

 Get push notifications with news, features and more.

 Ben Gabbe/Getty Images

 On Sunday, photos of the Trainspotting and Star Wars actor, 46, kissing his Fargo costar, 32, at a West London cafe were published by The Sun. Afterwards, the pair were seen leaving together on his motorbike.

 In February, Winstead shared a photo with McGregor on her Instagram with the caption, “Pretty lovely Canadian Sunday. Good night!”

 RELATED VIDEO: Ewan McGregor: Being Sexy Is a Lot of Work

 Winstead split from her own husband, Riley Stearns, in May. They were married in 2010.

 McGregor met Mavrakis on the set of the British TV crime series Kavanagh QC and they were married in 1995.

 Mavrakis is a production designer who was born in France and raised in China. She also served as production interpreter on the Chinese set of Steven Spielberg’s 1987 movie Empire of the Sun.

 The couple have four daughters together: Clara, 21, Jamyan, 16, Esther, 15 and Anouk, 6. ||||| The all new "true crime" case of Fargo's new chapter travels back to 1979 in Sioux Falls, South Dakota and Luverne, Minnesota, where a young State Police Officer Lou Solverson, recently back from Vietnam, investigates a case involving a local crime gang and a major Mob syndicate. Helping him piece things together is his father-in-law, Sheriff Hank Larsson. The investigation will lead them to a colorful cast of characters that includes Karl Weathers, the town lawyer of Luverne, Minnesota. A Korean War vet, Karl is a flowery drunk blessed with the gift of gab and the eloquence of a true con artist. Joe Bulo, the front man for the northern expansion of a Kansas City crime syndicate. The new face of corporate crime, Joe's bringing a Walmart mentality to small town America. His number two is Mike Milligan. Part enforcer, part detective, Mike is always smiling - but the joke is usually on you. Bulo and his crew have their sights set on the Gerhardt crime family in Fargo, currently led by ... Written by FX Networks |||||

– Ewan McGregor and his wife of 22 years have split, People reports. The news came Sunday after the Sun published photos of McGregor, 46, kissing his Fargo co-star Mary Elizabeth Winstead, 32, in a busy London café. A customer tells the tabloid the pair seemed "relaxed" together and were "deep in conversation" for more than an hour. "As they left she got on to the back of Ewan’s motorbike and they sped off together," the customer says. The US actress split from her husband of seven years, Riley Stearns, in May, per The Sun. That was the same month a family source tells People the Star Wars star split from French wife Eve Mavrakis, 51, a production designer. The pair met on the set of the British TV series Kavanagh QC and have four daughters, Clara, 21, Jamyan, 16, Esther, 15, and Anouk, 6. The splits follow other high-profile breakups: Fergie and Josh Duhamel called it quits in September, weeks after Amber Heard and Elon Musk.


VATICAN CITY — Ban Ki-moon arrived at the Vatican with his own college of cardinals. Mr. Ban, the United Nations secretary general, had brought the leaders of all his major agencies to see Pope Francis, a show of organizational muscle and respect for a meeting between two global institutions that had sometimes shared a bumpy past but now had a mutual interest.

 The agenda was poverty, and Francis inveighed against the “economy of exclusion” as he addressed Mr. Ban’s delegation at the Apostolic Palace. But in an informal meeting with Mr. Ban and his advisers, Francis shifted the discussion to the environment and how environmental degradation weighed heaviest on the poor.

 “This is the pope of the poor,” said Robert Orr, who attended the May 2014 meeting as Mr. Ban’s special adviser on climate change and described the informal conversation with Francis. “The fact that he is making the link to the planet is really significant.”

 On Thursday, Francis will release his first major teaching letter, known as an encyclical, on the theme of the environment and the poor. Given the pope’s widespread popularity, and his penchant for speaking out on major global issues, the encyclical is being treated as a milestone that could place the Roman Catholic Church at the forefront of a new coalition of religion and science. ||||| CLOSE Shannon Green and Gregg Zoroya discuss the encyclical from Pope Francis to be issued by the Vatican on Thursday, June 18, and the excitement it engenders among climate scientists. USA TODAY

 Pope Francis encyclical on the environment is due to be released Thursday (Photo: Alessandra Tarantino, AP)

 Corrections & Clarifications: A previous version of this article misstated Pope Francis' chemistry education. He studied chemistry and worked as a chemist prior to attending the seminary.

 Scientists weary after years of often vicious opposition by doubters of their climate-change findings see this year as crucial to the planet's future because of a religious document expected from Pope Francis on Thursday.

 The rare encyclical, or teaching letter, expected to promote climate action as a moral imperative could do more to slow global warming than international negotiations this year to limit greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say.

 "The encyclical is going to go out to over 1 billion Catholics — that's a way of getting a message across to a segment of society that the scientific community could never do," said an excited Jeff Kiehl with the National Center for Atmospheric Research. "I mean it's just unbelievable."

 "I'm not a religious person at all," said Gavin Schmidt, a NASA climatologist. But he sees faith-based efforts to shift thinking on climate action as very promising.

 "The pope's encyclical is probably going to have a bigger impact than the Paris negotiations," he said.

 The 21st United Nations conference on climate change, which is set for December in Paris with more than 190 countries, hopes to reach agreement on emissions that would keep further warming of the planet less than 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, beyond global temperature at the time of the Industrial Revolution.

 Catholic leaders expressed hope last week that the encyclical will transcend partisan fighting over the causes of climate change, arguments that have stymied efforts in the U.S. Congress and elsewhere to reduce greenhouse emissions.

 "This encyclical is aimed at everyone," Pope Francis said Sunday. "Let us pray that everyone can receive its message and grow in responsibility toward the common home that God has entrusted to us."

 He said Friday that to show unity of purpose, the document will be unveiled by three people: a Catholic cardinal, a Christian Orthodox church leader and a climate scientist the Vatican identified as an atheist.

 The pope, who studied chemistry and worked as a chemist before entering the seminary, has a history of environmental concern. He said in January that science is largely settled on the causes of climate change and that greater stewardship of God's creation is necessary.

 "Mostly, in great part, it is man who has slapped nature in the face," he said.

 There has already been push back from conservative Catholic religious writers and figures such as Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who is Catholic, accusing the pope of being alarmist.

 "The church has gotten it wrong a few times on science, and I think that we probably are better off leaving science to the scientists," Santorum recently told a radio-talk show host. "When we get involved with political and controversial scientific theories, then I think the church is probably not as forceful and credible."

 Scientists, however, applaud the pope for urging moral choices in a discussion dominated by the recitation — or among deniers, the misrepresentation — of facts.

 "Many people have this rosy view that there's this knowledge deficit, and that if we just provided more information or if we explain the science better or if we package it better, maybe with colored graphics, or write another scientific paper, that will be the one to convince (doubters)," said climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe of Texas Tech University.

 "But the reality is it's not a scientific issue (any longer). It is an ideological issue. We have to appeal to people based on values. Not just on data and facts. And for me as a scientist to say that is very unusual," Hayhoe said. "So from that perspective the pope is a very effective messenger."

 Scientists say that some predicted changes such as a warming Arctic, rising sea levels, more intense heat waves, extreme snow and rain storms and animal or plant extinctions are happening faster than anticipated. Frustration over a lack of response by the federal government has been growing.

 A website created by Australian science communicator Joe Duggan called "Is this how you feel?" contains dozens of letters from climate scientists angry or stunned by a lack of forceful action by policymakers.

 "I feel like nobody's listening," Australian research fellow Helen McGregor wrote last fall.

 "There is so much noise around the issue that I often feel compelled to be outraged by our own inability as a species to respond," scientist Carlo Buontempo wrote, "But the truth is that more often than not I just feel tired."

 The vast majority say they remain optimistic. Last year, a consortium of North American universities created a speakers network for climate change discussion and more than 370 scientists have since signed up to give talks at libraries, chambers of commerce, schools, colleges and community clubs.

 But change still seems too slow, many say.

 "As a scientist, I can say that it is possible for us to prevent truly catastrophic, potentially irreversible climate change. But I cannot say as a scientist whether or not we will find the will to do what's necessary," said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State University who published a book on the role of science deniers in subverting global warming discussions.

 Mann said only strong public outcry can force policy changes, and this is where the encyclical is crucial.

 "There are a lot of people out there who thus far have been either skeptical or indifferent," Mann said. "I think this (encyclical) will make a difference for them."

 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1Sfph3i ||||| The most anticipated papal letter for decades will be published in five languages on Thursday. It will call for an end to the ‘tyrannical’ exploitation of nature by mankind. Could it lead to a step-change in the battle against global warming?

 Pope Francis will call for an ethical and economic revolution to prevent catastrophic climate change and growing inequality in a letter to the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics on Thursday.

 In an unprecedented encyclical on the subject of the environment, the pontiff is expected to argue that humanity’s exploitation of the planet’s resources has crossed the Earth’s natural boundaries, and that the world faces ruin without a revolution in hearts and minds. The much-anticipated message, which will be sent to the world’s 5,000 Catholic bishops, will be published online in five languages on Thursday and is expected to be the most radical statement yet from the outspoken pontiff.

 However, it is certain to anger sections of Republican opinion in America by endorsing the warnings of climate scientists and admonishing rich elites, say cardinals and scientists who have advised the Vatican.

 The Ghanaian cardinal, Peter Turkson, president of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and a close ally of the pope, will launch the encyclical. He has said it will address the root causes of poverty and the threats facing nature, or “creation”.

 In a recent speech widely regarded as a curtain-raiser to the encyclical, Turkson said: “Much of the world remains in poverty, despite abundant resources, while a privileged global elite controls the bulk of the world’s wealth and consumes the bulk of its resources.”

 The Argentinian pontiff is expected to repeat calls for a change in attitudes to poverty and nature. “An economic system centred on the god of money needs to plunder nature to sustain the frenetic rhythm of consumption that is inherent to it,” he told a meeting of social movements last year. “I think a question that we are not asking ourselves is: isn’t humanity committing suicide with this indiscriminate and tyrannical use of nature? Safeguard creation because, if we destroy it, it will destroy us. Never forget this.”

 The encyclical will go much further than strictly environmental concerns, say Vatican insiders. “Pope Francis has repeatedly stated that the environment is not only an economic or political issue, but is an anthropological and ethical matter,” said another of the pope’s advisers, Archbishop Pedro Barreto Jimeno of Peru.

 “It will address the issue of inequality in the distribution of resources and topics such as the wasting of food and the irresponsible exploitation of nature and the consequences for people’s life and health,” Barreto Jimeno told the Catholic News Service.

 He was echoed by Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga of Honduras, who coordinates the Vatican’s inner council of cardinals and is thought to reflect the pope’s political thinking . “The ideology surrounding environmental issues is too tied to a capitalism that doesn’t want to stop ruining the environment because they don’t want to give up their profits,” Rodríguez Maradiaga said.

 The rare encyclical, called “Laudato Sii”, or “Praised Be”, has been timed to have maximum public impact ahead of the pope’s meeting with Barack Obama and his address to the US Congress and the UN general assembly in September.

 It is also intended to improve the prospect of a strong new UN global agreement to cut climate emissions. By adding a moral dimension to the well-rehearsed scientific arguments, Francis hopes to raise the ambition of countries above their own self-interest to secure a strong deal in a crucial climate summit in Paris in November.

 “Pope Francis is personally committed to this [climate] issue like no other pope before him. The encyclical will have a major impact. It will speak to the moral imperative of addressing climate change in a timely fashion in order to protect the most vulnerable,” said Christiana Figueres, the UN’s climate chief, in Bonn this week for negotiations.

 Francis, the first Latin American pope, is increasingly seen as the voice of the global south and a catalyst for change in global bodies. In September, he will seek to add impetus and moral authority to UN negotiations in New York to adopt new development goals and lay out a 15-year global plan to tackle hunger, extreme poverty and health. He will address the UN general assembly on 23 September as countries finalise their commitments.

 However, Francis’s radicalism is attracting resistance from Vatican conservatives and in rightwing church circles, particularly in the US – where Catholic climate sceptics also include John Boehner, Republican leader of the House of Representatives, and Rick Santorum, a Republican presidential candidate.

 Earlier this year Stephen Moore, a Catholic economist, called the pope a “complete disaster”, saying he was part of “a radical green movement that is at its core anti-Christian, anti-people and anti-progress”.

 Moore was backed this month by scientists and engineers from the powerful evangelical Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, who have written an open letter to Francis. “Today many prominent voices call humanity a scourge on our planet, saying that man is the problem, not the solution. Such attitudes too often contaminate their assessment of man’s effects on nature,” it says.

 But the encyclical will be well received in developing countries, where most Catholics live. “Francis has always put the poor at the centre of everything he has said. The developing countries will hear their voice in the encyclical,” said Neil Thorns, director of advocacy at the Catholic development agency, Cafod. “I expect it to challenge the way we think. The message that we cannot just treat the Earth as a tool for exploitation will be a message that many will not want to hear.”

 The pope is “aiming at a change of heart. What will save us is not technology or science. What will save us is the ethical transformation of our society,” said Carmelite Father Eduardo Agosta Scarel, a climate scientist who teaches at the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina in Buenos Aires.

 Facebook Twitter Pinterest Video: Suzanne Goldenberg visits the Heartland Institute’s conference in Washington, an annual gathering of climate sceptics, to hear what delegates – including US senator James Inhofe and blogger Marc Morano – think about the Pope’s upcoming encyclical on the environment and climate change .

 Earlier popes, including Benedict XVI and John Paul II, addressed environmental issues and “creation”, but neither mentioned climate change or devoted an entire encyclical to the links between poverty, economics and ecological destruction. Francis’s only previous encyclical concerned the nature of religious faith.

 The pontiff, who is playing an increasing role on the world stage, will visit Cuba ahead of travelling to the US. He was cited by Obama as having helped to thaw relations between the two countries, and last week met the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, to discuss the crisis in Ukraine and the threat to minority Christians in the Middle East.

 The pope chose Francis of Assisi, the patron saint of animals, as his namesake at the start of his papacy in 2011, saying the saint’s values reflected his own.

  ||||| VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis is looking for a global audience for his upcoming encyclical on the environment, saying Sunday it's meant for everyone, not just Catholics.

 Pope Francis is cheered by the crowd as he arrives for an audience with Italian AGESCI boy scouts association's members in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican, Saturday, June 13, 2015. (AP Photo/Alessandra... (Associated Press)

 Francis engaged in some self-promotion during his weekly blessing, alerting the thousands of people in St. Peter's Square that his first solo encyclical is coming out on Thursday and inviting them to pay attention to environmental degradation around them.

 "This encyclical is aimed at everyone: Let us pray that everyone can receive its message and grow in responsibility toward the common home that God has given us," he said.

 The eagerly awaited document will be launched at a Vatican news conference Thursday that underscores Francis' insistence that it's not just for Catholics: The three speakers are a Vatican cardinal, a Greek Orthodox theologian and an atheist scientist.

 In the encyclical, Francis is expected to lay out the moral imperative to fight global warming, since the poor are the most affected by it.

 Francis has said he wanted to get the encyclical out in plenty of time before negotiators meet in Paris at the end of the year to hammer out a deal to reduce greenhouse gases to a level that keeps global warming below 2 degrees C (3.6 F), compared with pre-industrial times. |||||

Write a summary.

– Pope Francis is days away from releasing what the Guardian predicts will be "his most radical statement" yet, and he says it isn't just for Catholics. Francis will be accompanied by an atheist climate scientist and a Greek Orthodox theologian, as well as a Vatican cardinal, when he releases his long-anticipated letter on the environment on Thursday, the AP reports. The encyclical, a rare papal "teaching letter," is expected to focus on climate change, humanity's role in causing it, and its devastating and disproportionate effects on the world's poor, reports the New York Times, which notes that Francis has long been outspoken on environmental issues and told reporters earlier this year that "man has slapped nature in the face." In a recent speech seen as a preview to the encyclical, Francis made it clear that he believes climate change and the suffering of the poor is the result of capitalism and overconsumption, the Guardian reports. "Much of the world remains in poverty, despite abundant resources, while a privileged global elite controls the bulk of the world's wealth and consumes the bulk of its resources," he said. Climate scientists say since the issue has become an ideological and partisan one as much as it is a scientific one, the papal letter could do more than international negotiations this year to reduce emissions, USA Today reports. (A US conservative group claims Francis has been "misled" on the issue, and staunch Catholic Rick Santorum says he finds the church leader hard to listen to.)


We use JavaScript to ensure we can give you the best experience on our website. JavaScript is not supported in your browser. For a better experience, enable JavaScript or redirect to the No JavaScript version of the page. ||||| ROME (AP) — American Amanda Knox and her Italian ex-boyfriend expect to learn their fate Wednesday when Italy's highest court hears their appeal of their guilty verdicts in the brutal 2007 murder of Knox's British roommate. Several outcomes are possible, including confirmation of the verdicts, a new appeals round, or even a ruling that amounts to an acquittal in the sensational case that has captivated audiences on both sides of the Atlantic.

 FILE - In this Nov. 2, 2007 file photo, Amanda Knox, left, and Raffaele Sollecito, are seen outside the rented house where 21-year-old British student Meredith Kercher was found dead in Perugia, Italy.... (Associated Press)

 In this July 1, 2014 file photo Raffaele Sollecito speaks during a press conference in Rome. The founder of a heavily visited Wiki site about the prosecutions of U.S. star defendant Amanda Knox and her... (Associated Press)

 FILE - In this Jan. 31, 2014 file photo Amanda Knox prepares to leave the set following a television interview, in New York. The founder of a heavily visited Wiki site about the prosecutions of U.S. star... (Associated Press)

 Here is a look at the case, the possible outcomes and issues that might come into play.

 THE CASE:

 Meredith Kercher, a 21-year-old student from Britain, was found dead Nov. 2, 2007 in the apartment she shared with Knox in the Umbrian city of Perugia where both women were studying. Kercher's throat was slashed and she had been sexually assaulted.

 Knox, now 27, and Raffaele Sollecito, who turns 31 on Thursday, were convicted of the murder by a trial court in Perugia in 2009. They were freed in 2011 after a Perugia appellate court overturned the convictions. They found themselves back in an appellate court after the Court of Cassation vacated the acquittals in 2013 in a harsh rebuke of the Perugia chief appellate judge's reasoning.

 Last year, an appeals court in Florence convicted the pair, sentencing Knox to 28 ½ years and Sollecito to 25 years. The court ruled that the pair acted in concert with Rudy Hermann Guede, a drifter born in the Ivory Coast who is serving a 16-year sentence for his role in the murder.

 Knox, who spent nearly four years in jail during the investigation and after her lower court conviction, remains free in the United States. She has vowed never to return willingly to Italy.

 IF THE CONVICTION IS CONFIRMED:

 If the high court upholds the Florence convictions, the prosecutor's office in Florence would issue an order to execute the sentences. In the case of Sollecito, who has remained in Italy, police would seek to take him into custody immediately after receiving the order. For Knox, the situation is more complicated. The prosecutor would ask the Justice Ministry to seek her extradition, and the Justice Ministry must decide whether to comply.

 Italy and the United States have an extradition treaty, and there is no formal reason for the request not to be made, according to Andrea Scella, a professor of criminal law and process at the University of Udine. However, extradition retains a political element, and the government could decide not to advance a request, accepting any political consequences from the Parliament or voters, he said.

 Issues like the severity of the crime and the length of the penalty influence extradition requests. Italy's request could propose having Knox serve the sentence in the United States, as an alternative.

 The timing of Italy's request is uncertain, but could unfold over months or longer.

 IF THE HIGH COURT ORDERS A NEW TRIAL:

 The high court can throw out all or any part of the Florence appeals court guilty verdict and order yet another appeals trial — the third in this case. It is not unprecedented in Italy for a case to be sent back to for multiple appellate rounds. In fact, one case involving the 1972 murder of a police commissioner reached the Court of Cassation nine times before the verdicts were finalized, 28 years after the murder.

 No appellate trial date can be set until the reasoning for the court's decision is issued, which would contain very specific directions to the new appeals court on which elements of the case needed to be re-examined. The court has 90 days to issue its reasoning.

 IF THE COURT ACQUITS:

 The high court can throw out the guilty verdict without ordering a new trial, which is tantamount to acquittal. Such a decision is rare, experts say, and would require the court to give a full reasoning for its decision — also within 90 days.

 For Knox and Sollecito, it would be "case closed" for their criminal court proceedings. Knox would be able to travel to Europe and Italy without risk of arrest. Sollecito, whose passport has been seized, would have his freedom to travel restored.

 THE ROGUE JUROR'S INTERVIEW:

 One of the civilian jurors on the panel that convicted the pair in the Florence appellate case gave an interview last week to the magazine Oggi saying she believed there was not enough evidence "to justify such a severe conviction." The interview, which violates secrecy of the deliberations, appeared to confirm rumors that the guilty finding was not unanimous. However, unanimous decisions are not required and it is unlikely to be mentioned in any of the legal teams' arguments before the high court nor have any bearing on the decision. |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– Yet another ruling in the Amanda Knox case is coming from Italy's highest court today. Knox and then-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito were convicted in the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher in 2009, acquitted on appeal in 2011 (at which point Knox returned to the US), had that acquittal overturned in 2013, and were then found guilty again last year. As the New York Times and the AP report, Italy's top court, the Court of Cassation, has a number of options: Confirm the convictions: That would mean Italy would likely attempt to extradite Knox, who has maintained her innocence and vowed not to return to the country willingly, though there is a chance the Justice Ministry would decline to do so. Sollecito, who is still in Italy, would go to prison immediately to serve his sentence. Order new appellate trials for Knox and/or Sollecito: Yes, you read that right: This saga may still not be over. If this court decides to throw out all or part of the appeals court's guilty verdict, it will likely order a third trial. (To give you an idea of how long this could go on, one 1972 murder case went to the Court of Cassation nine times before a final verdict was issued, 28 years later.) Throw out the guilty verdict without ordering new trials: This would amount to an acquittal, leaving Knox free to visit Italy without fear of arrest, but the AP notes that "such a decision is rare." If an extradition request is made for Knox, a professor of international law tells the Times the US will likely grant it, though it would be a "hard" decision. The two countries do have an extradition treaty, and another expert tells the AP there is no formal reason—though there are a number of political ones—for Italy to not bother asking in the first place. (Some have argued the concept of "double jeopardy" could be used to block Knox's extradition, though others have debunked that idea.) It's not clear when the ruling is expected, but the BBC's live updates noted that the hearing was "underway" as of 7am Eastern time.