The Pentagon is making detailed plans to send about 34,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan in anticipation of President Obama's decision on the future of the eight-year-old war, a defense official said Tuesday.

Obama held a lengthy meeting with top advisers Monday night and said Tuesday that he would announce plans for Afghanistan after the Thanksgiving holiday.

A Defense Department official with direct knowledge of the process said there has been no final word on the president's decision. But planners have been tasked with preparing to send 34,000 additional American troops into battle with the expectation that is the number Obama is leaning toward approving, the official said.

Obama ordered more than 20,000 additional troops to Afghanistan in March. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, reportedly has called for up to 40,000 more to wage a counterinsurgency campaign against the Taliban, the Islamic militia originally ousted by the U.S. invasion in 2001.

The president has weighed several options for bolstering the American contingent, ranging from sending a few thousand troops to sending the 40,000 McChrystal requested.

McChrystal was among those who took part in Monday's conference with Obama and other top advisers, which broke up at 10 p.m.

Vice President Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen and Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, were among the other senior officials in the meeting.

Obama said Tuesday that the deliberations have been "comprehensive and extremely useful."

"It's going to be important to recognize that in order for us to succeed there, you've got to have a comprehensive strategy that includes civilian and diplomatic efforts," he said at a news conference Tuesday with visiting Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The military has planning under way to send these units: three U.S. Army brigades, totaling about 15,000 troops; a Marine brigade with about 8,000 troops; a headquarters element of about 7,000; and between 4,000 and 5,000 support troops -- a total of approximately 34,000 troops, according to a defense official with direct knowledge of Pentagon operations.

CNN reported last month that this was the preferred option within the Pentagon.

The troops would be dispatched throughout Afghanistan but would be focused mainly on the southern and southeastern provinces, where much of the recent fighting has taken place

MORE

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, speaking in that trademark sonorous baritone, utters a simple statement that translates into real trouble for Democratic leaders: "I'm going to be stubborn on this."

Stubborn, he means, in opposing any health-care overhaul that includes a "public option," or government-run health-insurance plan, as the current bill does. His opposition is strong enough that Mr. Lieberman says he won't vote to let a bill come to a final vote if a public option is included.

Probe for a catch or caveat in that opposition, and none is visible. Can he support a public option if states could opt out of the plan, as the current bill provides? "The answer is no," he says in an interview from his Senate office. "I feel very strongly about this." How about a trigger, a mechanism for including a public option along with a provision saying it won't be used unless private insurance plans aren't spreading coverage far and fast enough? No again.

So any version of a public option will compel Mr. Lieberman to vote against bringing a bill to a final vote? "Correct," he says.

This is, of course, more than just one senator objecting to one part of health legislation. This is the former Democratic vice presidential nominee, now an independent, Joe Lieberman, still counted on to be the 60th vote Democrats will need to force a final vote on health legislation. In opposing a public option, he is opposing the element some Democratic liberals have come to consider the cornerstone of a health-care bill.

Maybe the Lieberman stance is posturing, or a maneuver to force a watering down of the public option into something he and like-minded Democratic conservatives can swallow. In any case, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid tries to solve the Rubik's Cube that is health legislation, Mr. Lieberman just might represent the hardest piece to flip into place.

MORE

Despite rising fears of the U.S. falling into another recession, a survey of top economists found them more optimistic about growth in the fourth quarter of this year and throughout 2010. But job seekers will have to wait a little longer for employers to start hiring again.

According to the November survey by the National Association of Business Economics, 48 top forecasters now expect the economy to grow at a 3% annual rate during the last three months of this year, up from their prediction of 2.4% growth in October.

The economists also raised their forecast for growth during every quarter of 2010. They now expect a 3.2% rise in economic activity over the course of the next four quarters, up from their previous estimate of 3%.

But the outlook isn't as good for the record 31 million Americans unable to find full-time jobs.

The economists pushed back their expectations for when U.S. payrolls will start to grow again to the second quarter of 2010. They previously had predicted a gain of 12,000 jobs a month in the first quarter.

The nation's unemployment rate hit 10.2% in October -- higher than expected. The continued problems in the labor market, combined with disappointing reports about housing and retail sales recently, have raised concerns about a so-called "double dip" recession.

MORE

Emails hacked from a British university climate study center are prompting a new debate over just how truthful scientific reports on global warming have been. Critics who believe science has yet to prove the earth is facing a dangerous warming trend say the emails show scientists manipulated statistics to cover up what actually was a decline in temperature, not an increase.

Kirkwood native and attorney Christopher Horner said Tuesday, "they are admitting in two places we've found in the computer code..in their annotations that it is a trick to hide the decline in temperatures." Horner, author of the book "Red Hot Lies: How Golbal Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed," is seeking more documents from government agencies under the Freedom of Information Act.

UMSL scientist Patrick Osborne, head of the campus's Harris World Ecology Center, points to years of scientific data he says demonstrates a link between man made greenhouse gas (CO2) and warmer temperatures. As for the emails, Osborne thinks they were just part of a "vigorous" private debate among scientists. "I think it's a storm in a tea cup quite frankly; it's got into news blown out of proportion," Osborne said. Osborne completed his PhD at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, the school where the email exchanges occurred.

Osborne said, "We are seeing glaciers retreating; we are seeing ice cap in the Arctic getting thinner losing area each summer. We're seeing organizms moving and all of these factors rette to the situation of global climate change and warming." Horner questioned that statement. He argued scientists have not proved a direct tie between glaciers melting and manmade global warming. "Glaciers have been melting for over a century since the end of what is called the 'Little Ice Age'," he noted adding "glaciers are also advancing all over the world but those aren't proof of global cooling."

The U.S. Congress is considering Cap and Trade legislation to reduce the amount of carbon emissions in the United States. Critics like Missouri's senior U.S. Senator Kit Bond warn the bill would cost millions of jobs and place a heavy burden on the American economy and taxpayer. United Nations scientists have recommended that developed nations cut their CO2 emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020.

A global climate conference convenes in Coopenhagen, Denmark December 7. The European Union Tuesday called on the United States to spell out a long-term vision for reducing carbon emissions over the next two decades

MORE

The International Atomic Energy Agency probe of Iran's nuclear program is at a dead end because Tehran is not cooperating, the chief of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said Thursday in an unusually blunt expression of frustration four days before he leaves office.

Mohamed ElBaradei also warned that international confidence in Iran's assertions of purely peaceful intent shrank after its belated revelation of a previously secret nuclear facility. And he criticized Tehran for not accepting an internationally endorsed plan meant to delay its achieving the ability to make nuclear weapons.

"There has been no movement on remaining issues of concern which need to be clarified for the agency to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program," ElBaradei told the opening session of the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors. "We have effectively reached a dead end, unless Iran engages fully with us."

"Issues of concern" is the IAEA term for indications that Tehran has experimented with nuclear weapons programs, including missile-delivery systems and tests of explosives that could serve as nuclear-bomb detonators.

ElBaradei has emphasized the need for talks instead of threats in engaging Iran. He has criticized the U.S. for invading Iraq on the pretext that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear weapons program, which has never been proven. That — and perceived softness on the Iran issue — has drawn criticism from the U.S. and its allies that he was overstepping his mandate.

But ElBaradei's comments Thursday left little doubt that he was most unhappy with Tehran.

"I am disappointed that Iran has not so far agreed to the original proposal" involving removal of most of Iran's enriched stockpile, ElBaradei told the meeting.

The plan approved by the six world powers negotiating with Iran over the past few months would commit Tehran to ship out 70 percent of its enriched uranium for processing into fuel rods for its research reactor in Tehran. That would help allay international fears by removing most of the material that Iran could use to make a nuclear weapon.

It would take more than a year for Tehran to replace the enriched material, meaning it would not be able to make a weapon for at least that long.

Iran says it is enriching only to power a future network of nuclear reactors. But enrichment can also produce fissile warhead material. Iran continues enriching, despite three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions meant to make it freeze that activity and has built an enriched stockpile that could arm two nuclear warheads.

MORE

Former US vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin's memoir has topped the US bestseller list in its first week of release, industry figures have shown.

With almost half a million copies sold, Going Rogue: An American Life beat new blockbusters by James Patterson and Stephen King Nielsen BookScan said.

Her sales have topped those of Barack Obama, whose Audacity of Hope sold 67,000 copies in its first week.

Palin ran for vice president last year alongside John McCain.

She has since stepped down from her position as governor of Alaska, but remains extremely popular among many American conservatives.

Book confusion

A string of public appearances have helped to boost both her profile and book sales.

An appearance on the Oprah Winfrey Show, during which Palin said a run for the White House in 2012 was "not on my radar screen right now", boosted the programme's ailing ratings.

However, first week sale statistics show her book has sold less than former president Bill Clinton's 2004 memoir, My Life, at the same period of sales, but is just ahead of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's 2003 Living History.

In October, Palin's book jumped to the top of the bestseller lists on the strength of advance sales only.

The title refers to claims that while on the campaign trail with Mr McCain, Palin pursued her own agenda.

Meanwhile, a book of critical essays about Palin, with a strikingly similar cover to Going Rogue, has been confusing some US media outlets.

Pictures of the book, called Going Rouge, have been used by USA Today and Fox News to illustrate their coverage of the former vice-presidential candidate's memoirs.

And, according to the LA Times, CNN mistakenly reported that White House officials were sharing copies of Going Rouge, when they had actually been reading Palin's book.

MORE

A Pennsylvania lawmaker defended Rep. Patrick Kennedy on Monday against a bishop who has acknowledged asking the Rhode Island congressman not to receive Holy Communion because of his support for abortion rights.

"We don't legislate at the orders of the Vatican, we legislate what is in our conscience and what we think is good for our country," said Rep. Patrick Murphy, a pro-choice Democrat and Catholic like Kennedy. Murphy spoke at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., where he received a John F. Kennedy New Frontier Award from the late president's daughter, Caroline Kennedy.

Patrick Kennedy is the nephew of John F. Kennedy, the first Roman Catholic elected president. He and Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, who oversees the most heavily Catholic state in the country, have clashed for weeks over health care reform and publicly financed abortion.

Last month, Kennedy ignited a sharp exchange with Tobin when he criticized the nation's Catholic bishops for threatening to oppose a massive overhaul to the health care system unless it included tighter restrictions on abortion. Tobin asked for an apology and publicly questioned Kennedy's faith.

Their exchange escalated when Kennedy told The Providence Journal in an interview published Sunday that Tobin instructed him not to receive Communion, a central focus of Roman Catholic worship. Kennedy said Tobin had also told his priests not to give him the sacrament.

Tobin acknowledged Sunday that he wrote to Kennedy in February 2007 asking the Democratic lawmaker not to receive Communion because of his abortion rights stance. But Tobin said he never banned Kennedy from receiving the sacrament and never instructed his priests not to give it to the lawmaker.

Kennedy and his spokeswoman did not return messages seeking comment on his remarks for a second day.

Murphy said he was a saddened by the controversy.

"It's been disheartening for millions of (Catholics) across the country to see one of our own be banished," Murphy said. "I'm reaching out to Patrick Kennedy and also to my local priests and bishops to make sure they know that we agree on 99 percent of the issues."

Murphy said he had not talked personally with Kennedy, but had sent him an e-mail and left a message with his office offering his support and prayers.

In his 2008 book, "Taking the Hill," Murphy wrote that a local parish priest refused to bless his marriage in 2006 to his wife, Jenni, during his first campaign for Congress because of his pro-choice views.

"That hurt me deeply," he said.
 

MORE

A federal government task force last week gave new recommendations about women and mammograms, causing a controversy among women and medical professionals.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force revised earlier recommendations that women begin having annual mammograms when they turn 40. The new guidelines “recommend against”  women ages 40 to 49 having routine mammograms unless there is a compelling reason to check.

For women ages 50 to 73, the task force recommended a screening every two years.

Sandra Howell, a breast surgeon based in Bay City, said she believes the task force misinterpreted the data.

“My opinion that the United States Preventative Services Task Force’s recommendations are unfounded and will cost women’s lives and will delay diagnosis,” Howell said.

The earlier breast cancer is detected, the less invasive treatment may be and there is a higher chance the woman will survive, she said.

The American Cancer Society estimates there will be more than 190,000 new cases of breast cancer this year. About 40,000 will die from the disease.

Howell is concerned the new recommendations will discourage women from getting mammograms and paints mammograms as unreliable. She’s also concerned it will lead to decreased insurance coverage for women ages 40 to 49.

 Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, said Wednesday the task force does not set federal policy and she doubts insurance companies will change their policies.

“My message to women is simple,” Sebelius said. “Mammograms have always been an important life-saving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today. Keep doing what you have been doing for years — talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions, and make the decision that is right for you.”

T.K. Jones IV, a radiologist at the Bay Diagnostic Center for Women, deals with breast cancer and screening on a daily basis at the center’s office, 3175 Professional Court, Bay City.

He said he was “appalled” by the revisions to the guidelines.

“I think it will kill people, I can’t put it more bluntly,” Jones said. “Extending the screening to two years will produce significant delays in the diagnosis of breast cancer and could prove fatal.”

The task force said the risks — false positives, anxiety and exposure to radiation — could outweigh the benefits of beginning mammograms at 40.

However, Jones said the risk of radiation exposure was “theoretical.”

“The risk is so small that it cannot be meaningfully measured,” he said.

Jones said the task force’s recommendation to wait to get mammograms could mean later diagnosis

MORE

The fallout from Adam Lambert's risqué American Music Awards performance keeps coming with "Good Morning America" canceling the singer's live performance scheduled for Wednesday morning.

ABC was flooded with more than 1,500 complaints, and the network sent an e-mail to potential concert goers letting them know that Lambert would not be performing on Wednesday.

"Given Adam Lambert's controversial live performance on the AMAs, we were concerned about airing a similar concert so early in the morning," a spokesperson for the network said.

"The Early Show" on rival network CBS was quick to announce that they have booked Lambert to perform and discuss the controversy on Wednesday morning.

Lambert shocked viewers with his sexually suggestive dance sequence that included simulated oral sex as well as Lambert kissing his male keyboardist.

The Parents Television Council, a Media watchdog group, also attacked the show as vulgar and urged its members on Monday to contact ABC, Dick Clark Productions and the show's advertisers with complaints about the content.

"Last night's 'American Music Awards' broadcast was nothing short of tasteless and vulgar. Adam Lambert, the second-place finisher in last season's 'American Idol' competition, chose to treat American families to simulated oral sex and other demeaning behavior," the PTC posted on its Web site.

Melissa Henson, director of communications and public education for the PTC, said the council wasn't concerned about Lambert's gay kiss. Its issue and focus are on the simulated oral sex, she said.

"The gender has nothing to do with it," Henson said. "It would be true if it had been a woman's face that was thrust into his crotch."

Henson also noted that this is not an anti-Adam Lambert campaign and said the council would have had no problem with Lambert performing live on "Good Morning America."

"As long as he keeps it clean," Henson said.

MORE

Josh McDaniels is an emotional coach who stocked his roster with passionate players.

All of them were on full display on Thanksgiving night in the Denver Broncos' R-rated 26-6 victory over the New York
Brian Dawkins' inspired play led a Denver defensive revival and the offense did its part by controlling the clock and in a slump-busting win.

The NFL Network joined the fray by accidentally airing a clip of McDaniels cursing at his players after they committed three false starts and dropped a pass in a five-play sequence that really got his blood boiling.

"No -- not our coach!" tight end Tony Scheffler retorted in mock surprise.

While the Broncos (7-4) still aren't effective enough in the red zone and draw too many yellow flags for McDaniels' taste, their month of misery is over.

Kyle Orton drove them on six scoring drives, Matt Prater kicked four field goals and Dawkins led a ferocious defense 48 hours after calling a players-only meeting that obviously struck a chord.

Elvis Dumervil dumped Eli Manning twice, extending his NFL-leading sack total to 14, and his second one resulted in a fourth-quarter fumble that sealed Denver's first win since Oct. 19.

Hosting their first Thanksgiving game since 1963 in the AFL, the Broncos returned to the physical style of play that marked their 6-0 start and ditched the sieve that was their defense during their four-game skid.

Behind three takeaways, the Broncos halted their freefall and pulled within a half game of AFC West leader San Diego. New York (6-5), which snapped its four-game losing streak on Sunday, fell two games behind Dallas, which beat Oakland earlier Thursday, in the NFC East.

"We didn't have any tempo and we didn't make any plays," Giants coach Tom Coughlin said. "We keep talking about winning the physical battle and controlling the line of scrimmage. We thought this would be the night and it wasn't."

The Giants have lost five of six since their 5-0 start.

"We can deal with being 6-5, but we need to play better football," said Manning, who was sacked three times and threw an interception while failing to reach the end zone in 11 drives.

"We're a good football team," Giants defensive end Osi Umenyiora said. "We just played bad today. ... From here on out, every game is a must-win."

The Broncos outgained the Giants 213-38 in the first half but settled for field goals on three drives, including their first two trips inside the Giants 10-yard line as they continued their monthlong red zone struggles.

That led to the NFL Network's embarrassing mistake.

After reaching the 7, the Broncos settled for Prater's 22-yarder and a 3-0 lead. Their second trip inside the Giants 10-yard line turned into a game of flag football as tight end Daniel Graham, left tackle Ryan Clady and center Casey Wiegmann all were whistled for false starts, and the Broncos sent out Prater for a 32-yarder that made it 6-0.

Coming out of a commercial break, the NFL Network showed a clip of McDaniels yelling at his players on the sideline saying, "All we're trying to do is win a [expletive] game!"

The vulgarity was clearly audible to viewers, and announcer Bob Papa immediately apologized on air.

In an interview with the Associated Press and the Denver Post, Eric Weinberger, executive producer of the NFL Network, apologized to viewers and McDaniels for the "terrible mistake."

"It was on delay. We wish we would have caught it and bleeped it," Weinberger said. "We apologize for ever airing anything like that, absolutely, especially on Thanksgiving."

"It's the NFL Network," McDaniels said with a shrug and a smile. "Doesn't surprise me."

What was his message, edited for family entertainment?

"We can't false-start in the red zone," McDaniels said. "We went over there and tried to have a little bit of an eye-to-eye, that's what that was."

McDaniels has shown emotion on the sideline before. He often tells his players and assistants to listen to the message and not the way it's delivered. He'll fist-up like Tiger Woods one game and curse to his guys the next.

Weinberger said it's not up to McDaniels to have to watch what he says, either.

MORE