Putin warns West as he launches presidential bid

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin agestures as he speaks during a United Russia party congress in Moscow, Russia, Sunday, Nov. 27, 2011. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has been formally nominated by the ruling United Russia party to run for president in next March's election. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin agestures as he speaks during a United Russia party congress in Moscow, Russia, Sunday, Nov. 27, 2011. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has been formally nominated by the ruling United Russia party to run for president in next March's election. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, right, and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, left, seen as arrive at the United Russia party congress in Moscow on Sunday, Nov. 27, 2011. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has received a formal nomination from the ruling United Russia party to run for president in next March's election. Putin, who stepped down in 2008 after two presidential terms but has remained Russia's No. 1 leader, announced his intention to reclaim the top job in September. Sunday's nomination marks the official start of his election bid. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Alexei Druzhinin, Presidential Press Service)

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev gestures during his speech at the United Russia party congress in Moscow on Sunday, Nov. 27, 2011. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has received a formal nomination from the ruling United Russia party to run for president in next March's election. Putin, who stepped down in 2008 after two presidential terms but has remained Russia's No. 1 leader, announced his intention to reclaim the top job in September. Sunday's nomination marks the official start of his election bid. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Yekaterina Shtukina, Presidential Press Service)

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev speeches at the United Russia party congress in Moscow on Sunday, Nov. 27, 2011. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has received a formal nomination from the ruling United Russia party to run for president in next March's election. Putin, who stepped down in 2008 after two presidential terms but has remained Russia's No. 1 leader, announced his intention to reclaim the top job in September. Sunday's nomination marks the official start of his election bid. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Yekaterina Shtukina, Presidential Press Service)

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, left, and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev greet delegates during a United Russia party congress in Moscow, Russia, Sunday, Nov. 27, 2011. Putin has been formally nominated by the ruling United Russia party to run for president in next March's election. (AP Photo/RIA-Novosti, Yekaterina Shtukina, Presidential Press Service, pool)

MOSCOW (AP) ? Prime Minister Vladimir Putin sternly warned the West not to interfere in Russia's elections, as he launched his campaign to reclaim the presidency in a speech Sunday before thousands of flag-waving supporters.

Putin stepped down in 2008 after two presidential terms, but kept his hold on power. He announced in September that he intended to return to the top job next year and was formally nominated Sunday by his United Russia party.

"All our foreign partners need to understand this: Russia is a democratic country, it's a reliable and predictable partner with which they can and must reach agreement, but on which they cannot impose anything from the outside," Putin told his audience.

The party congress, which was televised live, was aimed at boosting support for Putin and his party before parliamentary elections one week away.

Increasingly seen as representing the interests of a corrupt bureaucracy, United Russia has watched its public approval ratings plummet in recent months. The party is still certain to win the Dec. 4 election, but is expected to lose the current two-thirds majority that has allowed it to change the constitution at will.

Putin's decision to swap jobs with President Dmitry Medvedev after the presidential vote in March, presented as a done deal at the party congress in September, also has soured the public mood. Many Russians are wary of Putin's authoritarian tendencies and fear he will remain in power for 12 more years to become the longest-serving leader since Communist times.

Sunday's congress began with a steel worker, a businessman, a farmer, a decorated special services officer and a noted film director standing up one after another to praise Putin as the only man capable of leading the country. The 11,000 delegates filling the Moscow sports arena chanted "Putin, Putin" and "The people trust Putin!"

Putin promised Russians stability, a word he repeated often throughout his speech. In countering criticism that he has tightened his control at the expense of democracy, Putin insisted that Russia needs a "stable political system" to guarantee "stable development" for decades to come.

"This is an extremely important task for Russia with its history of upheavals and revolutions," he said.

He used the occasion to lash out at opposition leaders, saying they had brought the country to ruin when they served in the government in the 1990s.

"They killed industry, agriculture and the social sphere," Putin said. "They stabbed the knife of civil war in the very heart of Russia by allowing bloodshed in the North Caucasus. In fact, they led the country to the brink of catastrophe, the edge of a precipice."

He said Russia wants to develop cooperation with the West, but strongly warned the U.S. and Europe against paying too much attention to the Kremlin's critics and providing them with financial support.

"We know that ... representatives of some countries meet with those whom they pay money, the so-called grant recipients, give them instructions and guidance for what 'work' they need to do to influence the election campaign in our country," Putin said.

"That's a wasted effort, like throwing money to the winds," he said.

Putin said those who provide grants to Russian non-governmental organizations "would do better using this money to pay back their domestic debt and stop conducting such a costly and inefficient foreign policy."

Putin promised his countrymen that by maintaining a steady course they would build "a strong, rich and prosperous Russia." Offering something for everyone, he pledged to make it easier to do business, to improve the educational system and health care, to raise taxes on the rich and to bolster the military.

"In the next five to 10 years we must take our armed forces to a qualitatively new level. Of course, this will require big spending .... but we must do this if we want to defend the dignity of our country," he said.

Putin also said he would pursue his project of forming a Eurasian Union to boost integration between Russia and its neighbors, restoring some of the links that were destroyed when the Soviet Union collapsed 20 years ago.

He offered little new to address the calls from businessmen, economists and political liberals for reforms seen as necessary for Russia to modernize its economy and further its development.

"The signals so far have certainly been: no change, more of the same, muddling along, stability even if it comes at a high cost," said Masha Lipman, a scholar at the Carnegie Moscow Center.

She said any reforms that would increase public participation and encourage initiative are rightly seen as a serious risk for the political monopoly that Putin has established.

"Power is concentrated at the top, there is ultimately one arbiter," Lipman said. "I see no reason why this will change."

___

Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow contributed to this report.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2011-11-27-EU-Russia-Elections/id-cf7aad8a851140e4b499fc93a54c8a41

rick perry paterno oakland raiders carson palmer al davis edmund fitzgerald vincent brown

PFT's 10-pack: 'Fire Andy' -- but then what?

AP

Almost 12 weeks of the 2011 season are in the books, and there are only so many things we know.

The Packers are good.? The Colts are bad.? And Ndamukong Suh is in trouble.

For the 30 other teams and 1,700 other players, who knows what?s going on?? Let?s try to make sense of some of it via 10 of the story lines coming out of Sunday?s (and one of Thursday?s) games.

1.? Texans need a proven veteran.

It?s pretty clear that the Texans have decided not to flirt with Brett Favre for the stretch run.? But that doesn?t mean it makes sense to go with T.J. Yates, Kellen Clemens, and possibly Brodie Croyle at quarterback.

While that three-headed monster could be enough to fend off the pesky Titans for the AFC South crown, it won?t be enough to advance in a playoff field featuring the likes of the Patriots, Ravens, and Steelers.

And so the Texans need a proven veteran with playoff experience.? Whether that?s Favre or Jeff Garcia or even Jeff George, the playoff-bound Texans will be a bunch of wide-eyed kids on their first trip to the amusement park, and they?d benefit from someone who has ridden a roller coaster once or twice.

Even Daunte Culpepper would be a better option than Yates, Clemens, and Croyle.? After all, Culpepper has played in four playoff games, winning two and losing two.

Texans fans defended the decision to give the keys to Leinart by pointing out the low-risk passing game, the chains-moving running game, and the brick-wall defense.? But that same reasoning applies to a veteran quarterback, too.

In the Texans offense, no quarterback will be expected to do all that much.? A veteran with playoff experience will be far better suited to do what needs to be done, when it counts the most.

2.? McNabb should pull an Orton.

After the Bears lost quarterback Jay Cutler to a broken thumb, Kyle Orton asked for, and received, his walking papers from the Broncos.? So with the Texans needing a quarterback, why isn?t Vikings backup Donovan McNabb doing the same thing?

He claims he still can play, and he believes he shouldn?t have been benched.? McNabb therefore should request his release and hope that he slides down to the Texans on the waiver priority list.

Even if he doesn?t, any chance to play is better than holding a clipboard for a 2-9 team.? If McNabb is holding out any hope of getting a starting job in 2012, he?d benefit from being on the field in the 2011 postseason.

Until then, his failure to even make a play to get out of Minnesota should prompt legitimate speculation about his actual desire to compete.

3.? High praise for A.J. Green.

Receivers taken in the first round of the draft often underwhelm at the NFL level.? Bengals rookie receiver A.J. Green provides the latest exception to that rule.

He?s Randy Moss without the attitude, making great catches via a long body and uncanny ball skills that leave players like 2010 first-round pick Joe Haden helpless when trying to stop him.

Green?s three-catch, 110-yard performance against Cleveland included a 51-yard play that set up the game-winning field goal.? After the 7-4 Bengals reversed a two-game losing streak by beating the Browns, Cincinnati coach Marvin Lewis gave Green the ultimate endorsement.

?He?s the best first-round draft pick I?ve ever been around,? Marvin Lewis said, via the Cincinnati Enquirer. ?He continues to amaze me, every day.?

How big of a deal is that?? In 1996, Marvin Lewis worked in Baltimore, where the Ravens picked up tackle Jonathan Ogden and linebacker Ray Lewis in the first round of the draft.

Both are headed for Canton.? In Marvin?s assessment, Green already is on the trajectory.

And Marvin is right.

4.? Chris Johnson saves his job.

The bad news for Titans tailback Chris Johnson after a 23-carry, 190-yard performance against the Bucs?? He still doesn?t have the explosiveness he displayed during the first three years of his career.

The good news?? He?ll get the chance to find it in 2012.

Although the Titans retain the ability to avoid most of the supposedly guaranteed money contained in Johnson?s new contract by cutting him after the season, Johnson has done enough to persuade the Titans to stick with him.? With the benefit of a full offseason program and training camp and preseason, Johnson could rediscover the quality that puts him a step ahead of all running backs not named Adrian Peterson.

It may not happen, but the Titans surely won?t risk that it will happen with another team.

5.? The Tebowmania effect.

Lost in the impact that Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow has on his teammates is the impact he possibly has on his opponents.? (And, no, I?m not referring to the entirely different kind of Tebowing in which Chargers kicker Nick Novak engaged on Sunday.)

Despite the obsession that some have with statistics, football remains the unique product of 22 moving parts, fueled more by intangibles than metrics, especially where the metrics tend to balance each other out.? If 11 of the players possess genuine confidence in their skills, they can perform better than the sum of their parts.? And if they lack confidence, the opposite can occur.

That?s the other side of the Tebowmania effect.? The Broncos now believe that they can keep games close and find a way to win ? and teams like the Chargers believe that the Broncos will keep games close and find a way to win.

With each passing week, the team that Tebow plays will have to overcome his uncanny ability to overcome.? And that factor is far more dangerous than a rocket arm or a sub-4.4 40-yard dash or the ability to bench press 225 pounds up to 225 times.

Objectively, there was no reason that the Broncos should have beaten the Chargers in San Diego on Sunday.? The home team had lost five games in a row, the head coach occupies one of the hottest seats in all of football, and the Chargers on paper seem to be the better team.

But the Tebowmania effect allowed Denver to keep it close ? and to find a way to win.? Unless and until someone breaks that spell, the Broncos will remain a serious threat not only to make the playoffs but also to do some serious damage once they get there.

6.? ?Fire Andy,? and then what?

The pitchforks and torches, which have been taken out and then put away and then taken out again and then put away again, are once again out.? And this time they?re likely staying out for the rest of the season.

With the 4-7 Eagles needing to run the table and hope for plenty of help, what happens if (when) they fail to qualify for the postseason?? The home crowd has begun chanting ?Fire Andy!,? an indignity that hasn?t been loudly foisted upon anyone in the NFL since Matt Millen left Detroit for good.? Given that the Eagles went ?all in? for 2011, with president Joe Banner telling PFT Live that the line between success and failure resides at winning the Super Bowl, common sense suggests that failing to succeed means walking away from the table, not getting another stack of chips with which to go ?all in? again.

So what happens if Reid gets fired?? Does owner Jeffrey Lurie believe he can find someone as good, and hopefully better, than Reid?

Then there?s the issue of the front office.? With Reid supposedly still in charge, Banner and G.M. Howie Roseman could be vulnerable if Lurie tries to hire someone like Bill Cowher, who would want to have the same power that Reid has enjoyed, along with the ability to hire a new set of lieutenants.

It becomes a complex and risky exercise for Lurie, making the status quo safer, and thus more likely.? Even though things haven?t gotten better under Reid lately, they could get a lot worse.

7.? Lame-duck reluctance could result in plenty of vacancies.

Through nearly 12 full weeks of the 2011 season, no teams have fired their head coaches.? Once the 2011 season ends, at least six coaches will slide into the spotlight, for one very important reason.

For coaches whose contracts expire after the 2012 season, teams must decide whether to extend the contracts, to allow them to coach as lame ducks next year, or to move on and/or move out.

That dynamic applies to at least a half-dozen men:? Rams coach Steve Spagnuolo, Buccaneers coach Raheem Morris, Chiefs coach Todd Haley, Colts coach Jim Caldwell, Jaguars coach Jack Del Rio, and Giants coach Tom Coughlin.? Five of the six lost on Sunday, and the last one could lose on Monday night at New Orleans.

Over the past four weeks, those teams have generated a combined record of 5-20.? Apart from the Giants, none are in serious contention for the postseason.

So when Black Monday (not to be confused with Black Friday) arrives the morning after New Year?s Day, pay close attention to those six teams.? Assuming that none of them decide before then to make a change.

8.? Niners are still in great shape.

It would be easy to assume that the 49ers? bubble has burst, via a 10-point loss in Baltimore on Thanksgiving night.

It would be easy.? But it also would be incorrect.

Look at the schedule and the standings.? The 9-2 Niners still play four games ? four games ? against NFC West teams.? And they play the hapless Rams not once, but twice.

Even if the 49ers lose to the visiting Steelers in San Fran on Monday, December 19, the 49ers easily should get to 13-3, which would be enough to secure the second seed in the NFC.

Yes, at some point they may face another defense that could chase Alex Smith all over the field.? But that may not happen unless they face the Bears in the postseason ? or until the 49ers take on the the Ravens again, not in Baltimore but at a neutral site in February.

Either way, the 49ers will continue to be a significant factor down the stretch.? If anything, that loss knocks them toward the edge of the radar screen in the short term, which is probably where coach Jim Harbaugh would prefer to be anyway.

9.? The DeSean dilemma.

Regardless of whether Andy Reid stays or goes, the Eagles have a significant personnel issue on the horizon:? What should they do with receiver DeSean Jackson?

He?ll be a free agent after the season.? In recent weeks, Jackson has been deactivated after missing a meeting, flagged for a taunting penalty that wiped out a 50-yard gain (thanks to a bizarre quirk in the rules), and benched in the fourth quarter of Sunday?s latest loss, following another key drop.

Once presumed the Eagles would use the franchise tag in the hopes of signing Jackson to a long-term deal, the team may now opt to make a change.? But that doesn?t mean they?ll let him walk away.? Instead, look for the Eagles to apply the franchise tag (which will cost $9.5 million in cap space), to make him available in trade, to search for a replacement via free agency or the draft, and possibly to rescind the franchise tender if they can?t move him ? and if they can find another guy to return punts and run ?go? routes.

The risk of that approach comes from Jackson signing the franchise tender, which would guarantee him a base salary of $9.5 million in 2012; it equates to more than 15.8 times his $600,000 base salary in 2011.? And that would be Jackson?s smartest move, if he?s tagged.? Otherwise, the Eagles could end up removing the franchise tender later in the offseason (like they previously did to Jeremiah Trotter and Corey Simon), making Jackson an unrestricted free agent well after the vast majority of the unrestricted free agency money has flowed.

For that reason alone, the Eagles possibly could decide not to apply the franchise tag at all, something that would be more likely to happen if owner Jeffrey Lurie decides to clean house.

10.? ?Bowe doesn?t know football.?

Last night?s far-closer-than-expected game between the Steelers and Chiefs included a late effort by the Chiefs to drive for the winning touchdown.? Unthinkable given Kansas City?s recent inability to score offensive touchdowns but not impossible given Pittsburgh?s recent history of giving up big drives late, the Chiefs made it interesting.

Until receiver Dwayne Bowe blew it.

With the Chiefs facing first and 15 from the Pittsburgh 37, Bowe shot down the field, throwing his hand in the air ? the universal football gesture that means, ?I?m going deep.?

But then, right after Bowe called for a long throw, he broke to the post.? Tyler Palko already had launched toward where Bowe would have been.? And it landed where a Steelers defender was.

Making things worse for the Chiefs, and for Bowe, was a half-hearted (hoof-hearted) effort to catch the ball.? Bowe jumped but he didn?t extend, possibly wary of a rib-breaking blow to the midsection.

Bowe?s effort, or lack thereof, drew harsh criticism from NBC?s Cris Collinsworth, a former receiver who has the experience and the knowledge to justify criticism of a current player at the position.? And for a guy like Bowe, who?ll be heading to free agency after the season, a better try needs to be made in those situations.

It?s not as if a victory last night would have propelled the Chiefs back into the race for the AFC West crown or a wild-card berth, but it could have.? The loss instead dropped Kansas City to 4-7, making it difficult if not impossible for the Chiefs to qualify for the postseason and/or for coach Todd Haley to keep his job.

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/28/week-12-monday-10-pack-2/related/

andy rooney andy rooney groupon ipo groupon ipo breeders cup 2011 gwar gwar

NATO attack allegedly kills 24 Pakistani troops (AP)

ISLAMABAD ? Pakistan on Saturday blocked vital supply routes for U.S.-led troops in Afghanistan and demanded Washington vacate a base used by American drones after coalition aircraft allegedly killed 24 Pakistani troops at two posts along a mountainous frontier that serves as a safe haven for militants.

The incident was a major blow to American efforts to rebuild an already tattered alliance vital to winding down the 10-year-old Afghan war. Islamabad called the bloodshed in one of its tribal areas a "grave infringement" of the country's sovereignty, and it could make it even more difficult for the U.S. to enlist Pakistan's help in pushing Afghan insurgents to engage in peace talks.

A NATO spokesman said it was likely that coalition airstrikes caused Pakistani casualties, but an investigation was being conducted to determine the details. If confirmed, it would be the deadliest friendly fire incident by NATO against Pakistani troops since the Afghan war began a decade ago.

A prolonged closure of Pakistan's two Afghan border crossings to NATO supplies could cause serious problems for the coalition. The U.S., which is the largest member of the NATO force in Afghanistan, ships more than 30 percent of its non-lethal supplies through Pakistan. The coalition has alternative routes through Central Asia into northern Afghanistan, but they are costlier and less efficient.

Pakistan temporarily closed one of its Afghan crossings to NATO supplies last year after U.S. helicopters accidentally killed two Pakistani soldiers. Suspected militants took advantage of the impasse to launch attacks against stranded or rerouted trucks carrying NATO supplies. The government reopened the border after about 10 days when the U.S. apologized. NATO said at the time the relatively short closure did not significantly affect its ability to keep its troops supplied.

But the reported casualties are much greater this time, and the relationship between Pakistan and the U.S. has severely deteriorated over the last year, especially following the covert American raid that killed Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison town in May. Islamabad was outraged it wasn't told about the operation beforehand.

The government announced it closed its border crossings to NATO in a statement issued after an emergency meeting of the Cabinet's defense committee chaired by Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.

It also said that within 15 days the U.S. must vacate Shamsi Air Base, which is located in southwestern Baluchistan province. The U.S. uses the base to service drones that target al-Qaida and Taliban militants in Pakistan's tribal region when they cannot return to their bases inside Afghanistan because of weather conditions or mechanical difficulty, said U.S. and Pakistani officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive strategic matters.

The government also plans to review all diplomatic, military and intelligence cooperation with the U.S. and other NATO forces, according to the statement issued after the defense committee meeting.

The White House said that senior U.S. civilian and military officials had expressed their condolences to their Pakistani counterparts.

The White House statement said the officials expressed "our desire to work together to determine what took place, and our commitment to the U.S.-Pakistan partnership which advances our shared interests, including fighting terrorism in the region."

The White House statement did not address Pakistan's decision to block supply routes for the war in Afghanistan or its demand that the U.S. vacate the drone base.

The Pakistani army said Saturday that NATO helicopters and fighter jets carried out an "unprovoked" attack on two of its border posts in the Mohmand tribal area before dawn, killing 24 soldiers and wounding 13 others. The troops responded in self-defense "with all available weapons," an army statement said.

Pakistan army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani condemned the attack, calling it a "blatant and unacceptable act," according to the statement.

A spokesman for NATO forces, Brig. Gen. Carsten Jacobson, said Afghan and coalition troops were operating in the border area of eastern Afghanistan when "a tactical situation" prompted them to call in close air support. It is "highly likely" that the airstrikes caused Pakistani casualties, he told BBC television.

"My most sincere and personal heartfelt condolences go out to the families and loved ones of any members of Pakistan security forces who may have been killed or injured," said Gen. John Allen, the top overall commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, in a statement.

The border issue is a major source of tension between Islamabad and Washington, which is committed to withdrawing its combat troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

Much of the violence in Afghanistan is carried out by insurgents who are based just across the border in Pakistan. Coalition forces are not allowed to cross the frontier to attack the militants. However, the militants sometimes fire artillery and rockets across the line, reportedly from locations close to Pakistani army posts.

American officials have repeatedly accused Pakistani forces of supporting ? or turning a blind eye ? to militants using its territory for cross-border attacks. But militants based in Afghanistan have also been attacking Pakistan recently, prompting complaints from Islamabad.

The two posts that were attacked Saturday were located about 1,000 feet apart on a mountain top and were set up recently to stop Pakistani Taliban militants holed up in Afghanistan from crossing the border and staging attacks, said local government and security officials.

There was no militant activity in the area when the alleged NATO attack occurred, local officials said. Some of the soldiers were standing guard, while others were asleep, they said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media.

Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said map references of all of the force's border posts have been given to NATO several times.

Pakistan's prime minister summoned U.S. Ambassador Cameron Munter to protest the alleged NATO strike, according to a Foreign Ministry statement. It said the attack was a "grave infringement of Pakistan's sovereignty" and could have serious repercussions on Pakistan's cooperation with NATO.

Munter said in a statement that he regretted any Pakistani deaths and promised to work closely with Islamabad to investigate the incident.

The U.S., Pakistan, and Afghan militaries have long wrestled with the technical difficulties of patrolling a border that in many places is disputed or poorly marked. Saturday's incident took place a day after a meeting between NATO's Gen. Allen and Pakistan army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in Islamabad to discuss border operations.

The meeting tackled "coordination, communication and procedures ... aimed at enhancing border control on both sides," according to a statement from the Pakistani side.

The U.S. helicopter attack that killed two Pakistani soldiers on Sept. 30 of last year took place south of Mohmand in the Kurram tribal area. A joint U.S.-Pakistan investigation found that Pakistani soldiers fired at the two U.S. helicopters prior to the attack, a move the investigation team said was likely meant to notify the aircraft of their presence after they passed into Pakistani airspace several times.

A U.S. airstrike in June 2008 reportedly killed 11 Pakistani paramilitary troops during a clash between militants and coalition forces in the tribal region.

____

Associated Press writers Anwarullah Khan in Khar, Pakistan, Riaz Khan in Peshawar, Pakistan, Matiullah Achakzai in Chaman and Deb Riechmann in Kabul, Afghanistan, contributed to this report.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/asia/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111126/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

sweet potato casserole super committee walmart black friday ad 2011 nl mvp nl mvp verlander verlander