VP Marco Rubio? The man in demand

Miami (CNN) -- Will he or won't he? And would it matter?

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, considered a powerful Hispanic political player and rising star in his party, has consistently said no to having vice presidential aspirations. But still, the question keeps coming up.

Rubio, the popular Miami-born son of Cuban immigrants, has been seen by some inside Republican circles as a great "get" as a possible No. 2 on a hypothetical presidential ticket, and is already showing his power to influence the process.

Just this week he pushed back on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich after the Republican presidential candidate ran a Spanish language radio ad labeling former Gov. Mitt Romney as "the most anti-immigration candidate." Rubio called the commercial "inaccurate" and "inflammatory" and the Gingrich campaign pulled the ad.

Gingrich press secretary R.C. Hammond said the ad was taken down as part of a scheduled "rotation time for the ads," not as a result of complaints from Rubio.

Team Gingrich takes down Spanish-language ad

"This kind of language is more than just unfortunate. It's inaccurate, inflammatory and doesn't belong in this campaign," Rubio told the Miami Herald.

So, did his defense of the former Massachusetts governor constitute an endorsement? No. Rubio spokesman Alex Conant told CNN, "We remain neutral." Neutral, but perhaps not detached.

Romney and Gingrich are in a statistical dead heat in Florida, according to the latest CNN/Time/ORC International Poll.

What would Rubio bring to a Republican ticket? Many believe he could pull the Hispanic vote and clinch the victory in November. But others remind us there is no one single Hispanic vote but rather a complex group united only by a common language, with heritages as diverse as Cuba, Mexico, Puerto Rico, El Salvador or the Dominican Republic. In 2008, Hispanics voted 67% for then-Sen. Barack Obama over Sen. John McCain, who received 31% of their votes.

Navarrette: GOP, don't blow it with Florida's Latinos

Juan Hernandez, a Republican strategist and CNN en Espa ol political contributor, offers caution. "Marco Rubio is well-liked among Hispanics but he must speak clearly in favor of immigration reform to bring votes to a Republican candidate for president."

Immigration is an area where Rubio differs from other Hispanic elected officials. He recently said that immigration isn't the sole issue for Hispanic Americans. But as a wedge issue, it makes many Latinos -- even those registered as Republicans -- feel uncomfortable when the candidates talk about border security while rejecting the legalization of some undocumented workers and demanding that America makes English its official language.

There are those who believe that Rubio, a Cuban-American, would have a hard time attracting Mexican-Americans, who represent seven out of every 10 Latinos in the United States.

At the CNN debate in Jacksonville, Florida, on Thursday night, the candidates were asked about which Hispanics they would include in their administration. Rubio was first on the list for a Cabinet slot from Rick Santorum, while Gingrich suggested the senator might be more suited for a more "central and dignified" role than a Cabinet post.

Hernandez, a Mexican-American, said he believes there are other people besides the Florida senator worth looking at. "Rubio has notoriety today, but there is much room for leadership in the Hispanic political arena," he said.

Romney talks about possible running mates

Another name that comes up as a potential vice president is Susana Martinez, the Republican governor of New Mexico whose name was also mentioned Thursday night. Martinez is a Mexican-American conservative, but like Rubio, her position on immigration is in sharp contrast to where many Hispanics are on the subject.

She wants to revoke driver's licenses from undocumented immigrants in her state and signed an executive order requiring state police to check the immigration status of "criminal suspects."

But Maria Cardona, a democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, doubts Martinez can deliver the Latino vote. "Gov. Martinez would be a better match to garner any Latino support than Rubio ever would," she said. "But even so, she did not win the majority of the Latino vote in her state and if the VP nominee, presumably she would mirror the GOP nominee on all issues, which would mean she would be on the wrong side of most issues important to Latinos and so it would still be an uphill for her to garner enough Latino support for the GOP ticket."

"Latinos vote on the issues, not on surnames."

Source

Italian cruise ship survivors offered compensation

Rome (CNN) -- Surviving passengers on the wrecked Costa Concordia cruise ship will each receive a lump sum of 11,000 euros in compensation ($14,400), the cruise line said Friday.

The decision was reached during a meeting between Costa Cruises and consumer groups, the Italian Association of Tour Operators said.

The massive liner struck rocks and rolled over onto its side in shallow waters off an island on Italy's Tuscan coast on January 13, leading to a panicked overnight evacuation and a multiple deaths.

Divers searching the ship found a 16th body Tuesday; 16 others are missing. About 4,200 people were aboard the cruise liner -- 3,200 passengers and 1,000 crew members -- at the time of the collision.

Franco Gabrielli of Italy's civil protection agency, who is heading the rescue operation, said 14 of the bodies found have now been identified.

Efforts were under way Friday to open up new passages in the ship's hull so rescuers could access more areas, he told reporters.

Operations to remove 2,400 tons fuel from the liner's tanks will begin Saturday afternoon or Sunday, after a slight delay, he said.

Weather and sea conditions are expected to worsen Saturday, leading to higher waves, Gabrielli said. While this will not prevent the removal of fuel, it could present more risk to the environment if anything goes wrong, he added.

Residents of Giglio island near the site of the shipwreck have complained of seeing white filaments in the sea, he said, but further testing is needed to confirm the origin of the substance.

Outlining the compensation deal, Costa expressed "its profound condolences to the families of the victims, our continued sympathy to the families of the missing, and our deep regret and sorrow for the damages and hardship the Costa Concordia accident caused to all its guests."

The compensation will be paid to each passenger regardless of age and will cover damage to and loss of property and any psychological distress suffered, it said.

The payout will include reimbursement for the cost of the cruise and additional travel expenses. Costa will return the contents of cabin safes to their owners where possible, and will also set up a psychological counseling program for those passengers who request it.

Separate agreements will be reached with those passengers who were injured and needed treatment at the scene and with the families of those who died, its statement added.

A spokesman for the Italian Association of Tour Operators said none of the passengers was obliged to sign the agreement but, if they do, they will no longer be able to file a law suit against Costa.

Jesus Garcia Heredia, who was on the ill-starred cruise with his wife, told CNN he would not accept the payout, which would total 22,000 euros ($28,900) for the couple.

"If we can reach an agreement, I am willing to agree not to sue, no problem," he said, "but not for 11,000 euros. I don't accept this."

Heredia has not yet been contacted by anyone in the company to talk about the compensation offer, but says "it's not that easy" just to accept a lump sum.

He seemed uneasy talking about the incident and said that it has affected him deeply.

"There was a lot of loss that day," he said, referring to personal belongings and the emotional toll of the disaster. "We had it really bad there."

Roberto Corbella, president of the tour operators' association, said the compensation offer was the result of remarkable cooperation and "aims to give, after such a serious disgrace, a quick, concrete and adequate answer."

The 11,000 euro lump sum reflects Italian and international law, he said, with Costa likely to pay out about 3,000 euro more per passenger on top of that in refunds and travel costs.

He estimated the cost of the compensation offer -- not counting the separate agreements with the injured and the families of those killed and missing -- at over 40 million euro ($59 million).

He added: "Only in a year's time will we know the exact cost of this disaster for the company, in terms of expenses and in terms of image. And maybe one year will not be sufficient."

Corbella said cruise cancellations are only running about 10% higher than average, adding that "at the moment there isn't a strong emotional reaction."

Costa has said anyone who wishes to cancel a cruise booked before January 13 can do so without penalty, provided they get in touch by February 7.

Meanwhile, the captain of the Costa Concordia is under house arrest and faces possible charges of manslaughter, shipwreck and abandoning ship.

Both Costa Cruises and the Italian authorities have criticized Capt. Francesco Schettino's behavior.

Prosecutors were Friday questioning Ciro Ambrosio, Schettino's deputy on board the ship.

Entering the tribunal, his lawyer told reporters: "'We have many arms to defend us with honor. We don't feel responsible."

In his own answers to prosecutors, defense attorneys and a judge, Schettino has admitted he had made a "mistake" in colliding with the rocks off the island of Giglio.

"I hit this projection of rock, that seems almost stuck into the ship, but this was my mistake," Schettino said in a 126-page transcript. "... There isn't anything I can say, as I was convinced that passing within .28 of a mile there wouldn't be any problem."

The captain also brushed aside suggestions that at 15 knots, he was going too fast, as alleged by prosecutors.

"There isn't a speed limit," he said. "... We had more or less the speed needed to reach Savona on time."

According to the transcript, Schettino maintained he ran the ship aground to keep it from sinking. "This is what allowed me to limit the tilting," he said.

Schettino's defense attorney, Bruno Leporatti, filed an appeal Wednesday of a judge's decision to place the captain on house arrest, Leporatti's office said in a statement.

Both the prosecution and the defense are appealing the decision -- prosecutors because they believe Schettino should be in custody, and the defense because it believes he should have been released with no restrictions on his movements.

Cruise ship passengers described a scene of panic and confusion as they rushed for lifeboats the night the ship sank. Some said the crew seemed overwhelmed and did not have accurate information on what was taking place.

Source

Why is the Fed still so nervous?

Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke has championed more transparency for the central bank. But that could backfire if the Fed's projections are viewed as guarantees.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Some might say that the Federal Reserve is wisely taking a smart, wait-and-see approach regarding the economy. I am not one of those people.

The Fed may now be too bearish. It is now pledging to keep interest rates near zero for nearly another three years, pushing out its expectations for its next rate hike from mid-2013 to late 2014.

The Fed also lowered its growth forecast for the U.S. economy Wednesday, indicating that it now expects gross domestic product to rise at just a 2.2% to 2.7% rate in 2012.

The central bank may turn out to be right with its new outlook. But it's a bit odd that the Fed is rushing to tame expectations right at the same time that many large corporations are finally becoming more bullish.

Take a look at Caterpillar (CAT, Fortune 500). The construction equipment giant announced earnings that crushed estimates Thursday morning and also lifted its guidance for 2012. But what is even more telling is the economic outlook that Caterpillar gave.

In its earnings release, Caterpillar indicated that it expects the U.S. economy to grow at a rate of at least 3%. Caterpillar also noted that it thinks the Europe debt crisis -- while still a "lingering negative" -- "is unlikely to trigger a worldwide recession."

Finally, Caterpillar said it thinks Japan's economy will pick up speed following last year's tsunami and that the economies of China and other emerging markets will continue to show solid growth -- albeit at a slightly lower pace than 2011. It is forecasting 8.5% GDP growth for China and 4% for Latin America.

That's decidedly more upbeat than the Fed, don't you think?

Now is Caterpillar's forecast too rosy? Perhaps. But it seems reasonable given the recent encouraging data about the U.S. job market, growing hopes that Europe may no longer be a continent on the ledge and signs that China won't have a hard landing.

"We probably will see continued improvement in the U.S. economy and that should translate into higher earnings growth," said Steve Rogers, manager of the Shelton Core Value Fund (EQTIX) in San Francisco.

As readers of this column should know, I have consistently been saying for awhile now that the U.S. economy is slowly but surely getting better. I'll spare you my cutesy phrase that references a certain backyard piece of cooking equipment for once.

That doesn't mean that the economy is completely healthy. But it is convalescing. So it might be time for the Fed to take off the 0% training wheels a little sooner than after the next midterm election -- especially if even more companies confirm what Caterpillar is saying. And several already are.

I spoke with Sandy Cutler, CEO of Eaton (ETN, Fortune 500), a Cleveland-based maker of electrical components and power systems for trucks and automobiles, Thursday. I asked him what his company's outlook for the U.S. is now compared to three months ago. His response: "The U.S. feels better."

Like Caterpillar, Cutler said he thinks that "Armageddon" is off the table in Europe. He also said he thinks China, Brazil and other emerging markets took the right steps last year to slow their economies a bit to fight inflation.

That doesn't sound like conditions that would justify rates needing to remain near zero until 2014. If the Fed does sit tight until then, that will wind up being six years of historically low rates. That could create yet another asset bubble.

Rogers said he thinks the Fed is doing a good job given the numerous challenges facing the economy. But he conceded that the Fed probably should have only one mandate: Managing inflation through interest rates.

Sure, Ben Bernanke and the other Fed members who have found religion in the "communications tool" can talk until they are blue in the face about how interest rate forecasts are not set in stone. But that's bunk.

Maybe the Fed feels it needs to do everything it can to reassure the market it isn't asleep at the wheel and will step in when necessary to prevent future panics. Call it the ratings agency syndrome. After arguably waiting too long to act before the last recession, the Fed would rather now err on the side of caution to prove, like S&P and Moody's, that it has learned from prior mistakes.

But the market now expects no rate hikes until 2014. Anything before that would likely freak out investors. The Fed has boxed itself in, like it or not. It is showing everybody its hand ... before the cards have even been dealt.

"The Fed increased transparency but they did not provide greater clarity. They need to be data dependent. The interest rate projections cannot be guarantees," said Jeffrey Cleveland, senior economist at Payden & Rygel, a money management firm in Los Angeles.

Best of StockTwits. Netflix's Reed Hastings was on many lists as one of the best CEOs of 2010 (including Fortune's.) Hastings was also considered one of the worst CEOs of 2011 after the price hike/Qwikster/earnings warning debacles.

But with Netflix beating lowered forecasts Wednesday, Hastings could now be leading candidate for Comeback CEO of the Year. Netflix (NFLX) surged 22% Thursday and is now up 67% already in 2012. Still, many are skeptical.

totalguru: $NFLX is running up on short covering. Underlying biz still bad. CEO is stock manager.

That last comment is a bold, unfair charge. Hastings isn't "managing" earnings per se. But with so many investors short Netflix heading into the results, it does look like a squeeze is one reason the stock is up as much as it is Thursday.

mgreenlocke: $AAPL $NFLX apple up 6% on best earnings report out there and netflix up 20% on revised down smoke and mirrors report

The only thing these two have in common is they beat forecasts. Wall Street rewards companies that top expectations, even if, as was the case with Netflix, the expectations were fairly low.

oktobernv: REALITY - $NFLX - IF you assume Netflix makes a .02 cent profit for 2012 (which it wont) it would trade at 5,438 times forward earnings.

But techs with quadruple digit PE ratios in 1999 did so well! Wait. Where's my Pets.com sock puppet? Oh. There it is lying next to my WebVan T-shirt!

bradloncar: It's great $NFLX finally had some good news, but in an industry where content is everything, still not good that they lost Starz and Sony.

Agreed. That's not good. But that's why Netflix is making a big bet on its own content. It may work. I am intrigued by the Kevin Spacey show and delighted to hear there will be a fourth season of "Arrested Development" exclusively on Netflix in 2013.

But not excited enough to think it is worth more than a $1 billion boost in market value today.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica. Other than Time Warner, the parent of CNNMoney, and Abbott Laboratories, La Monica does not own positions in any individual stocks.

Today's featured rates:

Source

Three holes in Romney's economic plan

On some of the toughest economic challenges of the day -- housing, taxes and spending - Mitt Romney's plan is missing key policy details.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Above all else, the Romney campaign has one ethos: Our candidate will fix the economy.

But on some of the toughest economic challenges of the day -- housing, taxes and spending -- Mitt Romney's economic plan is missing key policy details.

And months on the campaign trail haven't filled the gaps.

Romney wants Americans to pay lower income taxes, but hasn't said what the new rates will be, what the bracket structure will look like, or when he wants them to take effect.

He wants to cut government spending to 20% of GDP, but is cloudy on exactly how that will happen.

And his economic plan barely even mentions housing -- one of the economy's biggest drags.

"These plans are always long on promise and short on numbers," said Robert Bixby, the executive director of The Concord Coalition. "And this is no exception."

Taxes

Romney's tax plan would mean big tax cuts and a corresponding reduction in federal revenue.

The plan eliminates taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains for taxpayers who make less than $200,000. It also calls for the elimination of the estate tax, and a reduction in the tax rate paid by corporations from 35% to 25%.

What, exactly, Romney proposes for personal income tax rates is more difficult to tease out. (Read Newt Gingrich's tax plan.)

Both the official economic plan and the Romney campaign website say the candidate wants to "maintain current tax rates on personal income."

That means a 35% tax rate on top-earning Americans. But in a debate last week, he suggested he would lower the top rate to 25% or even 20% when asked to identify the highest rate any American should pay.

"More than 25%, I think, is taking too much out of our pockets," Romney said.

Without giving a timetable, Romney has said in the past that he would like to move to a "fairer, flatter, simpler tax structure" in the long run. But when these lower rates would go into effect is unclear.

And what about Americans who are not at the top end of the pay scale? The campaign has not released any details on Romney's eventual plans for those tax brackets.

A campaign spokeswoman told CNNMoney that while Romney "has not yet released the specifics of his plan, he believes a top rate of 25% is reasonable in principle; it is consistent with a flatter, fairer, simpler approach."

Romney's competitors have been more specific. Newt Gingrich, for example, has proposed an optional 15% flat tax on income.

Spending

Like many politicians, Romney falls short when it comes to naming specific budget cuts that back his ambitious goals for cutting back on federal spending.

Romney says he would cap spending at 20% of GDP, immediately reduce non-security discretionary accounts by 5% and pursue a balanced budget amendment.

With federal spending currently at around 24% of GDP, that means huge cuts.

Romney wants to cut funding for relatively small programs like Amtrak, the National Endowment for the Arts, foreign aid, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and Title X family planning.

He does detail a few bigger ticket items, like a 10% reduction in the size of the federal workforce, which would mean around 250,000 fewer jobs. He also calls for a modification to Medicaid that would turn it into a block grant program.

Bixby described these cuts as "mere trinkets."

To reach 20% of GDP, more spending reductions will be needed, and Romney is light on the details.

"It gets very difficult to cut spending to match today's tax levels," Bixby said. "And really there isn't anything in the proposal that says how he would do that."

As for a balanced budget, Romney's tax plan would sharply reduce government revenue, something that when coupled with an opposition to cutting Pentagon spending, makes a balancing of accounts all but impossible.

But Romney's lack of specificity on spending cuts is not unique. Of the final four Republican candidates, only Ron Paul has provided a detailed scheme that pinpoints spending levels for programs and agencies.

Housing

The housing market remains tied in knots. One in every 69 homes had at least one foreclosure filing last year, while 804,000 homes were repossessed. In total, more than 4 million homes have been lost to foreclosure over the past five years. (Has Obama's housing policy failed?)

His official plan is virtually silent on the subject, but Romney has briefly commented on the housing crisis in other venues, offering prescriptions that critics have labeled insufficient.

"The best way to get this economy going again is to get the overhang of all these foreclosures pushed through the system, come out the other end, letting people get back into homes at reasonable prices and renegotiate them," Romney said Monday in Florida.

At a debate later that day, Romney said "you have to get government out of the mess," but added that fraud prevention was important and "you're going to have to help people see if they can't get more flexibility from their banks."

In an October interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial board, Romney criticized the Obama administration for interfering in the market, thereby exacerbating the foreclosure glut, and characterized the first-time home buyer tax credit as an "ineffective idea."

In the same interview, Romney expressed a willingness to consider a program that would help individuals refinance their mortgages as a way to help keep their homes, a strategy the Obama administration has deployed with marginal success.

But even that is to be announced.

"I'm not signing on," Romney said, "until I find out who's going to pay and who's going to get bailed out, and that's not something which we know all the answers to."

But Bixby said Romney's team will have to fill in the gaps as the campaign drags on.

"There are some big holes here," he said. "There is a lot that falls into the category of 'still to come'."

Today's featured rates:

Source

5 things we learned from Monday's debate

(CNN) -- After Saturday's South Carolina primary shook up the Republican presidential race, the four major candidates matched up on Monday in the first of two debates in Florida, which votes next on January 31. Here are five things we learned:

A new twist on "Newt Romney"

Newt Gingrich got a taste of the one-on-one debate he's proposed having with Mitt Romney Monday night, when the former Massachusetts governor launched an unrelenting attack against Gingrich and kept at it for much of the evening.

Continuing the assault he had launched since losing the South Carolina primary to Gingrich on Saturday, Romney went after the former House speaker in a big way in Tampa, calling him an "influence peddler" and mocking Gingrich for saying he advised troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac as "an historian."

He continued to tie Gingrich's consulting work to the foreclosure crisis gripping Florida.

"You could have spoken out in a way to say these guys are wrong, this needs to end," he told Gingrich. "But instead, you were being paid by them. You were making over $1 million at the same time people in Florida were being hurt by millions of dollars."

Romney senior adviser Stuart Stevens denied his candidate had shifted from last week's regret of attacking his opponents but that he is "a very aggressive individual" who took "a certain delight" in taking on the speaker's "preposterous statements."

So effective was Romney's attack that it raised questions about whether Gingrich had parried strongly enough to hold his own on the issue with his on-stage rival.

In a sign the Romney campaign would keep up the pressure, senior strategist Eric Fehrnstrom pointed to a statement Gingrich made in the debate that he had hired an "expert on lobbying law" to advise his Washington firm on "the bright line between what you can do as a citizen and what you can do as a lobbyist."

After the debate Fehrnstrom said Gingrich should follow up on his offer to make that expert available to testify about the training.

"He's got a lobbying expert who apparently went into Gingrich's lobbying firm and explained to them how they could exploit loopholes in the law so that their activities couldn't fairly be described lobbying," Fehrnstrom said. "I'd like to hear his testimony."

Hitting the mute button

During the last GOP debate in Charleston, South Carolina, a rowdy audience seemed to embolden the four candidates to go after each other more aggressively and even push moderator John King to direct at least one more question towards Ron Paul than he had planned.

At the start of Monday's debate, moderator Brian Williams asked all the invited guests to "withhold their applause, any verbal reactions to what they hear onstage, so as to ensure this is about the four candidates here tonight and what they have to say."

At first this seemed like a modest change to the debate's rules, but it ended up having a significant effect. In a debate season where audiences have lustily cheered for their favorite candidates or in support of hard-line conservative principles, the absence of feedback was notable.

The silence was only broken on a few occasions and the candidates were unable to gauge the impact of their calculated applause lines, and when Romney and Gingrich engaged in a prolonged back-and-forth over the former speaker's consulting record with Freddie Mac, the audience's silence made it more difficult to divine who won the round.

Trying to shoulder into a two-man race

Rick Santorum has worked hard over the last several weeks to remind people that this isn't a two-man race and has consistently blamed the media for prematurely narrowing the field. He repeated that argument on Monday but had trouble making it stick.

"I think if you've learned anything about this election, that any type of prediction is going to be wrong," Santorum said. "The idea that this was a two-person race has been an idea that has been in fashion now for eight months, and it's been wrong about eight times."

Desperately in need of a game-changing performance, Santorum nonetheless seemed to take a backseat for much of the rest of the night. One of his two real moments on offense came as he was playing defense. When asked about his fellow Republicans' attacks on Romney's record at Bain Capital, Santorum pointed out that he hasn't gone after Romney. Then he went after Romney.

"My question to Gov. Romney and to Speaker Gingrich -- if you believe in capitalism that much, then why did you support the bailout of Wall Street?" Santorum asked.

Towards the end of the debate Santorum was given another chance to go after his opponents, this time on their past support for individual health insurance mandates. Calling mandates "the biggest issue" in this election, and something that is "crushing the economy, will crush it even further and crush freedom," Santorum quickly ran through his opponents' checkered past on the issue

"Gov. Romney's plan in Massachusetts was the basis for Obamacare," he began. "Speaker Gingrich for 20 years supported a federal individual mandate, something that [Florida Attorney General] Pam Bondi is now going to the Supreme Court saying is unconstitutional. Speaker Gingrich, for 20 years up until last year, supported an individual mandate, which is at the core of Obamacare."

Both of these attacks were well-launched, but neither seemed to land very effectively, and neither seemed to really have the potential for shaking up the current state of the race in Florida.

Ron Paul, who has already said he would not spend primary night in Florida, injected some humor and his trademark libertarian flavor to the proceedings -- but did not appear to change the political calculus in the fourth state to vote.

Asked again whether he thought he had a viable chance to win the Republican nomination, Paul pointed to his support among young adults, and again said he did not plan to run as a third-party candidate.

He addressed a previous statement about not imagining himself in the White House by reaffirming his commitment to the race.

"Unlike others, maybe they sit around and daydream about being in the White House," Paul said. "I just don't sit around daydreaming about it, but I'm in a race, I'm in a good race."

Practice makes perfect?

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

After a week of faltering answers, Mitt Romney managed to give a fluid response to questions about his tax returns -- just one day before he was scheduled to release them.

The multi-millionaire calmly answered a series of questions about his financial documentation, acknowledging his wealth but then pivoting to discuss overhauling America's tax policy.

He also seemed prepared for a question that seemed to fluster him in a previous matchup -- whether he would follow the lead of his father George Romney, a one-time presidential hopeful who made a point to release 12 years of his returns.

"I agree with my dad on a lot of things, but we also disagree," Romney said. "And going out with 12 years of returns is not something I'm going to do."

With practiced answers and by saying he would release his 2010 returns and estimated 2011 taxes on Tuesday, Romney hoped to defuse the issue that helped create a week of bad press in the run-up to the South Carolina primary. Whether he chose to release enough information quickly enough to quiet criticism from his own supporters and the media remains to be seen.

All politics is local

After primaries in three states that will play relatively minor roles in the 2012 general election, almost a third of Monday's debate focused on issues important to Florida, a swing state in November.

For one long portion of the debate, the questions ranged from the potential effects of another oil spill on the Sunshine State's vital tourism industry to the future of federal subsidies for Florida's sugar industry. Even the long-forgotten Terry Schiavo case came up.

One of the most interesting questions pertained to the potential hypocrisy of the candidates' choice to film campaign commercials and distribute fliers in Spanish despite their belief that English should be the nation's official language.

"I would have ballots in English, and I think you could have programs where virtually everybody would be able to read the ballots," Gingrich said, and nearly all of his rivals agreed.

"English is the language of this nation," Romney said. "People need to learn English to be able to be successful, to get great jobs. We don't want to have people limited in their capacity to achieve the American dream because they don't speak English."

In a state as big as Florida with such a diverse Republican electorate, candidates must appeal to voters on a variety of issues. While previous debates have taken on the issue of immigration, both Gingrich and Romney emphasized their willingness to sign a version of the DREAM Act that would help only undocumented immigrants serving in the military -- a slight divergence from the harder line expressed in past debates.

With Florida looming as a crucial state in 2012, whoever emerges as the eventual nominee will surely have to address many of these issues again, only now there are even more details of their positions on the record.

Source

Turbulence injures three flight attendants on flight to Miami

(CNN) -- Three American Airlines flight attendants were injured Sunday when a flight bound for Miami, Florida, encountered severe turbulence.

Flight 980 from Recife, Brazil to Miami was carrying 167 passengers. No passengers were injured, according to American Airlines spokesman Tim Smith. Three of six flight attendants on board were injured.

The turbulence hit about two hours into the flight, passengers told CNN affiliate WFOR.

"Everything was fine and the next minute the plane just fell, a huge drop," passenger Gillas Correa told WFOR.

People were screaming and crying, Correa said. "There was a woman who was sitting a couple rows behind us; she got thrown up in the air and landed in the hallway."

All six flight attendants were taken to Miami area hospitals to be observed and treated, Smith said via e-mail.

"Fortunately, no passengers were injured. Five of the flight attendants were checked and released. One remained in the hospital overnight for further observation."

Correa said one flight attendant was injured by a falling food cart.

"She hit the ceiling and when she came down the cart hit her," he said.

Source

GOP race turns to Florida; Romney to release tax return Tuesday

Washington (CNN) -- After a spirited week of campaigning and debating in South Carolina, all eyes are now on Florida as the GOP presidential candidates prepare for the January 31 primary in the pivotal state.

Also this week, Mitt Romney will release his 2010 tax return and an estimate of his 2011 tax liability, the former Massachusetts governor said.

The comment, made in an interview on "Fox News Sunday," was a big change in Romney's plans for handling an issue that dogged his campaign last week, and followed Saturday's loss to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in the South Carolina primary.

Last week, Romney told reporters he would release his tax returns in April and estimated his actual tax rate was close to 15% -- the amount charged for capital gains income -- because most of his income was from investments.

On Sunday, he acknowledged that strategy didn't work in response to reporters and rival candidates questioning when Romney -- a multimillionaire -- would make public his tax details.

"I think we just made a mistake in holding off as long as we did. It was just a distraction," Romney said.

"I was planning on releasing them in April when they've been released by other candidates in the past," he said. "But you know what, given all the attention that has been focused on tax returns, given the distraction that I think they became in the last couple of weeks ... I will release my tax returns for 2010, which is the last returns that were completed."

Romney added that the tax return, as well as the 2011 estimate, would be posted on the campaign website Tuesday so that "people can take a good look at it."

Gingrich, who has raised the issue repeatedly, commended Romney when told during an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press" of the announcement.

"I think it's exactly the right thing to do," Gingrich said. "And as far as I'm concerned, that particular issue is now set aside and we can go on and talk about other, bigger, and more important things."

Democrats also have called for Romney to release his tax returns, hoping it will bolster their efforts to portray him as a wealthy financier out of touch with working Americans.

By succumbing to the growing pressure to release tax return details now, Romney acknowledged the issue hurt his once-soaring campaign as the nominating process shifts to the Florida primary on January 31.

A race that seemed headed toward a quick nomination for Romney went through a volatile week that changed the political equation for the four remaining Republican candidates vying to run against President Barack Obama in November.

Initially announced the victor in the January 3 Iowa caucuses by eight votes over former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, Romney learned Thursday that certified results showed Santorum actually won the state by 34 votes.

Then came Gingrich's solid victory Saturday in South Carolina in a race that Romney had led until his uncertain handling of the tax return issue on the campaign trail and in Thursday's debate.

Asked at the debate by moderator John King of CNN if he would follow his father's example and release tax returns for multiple years, Romney answered "maybe" and appeared uncomfortable discussing the issue all week.

Two of South Carolina's longest-serving elected officials attributed campaign mistakes by Romney for helping Gingrich run away with the state's first-in-the-South primary.

Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, a powerhouse in conservative politics, said on CNN's "State of the Union" that Romney bungled the tax return issue because "he wasn't definitive in his answer."

"He should have said immediately 'I'll do it in April,' or 'I'm not going to do it,' or 'I'm going to do it immediately.' But the fact that he wasn't clear, I think, is what hurt him," said DeMint, who endorsed Romney in 2008 but has yet to declare his support for anyone this time.

Democratic Rep. James Clyburn, who serves as the assistant minority leader in the House of Representatives, pinned Romney's loss on an inability to connect with South Carolina Republicans.

"Romney seemed not to be able to connect with his base; he really separated himself from the voters," Clyburn said. "It was very clear to me that he was cutting himself off. ... He was not doing well with identifying with ordinary voters. He doesn't seem to be able to do that."

Santorum, also on CNN, said the Republican race so far -- with three different candidates winning each of the first three states -- dealt a serious blow to any notion that Romney was certain to emerge as the Republican presidential nominee.

In particular, he said the victories by both himself and Gingrich showed that conservatives were flexing their muscles in the primary process.

"This idea that Mitt Romney is not going to be able to be defeated unless conservatives coalesce, well, it's objectively false," Santorum said.

Romney, meanwhile, aimed more fire at Gingrich -- portraying him as a Washington insider who lacked the necessary experience outside the U.S. capital to fix the government's problems.

"I don't think that the people of this country are going to choose as the next president of the United States a person who spent 40 years in Washington as a congressman and a lobbyist," Romney said on Fox, adding that Gingrich "is not ideally suited to face off against the president."

He said that Gingrich proved to be a "failed leader" during his four years in the 1990s as speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, claiming he resigned "in disgrace." Romney noted that a vast majority of GOP representatives joined Democrats in reprimanding Gingrich after he was ordered to pay $300,000 following an ethics probe.

"He has not had a record of successful leadership," Romney said during a rally Sunday in Ormond Beach, Florida.

Gingrich gave his explanation for what happened with that ethics probe on CNN's "State of the Union." He characterized the penalty leveled by the House Ethics Committee as reimbursement for the cost of the investigation.

He also claimed that he persuaded fellow Republicans in the House of Representatives to vote "yes" on the ethics charges against him in order to put a swift end to the proceedings. Doing so helped lawmakers move on the balancing the budget, Gingrich said.

"I personally asked House Republicans to vote 'yes' because we had to get it behind us to get back to the things that mattered," Gingrich said.

According to the nonpartisan fact check group PolitiFact, Gingrich was reprimanded by the House and ordered to pay the $300,000 penalty in 1997 for violating an ethics rule. It noted the charge against Gingrich was an ethics violation, though the $300,000 penalty was considered reimbursement for the ethics committee's investigation.

The violation originated in a course he taught at Kennesaw State College, which organizers claimed qualified for tax-exempt status, PolitiFact reported. The House Ethics Committee ultimately concluded the course was run to "help in achieving a partisan, political goal," making it ineligible for tax exemption, according to PolitiFact.

Central to the 1997 investigation was a letter submitted by Gingrich's lawyers, which the ethics panel deemed inaccurate. Gingrich conceded Sunday the letter was a mistake.

"It was a mistake," Gingrich said Sunday. "So the one mistake I made was signing a letter written by our lawyers, a firm which frankly did me a great disservice. And that's the only thing."

In another interview, Gingrich told C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" he planned a week of big speeches offering "big solutions for a big country" in the run-up to the Florida primary.

"I'll be at the space coast in Florida this week giving a speech -- a visionary speech -- on the United States going back into space in the John F. Kennedy tradition," Gingrich said, promising other speeches in following days on health care, housing, the economy, Cuba and Latin America.

Also taking to podiums this week will be Obama, who delivers his annual State of the Union address on Tuesday. Romney has announced plans for both a "prebuttal" and rebuttal to the president's speech.

Source

Health professor challenges Paula Deen to a cook-off

(CNN) -- "I'm just gonna put a little more butter in there, y'all," she said as she plopped a large chunk into the skillet. "Oh my," she added, "I've gone and put a whole stick in by now."

I was watching Paula Deen on the Food Network, whipping up a shrimp saut to go over pasta. I thought to myself, "I could make a similar dish that would look much better (hers was murky from all the butter), taste much better (fresh, clean flavors from a small amount of extra-virgin olive oil, garlic, dry vermouth and herbs), with a fraction of the fat and calories."

Later that day, I read about Deen's revelation that she had been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes three years ago and is now a paid spokeswoman for Novo Nordisk, the pharmaceutical company that supplies her diabetes medication. She says the diagnosis will not change the way she cooks.

What a shame! Like many people, Deen has genes that predispose to weight gain, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes when physical activity is insufficient and calories are consumed in excess, especially from quick-digesting carbohydrate foods that cause spikes of blood sugar. Type 2 diabetes is a serious condition that greatly increases risks of cardiovascular disease, disability and premature death.

The good news is that many, if not most, cases can be put into remission through lifestyle changes: losing weight, increasing activity and adhering to a low-glycemic-load diet, especially minimizing consumption of flour and sugar.

Taking a drug to lower blood sugar without making those lifestyle changes is a classic example of trying to deal with a problem without going to the root of it. (Another is taking a pill to suppress stomach acid so that you can eat foods that cause heartburn without it.)

Eatocracy: Hugh Acheson on Southern food beyond the butter

The queen of high-fat, high-calorie "Southern comfort" food likes to say that she encourages her followers to practice moderation in eating her rich dishes. How about using her charm and culinary skills to teach them to make healthier versions of those dishes without sacrificing flavor or any of the pleasure of eating?

If she doesn't think that's possible, I'd encourage her to eat at one of the True Food Kitchen restaurants in Arizona and California.

The food there is designed to emphasize flavor and pleasure along with good nutrition. Too many of us -- including Deen, I would guess -- think that food that's good and food that's good for you are in opposition. Unless you have experienced truly delicious, healthy food, you won't believe it exists.

The Food Network has become a major entertainment channel. A lot of people watch it.

Sadly, most of the shows focus on making (or eating huge portions) of just the kinds of foods that promote obesity and all too often the disturbances of metabolism that can lead to type 2 diabetes. The societal problems resulting from our unhealthy eating habits are grave; for one, the Defense Department has expressed concern that the obesity epidemic in young people is shrinking the pool of acceptable applicants for military service. The Food Network could begin doing public service by teaching people to prepare more sensible meals.

It could start with you, Paula Deen. You have the perfect reason to change your ways and the perfect platform to disseminate your message. Forget Novo Nordisk. Show your loyal fans how not to need diabetes drugs. And whenever you're ready to accept my challenge for a shrimp saut cook-off, y'all just let me know.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

Join the conversation on Facebook

Source

Where to get married like a star

(CNN) -- The approach of Valentine's Day may have you entertaining thoughts of love, perhaps even marriage.

You'll remember the place you exchange vows forever, for sure, but where on Earth should you go to make it extra special?

For answers, look to the stars -- the rich and famous kind, that is.

Here is a sample of some of the hotels, resorts and castles that celebrities found romantic enough to say "I do."

Parrot Cay Resort, Turks and Caicos

Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner chose secluded luxury when they tied the knot at this resort on a private island in 2005.

Known for its soft white sand beach and first-class spa, Parrot Cay has a no-fly zone so that famous guests -- such as Bruce Willis and Donna Karan -- don't have to worry about photographers snapping pictures of them from the air.

If relaxing in a private tropical paradise isn't enough, you can go diving, deep-sea fishing, windsurfing or catamaran sailing. The resort also offers yoga retreats and private cruises.

Rooms start at $450 a night for stays through April. If you're willing to spend much more, you can stay in a beach house or a spacious villa with direct beach access.

For more information, click here.

Castello Odescalchi, Italy

Just a short drive from Rome, this 15th century castle in Bracciano, Italy, has hosted princes, popes and kings, but it became Hollywood celebrity central when Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes wed here in 2006.

Dozens of famous guests -- including Brooke Shields and Jennifer Lopez -- flocked inside the castle's massive stone walls to watch the couple exchange vows during a sunset ceremony.

But you don't have to be a star to get married at the Castello Odescalchi. The property is open to the public and includes a museum as well as space for "unique and unforgettable" events and receptions.

For more information, click here. To inquire about holding your wedding there, e-mail matrimoni@odescalchi.it.

The Cloisters, Lutherville, Maryland

Built in the 1930s by Sumner and Dudrea Parker -- a wealthy Baltimore couple who loved to travel -- The Cloisters looks like a medieval European castle magically transported to rural Maryland.

It's here that Will Smith and Baltimore native Jada Pinkett Smith married on New Year's Eve in 1997.

The castle, which takes its name from the cloistered garden, incorporates antique building materials from Europe, such as gables from France and a stained-glass door from Italy. Inside, guests can marvel at the four-story spiral stair tower and an extensive collection of tapestries, paintings and antiques.

Mrs. Parker bequeathed The Cloisters and its contents to the city of Baltimore in 1972. It's now an event venue, hosting 250 weddings, parties and business meetings a year.

You can rent the mansion for $2,000 to $5,500, depending on the day of the week and the time of year.

For more information, click here.

The Plaza, New York

When one of the world's most famous couples decided to say "I do," they chose one of the world's most famous hotels.

Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas exchanged vows in a $1.5 million ceremony at The Plaza in the fall of 2000, complete with 20,000 roses and a 6-foot, 10-tier, vanilla-and-butter-cream cake.

Located on Fifth Avenue, the elegant Big Apple landmark has long been a sought-after site for weddings, so much so that it was a driving plot line in the movie "Bride Wars."

Couples can choose the Grand Ballroom or the Terrace Room for the ceremony and one of the hotel's 102 suites for the wedding night.

Rooms start at about $645 and suites at about $895 for a February stay.

For more information, click here.

Villa D'Este, Italy

John Krasinski's character in "The Office" got married in Niagara Falls, but the TV star chose a more faraway location for his nuptials to actress Emily Blunt in the summer of 2010.

Located on the shores of Italy's famed Lake Como, Villa D'Este was built in the 16th century as the summer residence for a cardinal and was converted into a luxury hotel in 1873.

The property is known for its lush gardens -- 25 acres where you can gaze upon everything from a 500-year-old tree to azaleas, camellias and roses.

Depending on your budget, you can stay in a room, suite or private villa surrounded by decor that includes period furniture, oil paintings and silk-covered sofas.

Rates start at about $545 per night for a March stay and rise quickly for rooms with a lake view.

For more information, click here.

Umaid Bhawan Palace, India

Called one of the largest private residences in the world, the Jodhpur royal family still lives in part of this massive palace, commissioned by the Maharaja of Jodhpur in 1923.

Today, the royals mingle with guests, including model Elizabeth Hurley and businessman Arun Nayar who married here in 2007 -- one of several wedding celebrations the couple held in England and India.

(Their British nuptials took place in Sudeley Castle near Winchcombe.)

Guests at Umaid Bhawan Palace will find opulent accommodations and exotic touches, such as a traditional welcome with a fleet of elephants and camels dressed in royal attire and the company of peacocks in the palace's colorful gardens.

The resort also employs a palmist and astrologer for guest use, noting that ancient rulers in the region were fascinated by star alignments and fortunetelling.

One-bedroom suites start at about $900 per night.

For more information, click here.

Source

Is the NFL really a quarterback league?

The San Francisco 49ers are trying to win the Super Bowl with Alex Smith, and the Baltimore Ravens are trying to win it with Joe Flacco, which seems like trying to shower without using water. The NFL, we have been told 1,000 times, is a quarterback league. You either have a great one or you need a great one. ESPN even declared that 2011 was "The Year of the Quarterback," but sadly couldn't get that confirmed on menus at Chinese restaurants. (Imagine! 2010: Year of the Tiger. 2011: Year of the Quarterback. 2012: Year of the Dragon.)

But is the NFL really a quarterback league? Obviously, teams need competent quarterbacks, but do they need great ones to win the Super Bowl?

The evidence points in that direction. Since the Ravens won the Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer at quarterback, 10 Super Bowls have been played. Seven quarterbacks have won. The list:

THREE TITLES: Tom Brady.

TWO TITLES: Ben Roethlisberger.

ONE TITLE: Drew Brees, Brad Johnson, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers.

Six of those seven guys have at least a chance at the Hall of Fame. The seventh is of course Johnson. Johnson was actually a pretty good passer -- he made two Pro Bowls -- but he is the perfect guy for this question. He was good but not great. Can a team win a Super Bowl with a good (but not great) quarterback?

There was a time, not long ago, when the league was not so QB-centric. I say "not long ago," because my rule is that if I remember it, it was not long ago. Go back to the 1980s. That time is mostly remembered as the Joe Montana era, for good reason, with guys like Dan Marino and John Elway chasing him, much as Patrick Ewing and Charles Barkley and Karl Malone chased Michael Jordan.

But who won Super Bowls from 1980 to 1992?

Well, Jim Plunkett won two. Plunkett is remembered fondly, and there is even a small (and hopeless) campaign to get him into the Hall of Fame. But that is mostly because he won those two Super Bowls, not because he was a great player. His career numbers: 52.5 completion percentage, 164 TDs, 198 interceptions. Even in that era, that was not impressive.

Jim McMahon won a Super Bowl. He is also remembered fondly, but it is worth noting that when McMahon was just 27, the Bears used their first-round pick on a quarterback (Jim Harbaugh).

The Redskins exemplified the era. They won a Super Bowl with Joe Theismann, who is also remembered fondly by people who never heard him on TV. I do think it's fair to say Theismann was a star at that point, but the Redskins won another Super Bowl with Doug Williams, a career 49.5 percent passer. Then, for kicks, they tried to win the Super Bowl with Mark Rypien -- and they did! This may explain why they thought that Rex Grossman experiment would work.

The Giants won a Super Bowl with Phil Simms, a classic good-but-not-great quarterback, and Jeff Hostetler, a career backup.

I don't mean to denigrate any of these players. But I think it's fair to say: In the '80s, you didn't feel like your team needed a star quarterback to win the Super Bowl.

The game has changed. Defensive backs are not allowed to be nearly as physical as they were 25 years ago. There are rules to protect the quarterback, the quarterback's image and the quarterback's financial advisor. Passing games are much more sophisticated. Coaches no longer fear the weather -- unless there is an apocalyptic rainstorm, they happily call pass plays.

And this has led to the feeling, at least for me, that it's a shootout game now, and you need one of the best quarterbacks to win the Super Bowl. The theory feels so correct. But it also feels like the conventional wisdom in the NBA, which is that you need a superstar to win the title.

I have a problem with that theory, for two reasons. One is that it is self-fulfilling -- we automatically assume the best player on the title team is a true superstar, and the best players on other teams are not-quite superstars. The reality is that there were probably 10 players as good as Dirk Nowitzki last year. Over the last five years, LeBron James has been the best player in the NBA, and he hasn't won a championship. Of course you need great players to win, but there are more of those than we sometimes realize.

It is even possible that, five years from now, we will decide that a great quarterback won the Super Bowl in 2012 -- and his name was Alex Smith or Joe Flacco. Smith is younger than Kurt Warner was when he shocked everybody with the '99 Rams, and while Warner bounced around before getting his chance, Smith bounced around while staying put. He has had like 17 offensive coordinators since he got to San Francisco. And Flacco seems like a caretaker quarterback, but he has a big arm and playoff experience. Maybe he will grow. (Hey, I said maybe.)

Or maybe one of them will win, then revert to mediocrity next year. And we will find out that the NFL is not quite the quarterback league it seems, but is more like the league it was ... not long ago.

Source