Docherty, who won silver at the 2004 Olympics, beat Armstrong by 31 seconds after overtaking the American on the running leg of the event, which was raced in searing heat in Panama City. The 70.3 refers to the triathlons distance, which is divided into a 1.2-mile swim, a 56-mile cycle race and a 13.1-mile race.

Docherty, who won in 3hr 50min 13sec, told New Zealand media that Armstrong brushed passed him at the finish line without offering congratulations but later briefly shook his hand and acknowledged his victory.

Docherty said: Im not sure what it was all about, I can only assume he was just disappointed to get beaten.

I did shake his hand a little bit later. Hes on a completely different level and planet to us guys [triathletes]. Its great to have him in the sport, he certainly adds something. Its an eye opener to see how he gets mobbed and the chaos around him.

The 40-year-old American retired from professional cycling last year following a career in which he overcame testicular, brain and lung cancer to win the Tour de France seven times in succession. Armstrong competed in amateur and professional triathlons as a teenager, before focusing on cycling.

Earlier this month US federal prosecutors closed an investigation into allegations of drug use levelled at Armstrong by his former team-mate Floyd Landis, with no charges laid.

In last years World Championship, held over the same distance but on a different course, Craig Alexander won gold with a time four minutes slower than Armstrong recorded.

I need a challenge in my life, Armstrong said. I need some stuff to do. I like to train. I like to suffer a bit and today was little over the top but its great to be back.

Docherty was surprised Armstrong did not dominate the races cycle leg. I thought Lance would absolutely cream us on the bike but he was probably in a similar position to me where he wasnt too sure how to pace himself. He certainly looked like he was holding back and that was probably why he ran so well off the bike.

Armstrong led Docherty after the cycling leg but the New Zealander made up ground on the running leg and passed Armstrong 1.5 miles from the finish.

Its great that I could hold one up for the other triathletes and show that its certainly not a sport that you can just walk into and dominate straight away, Docherty told the New Zealand Herald.

Its quite an honour to see a seven-time Tour de France winner and someone you admire standing in second place below you on the podium. Its a highlight of my career.

It appears that the president and his leftist cabal believe we are all stupid. They believe if you tell enough lies, the lies become fact. They spend all day, every day, trying to convince Americans that taxes on the rich are too low.

The reality is taxes are not low at all. If you think they are, youve either been brainwashed, or you arent paying taxes. The truth is: The taxes are too damn high.

We do have a serious problem in this country. But its not a tax problem. It is a spending problem.

Our government is addicted to spending. It doesn’t matter what the tax rate is. It doesn’t matter how high the tax revenues. We could raise tax rates to 90% and government would still spend $1.40 for every dollar it takes in. So why are we blaming the victim (taxpayers) for the national debt?

Government is a spending addict and needs rehab. If you dont believe me, look at Europe.

Taxes are far higher than America, yet the countries of Europe are desperately broke. Bankrupt, Insolvent. Panic is setting in. Greece is burning. It may become the worst economic crisis in modern history. And its all about big spending and high taxes.

Yet President Obama continues to claim in every speech that taxes on the rich are too low and we therefore desperately need to raise taxes.

When a private sector CEO lies to investors, it’s called fraud. You can go to prison for manipulating the facts. Yet President Obama and his leftist cabal in Congress lie, omit and manipulate the facts about taxes every day.

Let’s examine the bold faced lies of Obama and the left, who try to justify tax increases on the rich on a daily basis:

First, Obama quotes the dollars earned by the top 1% of income earners to prove that “the rich” are making too much and being taxed too little. That’s sleight of hand.

The president is lumping billionaires with yachts and private planes into the same boat with small business owners like myself. Within that top 1% are a few billionaire titans like Warren Buffett, hedge fund managers who earn $500 million per year, Wall Street tycoons who earn $100 million per year just in stock options, all mixed in with small business owners like me.

How can you use billion dollar stock gains, or $100 million hedge fund incomes, or $20 million Wall Street bonuses, to justify raising taxes on a small businessman who makes $250,000 to $500,000 per year by working 16 hours a day?

By courageously risking their own money, small business owners create over 70% of the new jobs in the US economy.

President Obama is comparing these individuals to billionaires who share the same tax bracket. Mr. Obama claims that everyone in the top 1% tax bracket is making too much, and paying too little in taxes.

The president is playing a bait and switch shell game. Some might even go so far as to call that kind of manipulation tax fraud.

Second, Mr. Obama claims tax rates are currently among the lowest in history. Once again the president is purposely omitting the full picture.

Separate from federal income tax rates, US taxpayers now pay the highest FICA and Medicare tax rates ever; the highest state, local and property taxes ever; the highest sales taxes ever; and the second highest business income taxes in the industrialized world.

Add it all up, and small business owners like myself are overburdened like never before in history. So we are clearly being deceived. Again, some might call that tax fraud.

Third, Obama is comparing apples to oranges when he compares tax rates. Rates are lower today than in the past because many valuable tax deductions were eliminated. And we now face caps, phase-outs, and the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax.

Therefore quoting higher rates is a distortion of the truth. A tax rate of 70% from decades ago might actually be lower than todays rates once you include these factors.

As Ronald Reagan would say, “There you go misrepresenting, again, President Obama.”

Fourth, Obama constantly reports that tax rates were once much higher. Another distortion.

It is true that FDR raised the top rate in 1935 to 79%. But what Mr. Obama and his team doesn’t tell us is that it only applied to someone making the equivalent of $76,000,000 per year.

Only one man in the entire United States of America paid a penny at that rate in 1935: John D. Rockefeller.

Mr. Obama wants much higher taxes for millions of small business owners making $250,000 and above.

But he quotes robber baron” rates to sell his bait and switch scheme. In the private sector you face civil or criminal charges for misleading investors like that.

President Obama also purposely leaves out a very important fact — that only in the last 30 years have we moved away from a cash economy.

Tax rates at 70% or higher didn’t matter prior to 1980 because the whole country operated with an underground (cash) economy. Most small businesses earned unreported cash.

Does anyone- including President Obama — believe that restaurant owners, bar owners, or retailers paid huge taxes on their cash incomes 30 years ago?

Today we have a computerized economy based on credit cards. Virtually every dollar that every business takes in is tracked and reported. Today, banks report to government all suspicious or big ticket deposits. Virtually every dollar in the US economy is tracked and taxed. So the rate of taxes is immaterial — all of us are paying far more in taxes than ever before. To not report that difference is deceptive. Some might call that tax fraud.

Finally, President Obama calls his desired tax increases small and fair. In reality they are huge.

If President Obama got his way federal income taxes would hit 40% or higher. And hed take the cap off FICA taxes. And hed dramatically reduce or eliminate mortgage, charitable and business deductions. And then just for fun, hed add a national VAT tax. Now add in the new taxes for ObamaCare. Add it up.

Americans would face tax rates approaching 70%. And this time there is no cash economy. The government would take 60 to 70 cents of every dollar we all make, while we do all the work. The mafia has nothing on the government!

So why is Obama playing fast and loose with the facts? Taxes arent low and he knows it. And the increases he desires arent small or fair, and he knows it.

Our government is heavily in debt, and Obama needs to find targets of opportunity (ie victims) to pay the bills, so America doesn’t go bankrupt on his watch.

Second, Obama’s only chance at re-election is to redistribute billions of dollars to his voters and campaign contributors in the way of entitlements, welfare, food stamps, stimulus, and green energy investments by government.

Third, by targeting, demonizing and punishing small business owners and high-income earners (the people who make almost all the contributions to conservative causes and candidates), Mr. Obama can starve his political opposition. If taxes are higher on the rich, then the presidents opposition has no money left to give to conservative candidates.

My hero Ronald Reagans plan was to lower taxes on the rich, to motivate and encourage investment, entrepreneurship and job creation, while at the same time starving big government.

Mr. Obamas plan is is the polar opposite: to raise taxes dramatically on the rich, so he can feed the beast of big government, and at the same time, starve his political opposition.

Wayne Allyn Root is a former Libertarian vice presidential nominee. He now serves as chairman of the Libertarian National Congressional Committee. He is the best-selling author of The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gold Tax Cuts. Visit his web site: www.ROOTforAmerica.com.

* Follows surge in wage settlements for state employees

* Analysts see no imminent economic dangers

* May be linked to election, cabinet reshuffle

* Stock market rises, currency steady

By Ahmed Hagagy and Andrew Torchia

KUWAIT/DUBAI Feb 13 (Reuters) – Kuwaits central bank
governor resigned after 25 years in the post on Monday,
protesting against a rapid rise in government spending, but his
departure may be linked to political change in the oil-rich
state and not any immediate economic crisis.

State news agency KUNA announced the resignation of Sheikh
Salem Abdul-Aziz al-Sabah, a member of the countrys ruling
family. It quoted him as saying the governments failure to push
through economic reforms had created imbalances that could
become serious if high global oil prices fell back.

The challenges facing the local economy amid an increase in
public spending to very high levels will hinder the central bank
from taking responsibilities in the future to achieve its
objectives as defined by the law, said Sheikh Salem, 60.

Last years uprisings in the Arab World emboldened workers
in Kuwait to stage a string of strikes which added to upward
pressure on wages of state employees. A strike at the national
airline ended with a 30-percent wage hike, local media reported;
oil sector workers received a wage rise after a strike threat.

Some top Kuwaiti economic policymakers, including Sheikh
Salem and the finance minister, publicly urged the government to
restrain spending and reduce waste in the budget last year. The
finance minister said public sector wages had risen to about 85
percent of the countrys oil revenues, which he called a real
danger.

The resignation is probably linked to monetary policy. If
hes trying to keep inflation down, government policy is clearly
going to work against that, said an economist at a global bank,
who declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue.

He added, however, that Kuwaits economy did not face any
major threats for the time being. Although the average inflation
rate climbed to a three-year high of 4.8 percent in 2011, it
remains far below levels above 10 percent hit in 2008, and many
analysts expect inflation to ease this year.

And while inefficient planning and tensions between the
cabinet and parliament have plagued policymaking, blocking
important infrastructure and economic development projects,
Kuwaits oil wealth means it is unlikely to face a fiscal crisis
any time soon.

The government posted a budget surplus of $47 billion in the
first nine months of 2011, nearly double the surplus in 2010.
Analysts expect economic growth to stay comfortable this year at
around 3.5 percent.

In an October interview with Reuters, Sheikh Salem said the
worlds No. 6 oil exporter needed to reform the government
budget and labour market, and strengthen the private sector, to
create a broader base for economic growth.

It is essential and urgent that significant reform steps
are taken at this stage, because further postponement and delay
will reduce the options available and further increase their
cost, he said at the time.

POLITICS

Some analysts linked Sheikh Salems resignation to political
change after the Islamist-led opposition won control of
parliament in a snap election this month. The early vote was
held after street protests against corruption and the storming
of parliament by opposition lawmakers prompted the emir, Sheikh
Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah, to dissolve parliament.

The election results may deepen political tensions if they
embolden the opposition to push for constitutional changes and
challenge the cabinet, which is appointed by a prime minister
hand-picked by the ruling family.

Sheikh Salems resignation is a result of the relationship
between the government and the parliament, said another
economist in the Gulf.

You have seen very little progress with the wider
development programme and wider investment projects such as
housing and education. Following the elections, it looks more
difficult to implement reforms.

An interim cabinet resigned last week and the Kuwait Times
newspaper reported on Monday that a new cabinet was expected to
be announced later in the day or on Tuesday. The current oil,
public works and commerce ministers are expected to be retained
in the new cabinet, the newspaper said.

Kuwaits currency, the only one in the Gulf not pegged to
the US dollar, was steady after news of Sheikh Salems
resignation while the stock market rose 0.7 percent.

Traders said investors were encouraged by strong
fourth-quarter corporate earnings while some were also
speculating that the government might boost spending further
after Sheikh Salems departure, which could benefit the market.

The level of British dominance in Beijing at the last games four years ago was extraordinary, with 17 golds, and they once again topped the medal table here with eight gold, seven silver and two bronze, but others are stepping up their game noticeably.

GB lead coach Chris Furber said he had expected the standard to rise, but admitted the level of competition had been tougher than anticipated, with Australia very competitive, Ireland taking a real step forward and the emergence again in a Paralympic year of China with some very talented riders.

Multiple world and Paralympic champions like Sarah Storey, Jody Cundy and Darren Kenny are still at the forefront of the sport, but perhaps the biggest plus from this past week from a British point of view is that we have a new star to add to the list of more established riders.

Welshman Mark Colbourne won gold and silver here, yet is still relatively new to the sport, having broken his back in a para-gliding accident only three years ago.

WASHINGTON February 12, 2012, 07:06 pm ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — Mitt Romney takes a hard line against congressional earmarks, but the GOP presidential front-runner had a more favorable view of federal pork-barrel spending when he was governor of Massachusetts.

Under his leadership, Massachusetts sought tens of millions of dollars in earmarks for transportation projects through the state’s congressional delegation.

A prime example was the $30 million that the Romney administration requested to renovate the historic Longfellow Bridge that spans the Charles River between Cambridge and Boston. The landmark is seen in many movies and television shows.

Romney’s transportation secretary, Daniel A. Grabauskas, asked the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to include the money in a transportation spending bill. That bill was full of thousands of earmarks that sparked public furor and became a symbol for Washington’s out-of-control spending when Congress passed it in 2005.

In a letter June 17, 2004, to the transportation panel’s chief of staff that was obtained by The Associated Press, Grabauskas said federal money for the Longfellow Bridge could be provided as part of the “bridge program, a new mega-project or an outside earmark, or a combination of the three.” Grabauskas did not immediately respond to phone messages from AP seeking comment.

A Romney campaign spokeswoman would not respond to questions about how many earmarks the Romney administration asked for, the amount of money involved and the particular projects.

“Every state budget in the country is dependent on federal funding, and every governor in the country makes requests for funding, but governors do not get to decide how Congress appropriates money,” said Andrea Saul, a Romney spokeswoman. “Gov. Romney supports a permanent ban on earmarks, which are symbols of what’s wrong with Washington.”

When Romney was governor and his state was desperately seeking federal dollars to repair crumbling roads and bridges, his administration suggested earmarks for projects to lawmakers on Capitol Hill who were in a position to request the money.

Romney officials specified projects they wanted included as earmarks in the transportation bill to members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation as the measure moved through Congress, said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

“The Romney administration was crystal clear on earmarks and what they wanted,” McGovern said. “They sent us a letter specifically asking for money to be earmarked for projects.”

McGovern cited a Feb. 7, 2005, email from Tom Lawler, Romney’s deputy director of state-federal relations in Washington, to a senior McGovern aide seeking $50 million for the Charles M. Braga Bridge between Somerset and Fall River, and $25 million for a highway interchange on Interstate 495 in the Worcester Democrat’s district.

The Romney aide wrote in the email that the projects were “the state’s suggested high priority projects” for McGovern’s district.

The term “high priority project” is congressional jargon for an earmarked project, said McGovern, who did not pursue earmarks for Romney’s suggested projects.

Rep. Michael Capuano, D-Mass., a committee member who is the delegation’s leader on securing money for bridges and roads, said he was also approached by Romney officials asking for earmarks.

“It was a routine thing,” Capuano said. “They went to different members in the delegation. They came to me and said, ‘Here’s what we need.’ They didn’t do a ton of (asking for earmarks), but they did enough of it.”

Capuano said he supported the Longfellow Bridge project and secured a $3 million earmark for it after sending a request letter and form to the House committee.

Massachusetts sorely needed money for long-neglected major road and bridge repairs during Romney’s governorship because for years federal transportation dollars were sucked up by the massive Big Dig project that buried Interstate 93 in tunnels underneath downtown Boston.

Massachusetts, which had its own office of state-federal relations in Washington under Romney, also relied on lobbyists O’Neill and Associates, headed by the son of legendary former House Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill, to help steer federal dollars to the state.

Romney joined the state’s big construction companies and contractors at a big Boston fundraising event in 2003 honoring Rep. Don Young, the Alaska Republican who at the time was chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and who held powerful sway on spending matters as the big transportation bill moved through Congress. Young netted more than $50,000, according to a Boston Globe story at the time.

During his campaign, Romney plays up his anti-earmark views to try to convince GOP voters of his conservative values and to try to undermine his rivals’ claims of fiscal conservatism. Earmarks are a hot issue in the GOP race, particularly among conservatives angry about runaway spending and the big federal budget deficits.

Romney’s campaign and his allies have hammered rivals Newt Gingrich, a former House speaker, and Rick Santorum, a former representative and senator from Pennsylvania, as “prolific earmarkers” winning federal money, and he has called for a permanent ban on earmarks.

Romney stepped up his attacks after losses to Santorum in in Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri, branding Santorum as a big-spending Washington insider.

“A lot of us feel that the Republican Party lost its way in the past,” Romney said Wednesday. “Republicans spent too much money, borrowed too much money, earmarked too much, and Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have to be held accountable.”

“Obviously, some of the things of his record are troubling … The fact that while he was in Washington, government spending grew by 80 percent. And the fact that he is a defender of earmarks. Look, I’m in favor of a ban on earmarks,” Romney said of Santorum in a Fox News Channel interview on Thursday.

The Santorum campaign, jabbing at Romney’s past support for federal spending, has highlighted a 2006 radio interview with Romney about the Big Dig where he said: “I’d be embarrassed if I didn’t always ask for federal money whenever I get the chance.”

Earmarking is the longtime Washington practice in which lawmakers, often at the request of governors and state legislators, insert money for home-state projects such as road and bridge work into spending bills. After the 2010 elections, Congress placed a moratorium on earmarking, following public outrage over a 2005 transportation bill stuffed with money for thousands of pet projects, including the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska.

Romney now has joined the chorus of tea party backers and fiscal conservatives who say lawmakers treat taxpayer money like a slush fund.

A pro-Romney group targeted Santorum with ads in recent primary contests assailing his support for pork-barrel spending in Congress. The Romney campaign has used a small group of House Republicans considered fiscal conservatives to attack Gingrich’s earmarking.

The New Jersey Nets will attempt to complete their first winning road trip of the season when they take on the Cleveland Cavaliers Friday night at the Quiken Loans Arena.

After losing to the Chicago Bulls Monday, New Jersey defeated the first-place Philadelphia 76ers on Wednesday, setting the stage for the winning road trip. The teams best run away from The Prudential Center to this point is a 1-1 batch of games the first week of January.

Related
- Nets At The Quarter-Pole Of The NBA Season
- Deron Williams Predicament Is Prokhorovs Fault

Against the Sixers, Nets PG Deron Williams played out of his mind, pouring in a game-high 34 points and 11 rebounds. Anthony Morrow played a season-high 41 minutes and added 16 points, while Kris Humphries was good for 13 points and 19 rebounds.

Cleveland broke a four-game losing streak Wednesday night with a 91-81 victory over the struggling New York Knicks. Veteran Antawn Jamison led the Cavs with 15 points and Omri Casspi chipped in 13 points in just 22 minutes. Former Nets coach Byron Scott leads the Cavs and first overall pick Kyrie Irving, who are off to a 7-10 start.

New Jersey standout rookie MarShon Brooks may not get a chance to size up Irving — the man hes chasing for Rookie of the Year — due to a lingering Achilles injury. Humphries (illness) and Mehmet Okur are also both game-time decisions for Avery Johnsons crew.

Catch the game locally on YES or WFAN 660 with tip scheduled for 7:30 pm

The Nets return home on Sunday to take on the Toronto Raptors at The Rock.

Mark it down as one of those quirks of sport. Just as her father Petr won an Australian Open in tennis (in 1998), the 18-year-old Korda will go down as an Australian Open champion, in golf. Just as the father scissor-kicked to celebrate all those years ago, so the daughter leapt for joy to mimic him. I was trying not to look down, she said.

Petr Korda was not there yesterday, at home in Florida attending to family matters after carrying the bag for his daughter in her difficult rookie season last year. But the family watched on television and they spoke on the phone immediately afterwards. He [Petr] said he was so proud of me and well talk about the three putts after!

So why are Democratic operatives and their media cheerleaders laughing? Because the Republican presidential candidates are so darn amusing in the slapstick of this campaign.