Yu-Na Kim, Joannie Rochette shine in women's figure skating

South Korea's Yu-Na Kim skated into Olympic history with a record-breaking gold medal win in Vancouver on Thursday night, while Canadian skater Joannie Rochette skated into a special place in the story of Olympic spirit, winning the bronze.

Kim skated early, and left no doubt that she deserved the nickname of "Queen." Her jumps were spot on, but the routine was so much more than jumps. It was a complete package of perfectly executed spins, footwork, spirals and jumps.

"This is the best routine I've ever seen in an Olympic competition," said NBC commentator Sandra Bezic. After she finished her routine, Kim broke down in tears, overwhelmed by the moment. Her long program score of 150.06 broke her own scoring record.

The inspirational story of the Olympics, Canadian Joannie Rochette, skated another graceful, elegant routine. Just four days after her mother's death, Rochette hit every part of her skate, starting off aggressively with a triple Lutz/double toeloop/double loop combination. From there, she skated well, save a small step on one jump. Her free skate score of 131.28 earned her a bronze medal.

After the skate, Rochette let out a deep sigh, and teary-eyed, blew a kiss to her father. During the medal ceremoy, she smiled through tears.

Winning silver, Japan's Mao Asada made a mark of her own, landing three triple Axels. In doing that, she became the first woman to ever land three triple Axels in the Olympics. But she made a few small errors in her routine, keeping her from knocking off the near unstoppable Kim.

American Mirai Nagasu took fourth, moving up from the sixth place that she earned in the short program. She was in a tough position, the last skater of the evening. But she did not back down, hitting every jump, winning the crowd over with contortionist-like spins, and earning high marks on execution. Though she did not win a medal, she seemed pleased.

Fellow American Rachael Flatt skated the best routine of her season, landing every jump and skating with an energy and maturity beyond her 17 years. Unfortunately, two of her triple jumps were downgraded to doubles, hurting her overall score.

The $555,000 Student-Loan Burden Part-2

Part -1: Here
Part - 2 Here now start:

She says she knew when she started medical school in 1999 that she would have to borrow heavily. But she reasoned that her future income as a doctor would make paying off the loans easy. While in school, her loans racked up interest with variable rates ranging from 3% to 11%.

She maxed out on federal loans, borrowing $152,000 over four years, and sought private loans from Sallie Mae to help make up the difference. She also took out two loans from Wells Fargo & Co. for $20,000 each. Each had a $2,000 origination fee. The total amount she borrowed at the time: $250,000.

In 2005, the bill for the Wells Fargo loans came due. Representatives from the bank called her father, Michael Bisutti, every day for two months demanding payment. Mr. Bisutti, who had co-signed on the loans, finally decided to cover the $550 monthly payments for a year.

Wells Fargo says it will stop calling consumers if they request it, says senior vice president Glen Herrick, who adds that the bank no longer imposes origination fees on its private loans.

Sallie Mae, meanwhile, called Mr. Bisutti's neighbor. The neighbor told Mr. Bisutti about the call. "Now they know [my dad's] daughter the doctor defaulted on her loans," Dr. Bisutti says.

Ms. Holler, the Sallie Mae spokeswoman, says that the company may contact a neighbor to verify an individual's address. But in those cases, she says, the details of the debt obligation aren't discussed.

Dr. Bisutti declined to authorize Sallie Mae to comment specifically on her case. "The overwhelming majority of medical-school graduates successfully repay their student loans," Ms. Holler says.

After completing her fellowship in 2007, Dr. Bisutti juggled other debts, including her credit-card balance, and was having trouble making her $1,000-a-month student-loan payments. That year, she defaulted on both her federal and private loans. That is when the "collection cost" fee of $53,870 was added on to her private loan.

Meanwhile, the variable interest rates continue to compound on her balance and fees. She recently applied for income-based repayment, but she still isn't sure if she will qualify. She makes $550-a-month payments to Wells Fargo for the two loans she hasn't defaulted on. By the time she is done, she will have paid the bank $128,000 -- over three times the $36,000 she received.

She recently entered a rehabilitation agreement on her defaulted federal loans, which now carry an additional $31,942 collection cost. She makes monthly payments on those loans -- now $209,399 -- for $990 a month, with only $100 of it going toward her original balance. The entire balance of her federal loans will be paid off in 351 months. Dr. Bisutti will be 70 years old.

The debt load keeps her up at night. Her damaged credit has prevented her from buying a home or a new car. She says she and her boyfriend of three years have put off marriage and having children because of the debt.

Dr. Bisutti told her 17-year-old niece the story of her debt as a cautionary tale "so the next generation of kids who want to get a higher education knows what they're getting into," she says. "I will likely have to deal with this debt for the rest of my life."

The $555,000 Student-Loan Burden Part-1

When Michelle Bisutti, a 41-year-old family practitioner in Columbus, Ohio, finished medical school in 2003, her student-loan debt amounted to roughly $250,000. Since then, it has ballooned to $555,000.

It is the result of her deferring loan payments while she completed her residency, default charges and relentlessly compounding interest rates. Among the charges: a single $53,870 fee for when her loan was turned over to a collection agency.

"Maybe half of it was my fault because I didn't look at the fine print," Dr. Bisutti says. "But this is just outrageous now."

To be sure, Dr. Bisutti's case is extreme, and lenders say student-loan terms are clear and that they try to work with borrowers who get in trouble.

But as tuitions rise, many people are borrowing heavily to pay their bills. Some no doubt view it as "good debt," because an education can lead to a higher salary. But in practice, student loans are one of the most toxic debts, requiring extreme consumer caution and, as Dr. Bisutti learned, responsibility.

Unlike other kinds of debt, student loans can be particularly hard to wriggle out of. Homeowners who can't make their mortgage payments can hand over the keys to their house to their lender. Credit-card and even gambling debts can be discharged in bankruptcy. But ditching a student loan is virtually impossible, especially once a collection agency gets involved. Although lenders may trim payments, getting fees or principals waived seldom happens.

Yet many former students are trying. There is an estimated $730 billion in outstanding federal and private student-loan debt, says Mark Kantrowitz of FinAid.org, a Web site that tracks financial-aid issues -- and only 40% of that debt is actively being repaid. The rest is in default, or in deferment, which means that payments and interest are halted, or in "forbearance," which means payments are halted while interest accrues.

Although Dr. Bisutti's debt load is unusual, her experience having problems repaying isn't. Emmanuel Tellez's mother is a laid-off factory worker, and $120 from her $300 unemployment checks is garnished to pay the federal PLUS student loan she took out for her son.

By the time Mr. Tellez graduated in 2008, he had $50,000 of his own debt in loans issued by SLM Corp., known as Sallie Mae, the largest private student lender. In December, he was laid off from his $29,000-a-year job in Boston and defaulted. Mr. Tellez says that when he signed up, the loan wasn't explained to him well, though he concedes he missed the fine print.

Loan terms, including interest rates, are disclosed "multiple times and in multiple ways," says Martha Holler, a spokeswoman for Sallie Mae, who says the company can't comment on individual accounts. Repayment tools and account information are accessible on Sallie Mae's Web site as well, she says.

Many borrowers say they are experiencing difficulties working out repayment and modification terms on their loans. Ms. Holler says that Sallie Mae works with borrowers individually to revamp loans. Although the U.S. Department of Education has expanded programs like income-based repayment, which effectively caps repayments for some borrowers, others might not qualify.

Heather Ehmke of Oakland, Calif., renegotiated the terms of her subprime mortgage after her home was foreclosed. But even after filing for bankruptcy, she says she couldn't get Sallie Mae, one of her lenders, to adjust the terms on her student loan. After 14 years with patches of deferment and forbearance, the loan has increased from $28,000 to more than $90,000. Her monthly payments jumped from $230 to $816. Last month, her petition for undue hardship on the loans was dismissed.

Sallie Mae supports reforms that would allow student loans to be dischargeable in bankruptcy for those who have made a good-faith effort to repay them, says Ms. Holler.

Dr. Bisutti says she loves her work, but regrets taking out so many student loans. She admits that she made mistakes in missing payments, deferring her loans and not being completely thorough with some of the paperwork, but was surprised at how quickly the debt spiraled.

The Least-Trusted Banks in America

Customers of the biggest banks in the United States are the least likely to believe their financial institution does what's best for them as opposed to what's best for the bottom line, according to a new report from Forrester Research.

The report, Forrester's annual Customer Advocacy rankings, ranks nearly 50 financial services firms in the United States by the percentage of each firm's customers who agree with the statement: "My financial provider does what's best for me, not just its own bottom line." The results are based on a survey of about 4,500 consumers.

The bottom seven of this year's rankings, first to last, are Bank of America, Chase, Capital One, TD/Commerce, Fifth Third, Citibank, and in last place, HSBC.

Among Bank of America customers, 33 percent agreed with the statement above, while 31 percent of Chase customers agreed, 29 percent of Capital One customers agreed, 28 percent of TD/Commerce Bank customers agreed, 27 percent of Fifth Third Bank customers agreed and 26 percent of Citibank customers agreed.

Among HSBC customers, only 16 percent said they agreed with the statement, the lowest customer advocacy score ever reported in the United States, down 10 percentage points from HSBC's score last year and in line with other recent similar poor rankings of other HSBC units.

An HSBC spokesman declined to comment on the survey, since he hadn't seen it yet.

To put the rankings in perspective, large banks have generally been at the bottom of the list since the survey was initiated seven years ago, and many of the banks have alternated between the bottom spots year to year, said a Forrester vice president, Bill Doyle, who wasn't aware of anything particular HSBC has done recently that would make its score so low. Last year, for instance, Capital One was at the bottom with 22 percent of its customers agreeing with the statement. In fact, the more customers a banking institution has, the lower its customer advocacy ranking is likely to be, according to Forrester.

Why the poor rankings for the big banks? "Part of it is that the banks are preoccupied with their bottom line. They are public institutions who are in business to make money for their shareholder and inevitably, that shows to customers," Mr. Doyle said.

A high customer advocacy ranking means that customers tend to believe their bank takes their side in disputes, does what is right even if it's not required by regulation to do so, gives fair rates or performance comparisons and is clear about charges and fees, Mr. Doyle said.

Wells Fargo/Wachovia, by contrast, did better than the other big banks. About 40 percent of its customers said they believed the bank does what is best for them, with Wachovia's customers probably pulling up Wells Fargo's ratings, Mr. Doyle said. Wachovia has generally done substantially better in the rankings than the other big banks.

According to Mr. Doyle, customer advocacy rankings are a predictor of customer retention and attrition, and customers who rate their financial service firms high are more likely to consider their firm for additional products. In contrast, customers who give their banks a low ranking are most likely to switch in the next year and are "going to be reluctant to put any more money and open new accounts at those institutions," Mr. Doyle said.

This means the low rankings don't bode well for the bigger banks, many of which are reaching federal limits for how much they can increase deposits by acquiring other banks and must rely on attracting more customers to increase revenue.

Credit unions ranked much higher than the big banks, as they have in previous years, with 70 percent of credit union customers saying their financial institution puts their interests first. Mr. Doyle said this is because of credit unions' different operating model -- they are owned by customers -- and because they tend to emphasize customer service.

After credit unions, the bank run by USAA, a financial services company that serves the military and their families, came in next with 64 percent of its customers agreeing with the statement. It was followed by ING Direct, with 46 percent. Regional banks including PNC, U.S. Bank and BB&T came in next with rankings similar to Wells Fargo/Wachovia. Regional banks, which often can't afford big advertising campaigns, tend to emphasize customer service, Mr. Doyle said.

Insurance firms, meanwhile, remained the highest rated firms for customer advocacy, with more than half of all customers rating their insurers high on customer advocacy and insurers representing two-thirds of the firms in the top half of the rankings. The ranking of investment firms, meanwhile, fell below banks for the first time since the rankings began. Investment firm rankings tend to fall when the market isn't doing well, Mr. Doyle said.

Letterman Wanted Conan on Super Bowl Ad Sofa

If you thought the commercial featuring longtime rivals David Letterman and Jay Leno sitting within arm's length of each other was the most shocking of last night's Super Bowl ads, imagine if Conan O'Brien had appeared in it, too. As it turns out, if Letterman had gotten his wish, that third member of the recent bizarre late night television triangle would have joined them.

Letterman's team had the idea of putting the three late night hosts together for the Super Bowl spot for his show and, sensing the comedic opportunity, Leno didn't hesitate. O'Brien's team never fully rejected the idea but according to longtime Letterman producer Rob Burnett, it was never close to happening.

"I did call Jeff Ross (O'Brien's producer) to talk about it," Burnett said. "I just think they weren't in a position to consider it all."

The call came just as O'Brien and Ross were finishing up production on "The Tonight Show," so nothing ever came of the idea. Jay Leno, who jumped at the chance to share screen time with Letterman and Oprah Winfrey, secretly flew to New York City on February 2 to create the 10-second spot. To keep the secret under wraps, Leno donned a fake mustache and hooded sweatshirt as he entered the Ed Sullivan Theater to tape the commercial.

As far as anyone knows, it was the first time in 20 years that the former pals had seen each other face to face. Jay Leno appeared on NBC's Late Night with David Letterman for the last time in 1990.

Before Sunday's Super Bowl commercial, the closest the tel-enemies came to reuniting -- according to William Knoedelseder's book, "I'm Dying Up Here," -- was in 2003 when the hosts' mutual friend and fellow comedian, George Miller, died from leukemia. Leno attended the funeral; Letterman -- who had paid Miller's medical bills -- was battling a severe case of shingles and did not attend.

USC fires student manager after his technical foul for ref abuse

The University of Southern California is 2-5 since news broke that the team would forfeit its 2009-10 season in the wake of the O.J. Mayo saga, meaning the Trojans are playing for little more than pride at this point. Regardless, team manager Stan Holt is as passionate as ever.

USC coach Kevin O'Neill confirmed that Holt, a graduate student at USC, was fired after he ran his mouth to the officials over foul calls in the Trojans' game vs. Oregon. The box score shows 17 fouls against USC and 11 charged to the Ducks, but since Holt spoke up too frequently and too audibly, he was charged with a technical foul late in the second half of a close game. After that T, Oregon went on a 10-0 run and won the game, 67-57.

After Holt was slapped with the technical, the Oregon student section chanted "You're fired!" at him, causing Holt to leave the team bench and head into the bowels of the arena. Then, after the game, Trojan Dwight Lewis admitted Holt's technical changed the momentum of the game, and O'Neill apologized to the team for Holt's technical while Holt "stood 30 feet from the locker room" and was protected from reporters.

Yemeni forces capture 3 al-Qaida suspects

SAN'A, Yemen – Yemeni security forces arrested three suspected al-Qaida militants from a cell that the U.S. has said was linked to a plot against the American or other embassies, the Interior Ministry said Wednesday.

The arrests were the latest move in Yemen's U.S.-backed crackdown on al-Qaida's offshoot here, as Yemeni officials trumpet that they are taking on the militant group.

The U.S. and British embassies closed for two days this week because of a threats that al-Qaida was planning an attack. Other Western embassies also took security precautions, closing to the public or limiting access.

The two missions reopened on Tuesday, after the United States said an assault by Yemeni security forces on an al-Qaida cell northeast of the capital a day earlier had "addressed" the threat.

In those clashes, Yemeni forces attacked a group of al-Qaida fighters moving in the mountains in the Arhab region. The troops were aiming to capture al-Qaida's suspected leader in the area, Mohammed Ahmed al-Hanaq, and a relative Nazeeh al-Hanaq, the ministry said.

They escaped, but two fighters with them were killed and several others were wounded.

On Tuesday, security forces captured three of the wounded militants while they were being treated at a hospital in Reyda, a region northwest of the capital, San'a, the ministry said. Also arrested were four people suspected of transporting the militants to the hospital and hiding them there, it said.

No identities were given for the captured militants.

Yemen's government has increasingly claimed successes against al-Qaida in recent days, a sign of officials' anger over suggestions the state is too weakened to handle the fight against terrorists as the United States dramatically ramps up its counterterrorism aid to the unstable, impoverished nation.

The embassy closure on Sunday became a case in point, rankling some officials who said it gave the appearance that Yemeni security forces could not protect the facilities.

On Tuesday, as the embassy reopened, the Interior Ministry insisted the fight against al-Qaida was under control, saying Yemeni forces "have imposed a security cordon around al-Qaida elements everywhere they are present and...are observing and pursuing them around the clock."

The ministry said it had captured five other militants in recent days around San'a and in the western region of Hodeida. Thousands of troops have been sent to provinces east of the capital where the terror group has set up strongholds in a bid to strengthen government control in the areas.

The government also has carried out a series of U.S.-backed strikes against militant hideouts in the past month.

More broadly, the intensified partnership with the U.S. presents dilemmas for Yemen.

The government is concerned that too public an American role in the anti-terror campaign could embarrass the government, presenting it as weak before a Yemeni public where mistrust of the United States runs high. It also could bring a backlash from Islamic conservatives who are a major pillar of support for President Ali Abdullah Saleh.

Moreover, Yemeni officials appear worried American aid will come with pressure on Saleh to reform his rule in this unstable, divided nation.

The government is deeply sensitive over any hint of meddling in its internal affairs. But at the same time, it is being battered by multiple crises and needs assistance.

It has little control outside the capital, and heavily armed tribes hold sway over large parts of the mountainous, impoverished nation. Many tribes are disgruntled with Saleh, and some have allowed al-Qaida fighters to take refuge. On other fronts, it is battling Shiite rebels in the north and a revived separatist campaign in the once-independent south.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday praised Yemeni action but warned that al-Qaida's offshoot in Yemen has become a global threat. The group is being blamed for planning the Christmas attempt to bomb a U.S. passenger jet.