The climate change summit that starts today in Copenhagen is bringing together officials from nearly 200 nations, including President Obama, who will fly there next week. One of the goals is to get countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions, which scientists say are heating up the Earth and doing damage to the world our kids and their kids will inherit.

But is the problem as bad as some people make it sound? Critics say e-mails swiped from a British university suggest researchers could be putting their own spin on reality. The controversy is creating political fireworks all the way to Washington. Our Jim Acosta has the report.

Former teen idol Kirk Cameron is on a crusade to debunk evolution. He's a born-again Christian and part of a group that wrote a new 50-page intro to Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" to mark its 150th anniversary.

Cameron and his group are handing out thousands of copies of the book on universities across the country. CNN's Carol Costello reports.

By Jim Acosta

The question comes up time and again: Why is President Obama the target of so much fury from self-described "patriots," tea partiers, and other libertarians in America? Is it racial as former President Carter suggested earlier this year? Sadly, for some Americans, that is the case.

Militias and extremist groups are on the rise in this country, but who is joining these groups and why?

But in the growing "patriot movement" in America, there are other factors. For starters, the leaders and many members of both the militia in Michigan and the "Oath Keepers" vehemently deny race is their cause for alarm.

In fact, one militia member told us he was proud to see the first African-American become President of the United States. He just doesn't like where Mr. Obama stands on the issues.

A good many of the self-described patriots say their beef boils down to some of the issues President Obama inherited from the Bush administration.

Libertarians detest a whole host of Bush-era policies from the Patriot Act to the indefinite detention of enemy combatants during the "War on Terror."

Gun enthusiasts abhor the brief confiscation of firearms that happened in the City of New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina – another Bush legacy.

Then came the Bush bailout of 2008. For many libertarians and self-described "patriots," the financial rescue of the banks remains an outrage.

So when President Obama continued the bailout with a taxpayer lifeline to the car companies, many on the right saw a further erosion of what they believe is the American way.

The Obama administration argues it was facing a potential Great Depression II, and had no choice but to carry on with the bailout.

White House officials also say they are trying to reverse several Bush war on terror policies right now but caution those changes won't happen overnight.

All of this begs the question: Why didn't these libertarians and self-styled patriots speak out more forcefully when Bush was in charge?

To answer that, you can google Ron Paul. Unfortunately for President Obama, many Americans don't point fingers at former presidents. When things are going downhill, they blame the people in charge.

There are millions of women today who are now questioning the best strategy for detecting and fighting breast cancer.

New guidelines from a government task force advise women to now wait until they are 50-years-old, not 40, to start getting routine mammograms.

So, do the risks of routine mammograms really outweigh the benefits?

To get a perspective from all sides, we talked to: Julie Sisskind, a breast cancer patient without any family history, who was diagnosed from a routine mammogram; Lucy Marion, one of the members of the task force that created the new guidelines; and our own Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN chief medical correspondent and practicing neurosurgeon.

Since the new recommendations have the potential to affect the health and well-being of millions of American women, it's not surprising that there is a deep concern from many over what this all actually means.

At times heated, this is an interview you don't want to miss.

Related: Breast 'awareness' trumps self-exams, docs say

By Jim Acosta

In the first two parts of our series, “Patriots or Extremists?” we looked at the growth of private militias in this country. Now we turn to a group whose founder says he doesn't need a militia. That's because his organization is recruiting its members... right out of the military and law enforcement.

Just a couple of miles off the Las Vegas strip inside a casino ballroom, dozens of men and women are taking an oath. An oath, they say, to the Constitution of the United States – not to the president.

"If we're going to watch while our country dies and think that there's nothing we can do about it, we're wrong," says Richard Mack, a former sheriff.

They call themselves the "Oath Keepers," and last month they held their first national conference.

The group's founder, Stewart Rhodes, a former Army paratrooper and staffer for Congressman Ron Paul, says his members recite a revised version of the oath that's used for enlistment in the Armed Services, but they exclude this phrase: "I will obey the orders of the President of the United States."

"Our role is not to be obedient to whoever happens to be the leader. Our role is to defend the Constitution and the republic," says Rhodes.

Read the rest of this entry »

Jay Phillips is a 10-year-old boy from Arkansas who is taking a stand, by sitting down. Phillips is refusing to pledge allegiance to the flag in his fifth grade classroom until he says gays and lesbians have equal rights. John Roberts spoke to Phillips on CNN's American Morning Monday.

By Jim Acosta

Out in the woods, 30-minutes from the nearest city, the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia meets for training once a month.

Armed with a small arsenal of semi-automatic weapons, the question that crosses your mind at one of these exercises is: training for what?

That depends on who you ask.

Our visit with the militia is the first installment of our three part series on something called "the Patriot movement."

The members of the militia in Michigan would certainly call themselves patriots. The folks at the civil rights organization, the Southern Poverty Law Center prefers to use the word "extremists."

Critics of the modern-day militia point out how some of the members of this movement are highly secretive. For example, we contacted nearly a dozen militias for permission to observe their exercises. The militia in Michigan is the only one that said yes.

Watch: Patriots or Extremists?

Still, some of its members would not give us their names. Others wore masks.

Then there are the members' constant fears the Obama administration will eventually take away their gun rights.

Another member told us he thinks the president could be "dangerous for the nation."

In nearly the same breath that member said he hopes the militia's training exercises would give some in Washington "pause."

Not to worry, says the group's leader Lee Miracle. A military veteran and postal worker, yes postal worker, Miracle says he urges respect for the president.

He's out to change the way the world views militia groups. We get an up-close look at his family in part two of our series. A family Miracle refers to as "Lee and Kate plus eight plus a gun rack." That's because they have eight kids and 22 guns in the house. And the kids take part in militia day.

In part three of our series, we go to Las Vegas to go behind the scenes with an organization called "Oathkeepers." It's a group of ex-law enforcement officials and military veterans who say they've sworn an oath to the Constitution, not the president. The president they're referring to, of course, is Mr. Obama.

Share your thoughts with us here at amFIX.

By Carol Costello and Ronni Berke

Who is Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical Yemeni cleric, who called the alleged Fort Hood shooter Nadal Hasan a "hero?" And could he inspire young men in the United States to commit violent acts in the name of their religion?

Some experts say al-Awlaki represents a new kind of terrorist: charismatic, young, soft-spoken and Facebook-savvy. They describe him as a "low-key" extremist, not known for fiery rhetoric.

On Facebook, al-Awlaki has more than 5,000 friends. American-born, fluent in English, his influence in the West should not be discounted, says Jarret Brachman, author of "Global Jihadism," and an adviser to the government on terrorism.

"A lot of guys in the United States read al-Awlaki's work. They watch his videos they listen to his sermons," says Brachman. "His personality's very engaging, very candid, you know he's playful, he's got a great sense of humor," he adds. "The guy is very appealing to people who are kind of dipping their toes into, into radicalism."

He's been on law enforcement's radar for years, says Brachman: "He can take you all the way to al Qaeda – that's the concerning part about him."

Read the rest of this entry »

By Carol Costello and Bob Ruff

Ten. That’s the number of questions you’ll be asked when the 2010 census forms arrive in mail boxes starting next April.

Question 1: “How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?”

From there, questions 2 through 10 range from a person’s sex and race to phone number.

But nowhere is this question asked: “Are you a U.S. citizen?”

Senator David Vitter (R-LA) and others are asking, why not? Vitter is pushing an amendment to a Senate spending bill that would put the citizenship question on the next census form. The Bureau of the Census hasn’t asked that question before. So, why now?

Senator Vitter told Carol Costello that it’s all about apportionment, which is the allocation of seats in the House of Representatives based on the number of people counted in each state by the census. It’s right there in Article I of the U.S. Constitution.

“…Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years…”

For Senator Vitter, who represents Louisiana in the U.S. Senate, this is personal. “If all people,” the senator says, “including non-citizens, including illegals, go into the process of reapportionment, Louisiana will lose one House seat.”

Read the rest of this entry »

By Carol Costello and Bob Ruff

Ever wonder why we have a census? The answer is right there in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States:

"Representation and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers ... The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

The short form of the 2010 census has just 10 questions, but it is controversial.

Monday, August 2, 1790 marked the start of the first census. It was then, and still is now, used to determine each state’s allocation of members in the House of Representatives. But as the country has grown from just under the 4 million people counted in that very first census, to the nearly 300,000,000 counted in 2000, so too has its uses. Today the census also helps determine how many federal dollars go to which states, and it gives agencies national social and health statistics that are used for policy purposes. And in addition to the short form that counts every American, there are longer, much more detailed forms that go out to smaller numbers of Americans each year.

The short form of the 2010 census has just 10 questions, but it is controversial.

Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann has been among the most vocal critics. She says the census questions represent government intrusion, such as Question 4 on the form: “What is your telephone number?” Bachmann told CNN she only plans to list the number of people in her household on her 2010 form because the Constitution doesn’t require any information beyond that.

CNN’s Carol Costello spoke with one census worker, who preferred to remain anonymous so that he could speak more freely, to see what kind of response he gets when he asks questions of people who share Rep. Bachmann’s privacy concerns.

“Carl”, the census worker, said he’s concerned that Bachmann’s objections reinforce the fear that some Americans already have about the census: “Some of them are pretty blunt.,” said “Carl.” “They say I’m not talking to you. I don’t want to have anything to do with the government. I’m not talking to you or anything. Get off my property or I’ll call the police.”

Read the rest of this entry »