Billionaire investor Warren Buffett speaks in Omaha, Neb., on Nov. 14, 2011 at an event to raise money for the Girls Inc. charity organization.(Photo: Nati Harnik, AP)Story HighlightsWarren Buffett released the much-anticipated annual letter to shareholders FridayInvestors were keenly interested in what the Oracle of Omaha said about the Heinz deal, economyBuffett's thought on the housing market and his health were also of interestWarren Buffett lamented his Berkshire Hathaway didn't perform better in 2012, but said he's optimistic about the U.S.' future and urged other CEOs to do the same in his much anticipated letter to shareholders. Interest was particularly high in this year's letter, released Friday, as shares of Buffett's conglomerate, Berkshire Hathaway, hit an all-time high Thursday as many of the company's bets made last year and prior are starting to pay off. The annual letter contains Buffett's thoughts on money, investment and business, ahead of the company's annual shareholders' meeting, this year scheduled for May 4.BUFFETT: Read his annual letter to shareholders[1]HIGHLIGHTS: Buffett's words of investing wisdom[2]"Buffett was characteristically bullish on America at a time CEOs seem skittish," says Lawrence Cunningham, author of "The Essays of Warren Buffett: Lessons for Corporate America." "He encouraged other CEOs to be less cautious and less nervous." Pearls of wisdom and folksy advice is what investors expect from Buffett's note and this year's edition didn't disappoint. Some highlights included comments on:• Performance relative to Standard & Poor's 500. Buffett launched the letter on a sour note, pointing out that for the ninth time in 48 years, the company's percentage gain in book value, 14.4%, was less than the Standard & Poor's 500's total return gain of 16%. He added that while Berkshire has never lagged the S&P 500 for a five-year period, the S&P 500 has outpaced Berkshire over the past…

Rem Rieder, columnist(Photo: USA TODAY)Story HighlightsSotomayor and Kagan at one time expressed openness to the idea of camerasCourt plays huge role in American life, including on key issue such as health careC-SPAN's Brian Lamb has pushed hard for his network to air the proceedingsIn the classic Pulp Fiction, Jules (played by Samuel L. Jackson) asks his fellow hit man, Vincent (John Travolta): "You know the shows on TV?""I don't watch TV," Vincent replies."Yeah," Jules says, "but, you are aware that there's an invention called television, and on this invention they show shows, right?"It's likely that the nine distinguished justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have heard of this invention called television, but they don't seem to like it any better than Vincent. The court continues to cling to its misguided policy of refusing to allow its proceedings to be televised. It's a supremely bad idea.And it doesn't look like that will change anytime soon. Indeed, things seem to be moving backward. During their confirmation hearings, the two newest justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, indicated that they were open to letting the cameras in. But apparently now that they've joined the club, they have rethought their positions, according to an article in The New York Times last week.STORY: Oral arguments on voting rights law[1]Sotomayor seems to think the masses just aren't sharp enough to understand what they'd be seeing. She said during an interview with Charlie Rose on PBS: "I don't think most viewers take the time to actually delve into either the briefs or the legal arguments to appreciate what the court is doing. They speculate about, oh, the judge favors this point rather than that point. Very few of them understand what the process is, which is to play devil's advocate." The Times article also reported that Kagan…

An oil slick is seen as the Deepwater Horizon oil rig burns in April 2010.(Photo: Gerald Herbert, AP)Story HighlightsTrail will determine BP's liability in the oil spillBillions of dollars are on the lineSeveral hours of opening statements by lawyers expected MondayNEW ORLEANS (AP) — Nearly three years after a deadly rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico triggered the nation's worst offshore oil spill, a federal judge in New Orleans is set to preside over a high-stakes trial for the raft of litigation spawned by the disaster.Barring an 11th-hour settlement, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier will hear several hours of opening statements Monday by lawyers for the companies involved in the 2010 spill and the plaintiffs who sued them. And the judge, not a jury, ultimately could decide how much more money BP PLC and its partners on the ill-fated drilling project owe for their roles in the environmental catastrophe.BP has said it already has racked up more than $24 billion in spill-related expenses and has estimated it will pay a total of $42 billion to fully resolve its liability for the disaster that killed 11 workers and spewed millions of gallons of oil.But the trial attorneys for the federal government and Gulf states and private plaintiffs hope to convince the judge that the company is liable for much more.With billions of dollars on the line, the companies and their courtroom adversaries have spared no expense in preparing for a trial that could last several months. Hundreds of attorneys have worked on the case, generating roughly 90 million pages of documents, logging nearly 9,000 docket entries and taking more than 300 depositions of witnesses who could testify at trial."In terms of sheer dollar amounts and public attention, this is one of the most complex and massive disputes ever faced by…