truesee's Blog

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/11/26/why-sarah-palin-might-become-president-in-2012.html

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local-beat/Theives-Hit-Charity-Center--110238819.html?dr

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/24/military-pegs-hourly-air-force-cost-g-obama-sets-travel-record/

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/photos/sns-viral-yir-words-phrases-2010-pg,0,777514.photogallery

Neptune pastor may take time off after Facebook decree, three-way relationship landed him in news

 

NANCY SHIELDS • STAFF WRITER • November 24, 2010

 

 

FACEBOOK PASTOR: In a Jan. 17, 2010 photo, Pastor Cedric Miller, delivers the sermon during a service at Living Word Christian Fellowship in Neptune, N.J. Miller said 20 couples among the 1,100 members of his Living Word Christian Fellowship Church have run into marital trouble over the last six months after a spouse connected with an ex-flame over Facebook. Because of the problems, he is ordering about 50 married church officials to delete their accounts with the social networking site or resign from their leadership positions.

(STAFF PHOTO: MARY FRANK)

 

Miller said Wednesday afternoon an official statement from Living Word Christian Fellowship Church will be read at the 9:30 a.m. service Sunday.

The Associated Press reported earlier Wednesday that Miller would be taking time off following a church vote Tuesday night. Miller told the AP that church members gave him a vote of confidence subject to some restrictions he would not list.

Later Wednesday, Miller again declined to say what those restrictions were. He said he would be at both the Thanksgiving service today and the Sunday service.

Miller, 48, leapt into the headlines a week ago after calling the Asbury Park Press to get coverage for his plan to ask his married church leaders — perhaps a couple dozen — to set an example and remove themselves from Facebook because he believes the social networking website was causing infidelity among people coming to him for counseling.

He said the church officers would have to step down from their leadership positions if they did not give up their Facebook accounts. Miller gave up his account last week.

Soon after that story came out, it was revealed that in court proceedings in 2003, Miller admitted to a three-way sexual relationship that had been ongoing, but ended, and included a close church male assistant and Miller's wife, Kim.

Hazel Samuels, chairwoman of the church board of trustees, said Wednesday she could not did speak for the church or congregation about the Tuesday night meeting because she did not attend.

At the service Sunday, a day after his previous indiscretions were in the news, Miller appeared to have strong backing from most of the 250 to 300 people attending, with many going up to stand behind him as he spoke.

He said that day that for many members, the revelations were old news, but "for others of you, it was shocking."

He said that Tuesday night there would be a church meeting where questions would be answered. He mentioned that if people wanted to leave the congregation, the elders would help them find another church.

Miller charged the church elders to do all they could do to protect the church.

The pastor and his wife founded their independent church in their then home in Neptune in 1987. They now live in Millstone Township. The church is on Route 35 in Neptune.

In his 2003 testimony concerning charges — later dismissed — on another matter he had brought against the man in the three-way relationship, Miller painted a picture of having near total control over the church.

He said in his testimony that for accountability purposes, he had an outside pastor he did not name who would listen to church tapes and look at the church's financial records.

And Miller testified that according to the church's constitution, he could be fired for gross, moral misconduct and refusal to repent.

"And who would fire you?" an assistant prosecutor asked.

"That's a very tricky question, because the trustees would have to do it, and they're appointed by me," Miller answered.

"OK, so if someone were to recommend that you would be fired, who would that be?" he was asked.

"I never thought of that. If somebody was to recommend that I'd be fired, they probably wouldn't have a job," Miller testified.

"Could it be a situation where the board on their own might decide to take up a vote?" he was asked.

"I guess it's conceivable, but it's not very probable in an independent church," Miller answered.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/arts/sfl-world-meeting-body-art-venezuela-20101018-pictures,0,4730982.photogallery

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/stupid/vet-77-busted-obama-death-threat

Pelosi's new mission: Limit Obama deals with GOP

 

 

JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS
The Associated Press
Wednesday, November 24, 2010; 3:10 PM

 

 

WASHINGTON -- Hers was the face on the grainy negative TV ads that helped defeat scores of Democrats. His agenda, re-election chances and legacy are on the line. Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, chosen after a messy family feud among Democrats to remain as their leader in the new Congress, and President Barack Obama share a keen interest in repairing their injured party after this month's staggering losses.

But Pelosi's mandate is diverging from the president's at a critical time, with potentially damaging consequences for Obama's ability to cut deals with Republicans in the new Congress.

Their partnership is strained after an election in which Pelosi and many Democrats feel the White House failed them by muddling the party's message and being too slow to provide cover for incumbents who cast tough votes for Obama's marquee initiatives.

Pelosi will lead Democrats "in pulling on the president's shirttails to make sure that he doesn't move from center-right to far-right," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., a co-chair of the liberal Progressive Caucus in the House. "We think if he'd done less compromising in the last two years, there's a good chance we'd have had a jobs bill that would have created real jobs, and then we wouldn't even be worrying about having lost elections."

Behind Democrats' decision to keep Pelosi as their leader after historic losses lies intense concern among liberals who dominate the party's ranks on Capitol Hill: They fear Obama will go too far in accommodating the GOP in the new era of divided government, and they see Pelosi as a counterweight.

She's played that role before. When Democrats panicked after losing their Senate supermajority last winter, Pelosi rebuffed feelers by then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and others to settle for a smaller health care bill. She derided the approach as "kiddie care" and pushed forward with the sweeping overhaul she painstakingly steered through the House by a razor-thin margin.

A more recent example is Pelosi's stated refusal to consider extending Bush-era income tax cuts for the highest brackets past their January expiration. Obama's aides recently signaled he might be open to doing so temporarily if that were the only way of preserving the tax cuts for the middle class - a bargain the president had steadfastly resisted before the election.

Such a deal wouldn't be acceptable to her or House Democrats, Pelosi told the president last week.

Pelosi "can provide that balance with the White House," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md. House Democrats "want to make sure that they've got somebody at the table with the president, looking him eye-to-eye and saying basically, 'You've got some people who have been very, very loyal to you - not just progressives but moderates, too - and they truly believe that that's not the right thing to do.' "

The White House says Obama and Pelosi have uniform goals and a proven track record of working together, and insists they're on the same page on important issues, particularly preserving the health care and financial regulation laws enacted this year against Republicans' promised attempts to roll them back.

"The president and Speaker Pelosi have enjoyed a remarkably productive working relationship over the last two years, and he looks forward to continuing to work with her on an agenda to strengthen the economy, create jobs and move America forward," said Josh Earnest, a White House spokesman.

The president isn't going to be in a position during the next two years to work exclusively with either Democrats or Republicans, his aides argue. His challenge will be determining - with input from Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, among others - what concessions he needs from the GOP to forge a good compromise, the aides say.

People close to Pelosi say she trusts the president - perhaps moreso than some of her allies in Congress do - to defend core Democratic principles in his dealings with the GOP.

Some Democrats argue that Pelosi's liberal streak might help the president in that context - a bad cop to Obama's good cop.

"In his negotiations with the Republicans, (Obama) needs to be able to say, 'Look, you say you're not going to compromise, but I've got Nancy Pelosi over here who is very passionate about these issues, and I have to listen to what she's saying,'" Cummings said.

It's not likely to be a tidy process.

A band of centrist Democrats who last week failed to oust Pelosi in favor of a fresh, more moderate face for the party is ready to side with Republicans on key issues next year. They say they're eager to work with Obama and the GOP on middle-of-the-road initiatives that are unlikely to be embraced by Pelosi or her liberal allies.

"I'd like to think there's an opportunity to do that," said Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, a leader of the conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats.

The coalition, comprised mostly of Southerners who were once known as "Yellow Dog" Democrats, was born after the Republican takeover of 1994, when it was said they felt "choked blue" by their colleagues on the left.

In those days, Matheson noted, they worked with then-President Bill Clinton on welfare reform and balancing the budget - things that enraged liberals and led to angry accusations that the president was betraying his own party. Welfare is "an example of being honest brokers, working together to get things done, and that's what Blue Dogs want to do."

It's not what Pelosi or many other Democrats have in mind.

Rep. Brian Higgins, D-N.Y., said Democrats learned from the last two years and their shellacking at the polls that "we need to be more aggressive with the White House. They were looking for what was acceptable and then moving toward that, instead of what was important, and moving toward that," Higgins said. "We need to be true to our principles."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/11/24/2010-11-24_sarah_palin_on_glenn_becks_radio_show_we_gotta_stand_with_our_north_korean_allie.html

Full-body scanners popping up at courthouses

 

P. SOLOMON BANDA

Associated Press 

Tue Nov 23, 9:21 pm ET

CASTLE ROCK, Colo. – Taking a trip during the holidays isn't the only time that people might get a full-body scan to pass through security. People heading to court to testify, get a restraining order, pay a ticket or answer criminal charges could also face a full-body scan at courthouses.

The U.S. Marshals Service, which is in charge of protecting federal judges nationwide, is exploring their use at federal courthouses. And two state courthouses in Douglas and El Paso counties in Colorado have already deployed full-body scanners that use radio waves to detect all objects on a person, including paper.

A guard in a separate room monitors the gray images with pixelated faces and genital areas, and the images aren't stored on a computer. officials said. All visitors to the Douglas County Courthouse in Castle Rock, Colo., undergo full-body scans, while guards at the El Paso County Judicial Center in Colorado Springs use the scanners during peak hours.

Angela Hellenbrand received a quick pat down Tuesday by security guard Mike Couts at the Castle Rock courthouse about 30 miles south of Denver. A guard in another room monitoring the full-body scans alerted Couts to an object in Hellenbrand's left rear pocket. It was the paper backing of a "Junior Deputy Sheriff" sticker that one of the guards had given her two young boys.

"It's OK," Hellenbrand said. "It's how they do security here. It's my second time through."

TSA officers, who handle security at airports, have been called molesters and threatened as they try to carry out patdowns called for in security measures for people who refuse to go through full-body scanners, including some that use X-rays.

The new security techniques are meant to thwart plots by would-be terrorists to use liquid explosives and bombs hidden in shoes and inside underwear. Court observers note that the threat in a courtroom is somewhat different.

"What we are still worried about at a courthouse is angry divorce litigants with a gun," said Sam Kamin, a law professor at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. "Metal detectors are pretty good at that."

Still, court officials note that evolving technology in materials, including plastic guns and knives, aren't detected by the 1970s technology of metal detectors.

"Although we have no current plans for deployment, the U.S. Marshals Service believes in the technology," said Washington-based Michael Prout, assistant director for judicial security for the U.S. marshals. "We will continue to explore the use of body scanners as a security measure for the federal judiciary."

Prout declined to discuss the results of a full-body screening test, citing sensitive law enforcement and procurement information.

In a statement, the marshals said they didn't receive any complaints from people passing through the scanners during the tests. The images of the full-body scans were saved on a computer hard drive, but weren't accessible without an administrative password and weren't reviewed by the marshals, according to the agency.

However, privacy became an issue when it was learned the images were stored. The Marshals Service received a request for the information under the Freedom of Information Act, but it wasn't immediately known who made the request.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/22/AR2010112205270.html

Carter: Fox commentators have ‘deliberately distorted’ news

AP/YonhapSmoke billow from Yeonpyeong island near the border against North Korea, in South Korea.

  

AP/YonhapNorth Korea shot dozens of rounds of artillery onto the populated South Korean island near their disputed western border.

 

Tensions between North and South Korea have boiled over, with shots being fired by both sides leaving at least two marines dead and wounding more than 13 others.

The conflict came to a head on Tuesday when the North fired artillery at an island belonging to the South in the Yellow Sea, according to military officials.

At least 100 rounds fell on Yeonpyeong, which houses a military garrison and is home to some 1,600 residents, according to the Yonhap news agency. However, the Defense Ministry has not confirmed how many rounds actually struck the island.

In response to the attack, the South Korean military fired more than 80 rounds into North Korea and launched fighter jets. The exchange of artillery lasted about an hour, CNN reports.

Images of smoke spewing into the sky over the small island were broadcast on Yonhap television, and showed several houses on fire. Residents have begun to flee to the South Korean mainland some 90 miles away.

"I was at home when I was surprised by the sounds of bomb explosions," a 35-year-old resident told the Korean news agency. "As I stepped out of my home, I saw the entire village had already turned into a sea of fire."

The attack began around 2:34 p.m. local time, a military official told Yonhap. Tensions between the neighboring nations have worsened since earlier this year, when a North Korean torpedo sank a South Korean navy ship, killing 46 people. It was also revealed this weekend that the North has secretly constructed a facility that allows it to produce low-enriched uranium.

The artillery fire followed a routine military drill by the South near Yeonpyeong island, Yonhap reports. The nine-day practice occurs annually at the site and started on Monday.

"North Korea's indiscriminate artillery attack on Yeonpyeong Island is a clear military provocation on the Republic of Korea," Hong Sang-pyo, senior secretary for public affairs at the presidential office Cheong Wa Dae, said in a statement. "Furthermore, recklessly shelling against civilians can never be tolerated."

The United States, which has tens of thousands of troops stationed in South Korea, was also quick to blast the North Korean attack.

"The United States strongly condemns this attack and calls on North Korea to halt its belligerent action," the White House said in a statement. The U.S. "is firmly committed to the defense of our ally, the Republic of Korea, and to the maintenance of regional peace and stability."

A U.S. official, speaking on anonymity, told Reuters that U.S. forces in Korea were closely monitoring the situation. But no U.S. troops were involved in the response to the North's artillery fire, the official said.

There are around 28,000 U.S. forces stationed in South Korea.

Officials in China has asked that both sides remain calm.

"We express our concern over the situation. The situation is to be verified," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a regularly scheduled media briefing in Beijing, according to Fox News.

Technically, the two Koreas have been at war for nearly 50 years. The Korean War, which began in 1950, ended only with a truce in 1953, but it was never officially ended.

With News Wire Services

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/11/23/2010-11-23_north_korea_bombs_south_korea_report.html#ixzz166fx9lNY