濮阳东方男科在哪个地方(濮阳东方男科价格低) (今日更新中)

Imagine Kevin James as Frank Underwood on "House of Cards."There is an online petition suggesting just that -- believe it or not -- and as of Tuesday, nearly 30,000 people have signed on to endorse the idea."Losing a great show is hard, no matter the circumstances," the petition reads. "However with hardship comes the opportunity for a great show to become one of the greatest television shows of all time. I think Kevin James can elevate 'House of Cards' to a globally adored franchise like 'Game of Thrones' and make the entire world focus on one of the most important Netflix original series there is."It's doubtful one Kevin will replace the other, but let's not pretend that television hasn't pulled big swaps before.Here are a few examples:Donna's death on "Kevin Can Wait"James is currently starring in the CBS sitcom "Kevin Can Wait," which recently killed off his character's wife, played by Erinn Hayes.Now, killing off a character is not out of the ordinary, but the show managed to make this particular plot twist especially awkward.Some "Kevin Can Wait" viewers complained that series treated the character's death too lightly, making a joke about her gym sending a postcard saying she was missed.James's character tells his daughter not to toss the card because "on the bottom, there's a coupon for a Kung-Fu lesson. I want to go there."James's former "King of Queens" costar, Leah Remini, was added to the cast, effectively making the show feel like "King of Queens 2.0."Original vs. new Becky on "Roseanne"Fans still like to argue over who was the better Becky on the hit 1990s sitcom "Roseanne."Actress Lecy Goranson played the eldest Conner child for the first five seasons, before leaving to go to college.Sarah Chalke was then recast in the role for Season 6, which some viewers didn't love.Goranson tried to work with the show -- reprising her role in Season 8 -- but ultimately Chalke became Becky full time.The whole thing turned into a running gag on "Rosanne," which would sometimes include jokes about the missing Goranson.The forthcoming "Roseanne" revival is set to have Goranson back as Becky and Chalke in another role.What happened to Judy on "Family Matters?"Judy Winslow went upstairs to her room one day and was never seen or heard from again.At least that's how fans of ABC's "Family Matters" felt like it all went down.The sitcom, which ran from 1989 to 1997, made the character Steve Urkle famous. But it was the disappearance of young Judy after four seasons that many viewers still talk about.Jaimee Foxworth, the actress who portrayed Judy, is now 37."The producers felt that they could do it [disappear her character] and no one would notice," Foxworth recently told The Root "They'd done it with previous shows they had," she said. "They figured no one would really care. My fans took notice of it."A tale of two Morgan Matthews on "Boy Meets World""Boy Meets World" thought they could pull one over on us when they swapped out actress Lily Nicksay, who played the scene-stealing sister Morgan, for actress Lindsay Ridgeway. Well, the second Morgan became forever known as "the other Morgan."Disney gave the 1990s show a bit of a reboot in 2014 with "Girl Meets World," which at the end of Season 3 brought both actresses back for the finale.It got ugly with Aunt Viv on "Fresh Prince of Bel Air"The original Aunt Viv, Janet Hubert, was beloved by fans for the first three seasons of the series which debuted in 1990.But the actress departed the NBC sitcom in 1993, and cast Daphne Maxwell Reid to play rapper Will Smith's aunt.In 2013, Hubert told "The Insider" that Smith fired her."He said 'We're just going to replace her and act like nothing happened," Hubert said at the time. "Well, honey, that is not what happened is it?"For his part, Smith reportedly said in a 1993 radio interview that he expected Hubert's anger."I can say straight up that Janet Hubert wanted the show to be 'The Aunt Viv of Bel Air Show,' because I know she is going to dog me in the press," he said. "She has basically gone from a quarter of a million dollars a year to nothing. She's mad now, but she's been mad all along."The-CNN-Wire 4169

HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge has rejected a last-ditch Republican effort to invalidate nearly 127,000 votes in Houston. U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen’s ruling Monday concerned ballots cast at drive-thru polling centers that were established during the pandemic. The judge's decision to hear arguments on the brink of Election Day drew concern from voting rights activists, and came after the Texas Supreme Court rejected a nearly identical challenge over the weekend.The lawsuit was brought by conservative Texas activists who have railed against expanded voting access in Harris County. Hanen said the opponents to drive-thru centers — who were represented by former Harris County GOP Chairman Jared Woodfill— had no standing to bring a lawsuit. He added that people had already voted and that conservative activists had months to bring a challenge sooner.But Hanen still expressed doubts about whether Texas law allowed anyone to vote from their car, even in a pandemic.“If I were voting tomorrow, I would not vote in a drive-thru just out of my concern as to whether that’s legal or not,” Hanen said.Another 20,000 or more voters were expected to use drive-thru polling locations Tuesday, said Harris County Clerk Chris Hollins, the county’s top elections official. Several voters who already used the drive-thru centers rushed to join mounting opposition to the lawsuit, including a Houston attorney whose wife was 35 weeks pregnant when she cast her ballot. She gave birth to twins Friday.The county is the nation’s third largest and a crucial battleground in Texas, where President Donald Trump and Republicans are bracing for the closest election in decades on Tuesday. 1689

In a statement released Wednesday, Fox News president Jay Wallace says the network supports CNN's lawsuit to restore one of its reporters "hard" press passes.Wallace also said the network would file an amicus brief on behalf of CNN today."FOX News supports CNN in its legal effort to regain its White House reporter's press credential. We intend to file an amicus brief with the U.S. District Court. Secret Service passes for working White House journalists should not be weaponized. While we don't condone the antagonistic tone by both the President and the press at recent media avails, we do support a free press, access and open exchanges for the American people," Wallace's statement read.Fox News joins the Associated Press, Bloomberg, First Look Media, Gannett, NBC News, The New York Times, POLITICO and the Washington Post. The E.W. Scripps Company, this station's parent company, also joined in filing an amicus brief on CNN's behalf."Whether the news of the day concerns national security, the economy, or the environment, reporters covering the White House must remain free to ask questions. It is imperative that independent journalists have access to the President and his activities, and that journalists are not barred for arbitrary reasons. Our news organizations support the fundamental constitutional right to question this President, or any President. We will be filing friend-of-the-court briefs to support CNN's and Jim Acosta's lawsuit based on these principals," E.W. Scripps said in a statement.The White House pulled CNN reporter Jim Acosta's hard pass last week after an incident at a press conference in which a White House staffer tried to forcefully grab a microphone while Acosta attempted to ask President Trump follow-up question. Trump had repeatedly told Acosta he was moving on to another reporter.Though the White House maintains that it was simply revoking his "hard" pass and that Acosta could continually apply for daily passes, he has been denied daily passes multiple times since the incident.On Tuesday, CNN filed a lawsuit against the White House, seeking the restoration of Acosta's hard pass on First and Fifth Amendment grounds. It's also seeking a preliminary injunction to allow Acosta to immediately resume covering the White House.A hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for 3:30 ET Wednesday.  2366

If someone tells you any words other than "misinformation" and "toxic" are the words of the year, it's fake news.Dictionary.com chose the word "misinformation" on Monday and said it intentionally went with "mis" over "dis." It's the idea of intent, whether to inadvertently mislead or do it on purpose, the website wanted to highlight, according to the Associated Press."The recent explosion of misinformation and the growing vocabulary we use to understand it have come up again and again in the work of our lexicographers," Dictionary.com says. 554

If not for an attorney taking her case pro bono, a Barberton, Ohio woman’s request for 40 cents nearly landed her a 30-day stay in jail and a 0 fine under the city’s strict panhandling ordinance.Enacted in 1980, that ordinance could be repealed by the city council next month. If not, the woman’s attorney has threatened legal action over the “unconstitutional” ordinance.In February, Samantha Stevens, a single mother of one, was asking patrons of a McDonald’s in downtown Barberton for 40 cents so she could cover bus fare. A city police officer then issued the woman a summons for soliciting alms — better known as panhandling. Under city ordinance, it is considered a fourth-degree misdemeanor, which carries a potential 30-day jail sentence and a 0 fine.Civil rights attorney Becky Sremack came across the incident by reading the police blotter in the local newspaper, the Barberton Herald.“I wrote her a letter and offered pro-bono legal assistance at that point,” Sremack said. “It doesn’t really add up to charge someone criminally for asking another citizen for a small amount of money.”Not only does it not add up, it’s also unconstitutional, Sremack said.Laws prohibiting panhandling in public places have been repeatedly deemed unconstitutional by federal courts because soliciting or requesting money is considered protected speech under the First Amendment.Last week, Sremack filed a motion to dismiss the charge against Stevens on the grounds that the city’s anti-panhandling ordinance was unconstitutional. City prosecutors have since dismissed the charge.“The fundamental problem is that the government does not have the right to ban solicitation in a public place,” Sremack said. “Solicitation of money asking someone for help is free speech and is protected along with every other type of speech. It’s a basic free speech issue. The Constitution has to apply to the poor as well as to the rich.”Sremack then took the matter a step further, penning a letter to Barberton city leaders that if the city’s anti-panhandling ordinance isn’t repealed within a reasonable amount of time, she would be filing a lawsuit against the city. According to police records, a total of 30 panhandling summonses have been issued since January 2017.“Criminalizing is going to do nothing to reduce the need amongst the poor for help, for assistance,” Sremack said. “These resources would be better put into programs that address the underlying issue.”City Law Director Lisa Miller told Scripps station WEWS in Cleveland on Tuesday that city leaders had begun the process of repealing the 38-year-old ordinance before Sremack sent the letter. The possible repeal of the ordinance could go before a city council committee on May 7th. A vote on the measure could come as early as May 14th.Craig Megyes, the president of the Barberton City Council, said he anticipates that the ordinance will be repealed.The possibly unconstitutional ordinance only applies to soliciting in public places like sidewalks and street corners. Private property owners still have the right to prohibit panhandling on their property.“The Constitution protects speech that we like as well as speech we don’t like,” Sremack said. “Simply being made uncomfortable by seeing a neighbor in need is not enough to call it a crime.” 3315

来源：资阳报