濮阳东方医院治阳痿非常好濮阳东方价格低,濮阳东方医院做人流非常靠谱,濮阳东方医院看妇科价格低,濮阳东方妇科公交路线,濮阳东方妇科技术好,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄口碑很好放心,濮阳东方看男科可靠

If you are way into politics, you are not the average American. Not even close.A new poll from the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center reveals how shockingly little people know about even the most basic elements of our government and the Constitution that formed it.Take your pick from this bouillabaisse:* More than one in three people (37%) could not name a single right protected by the First Amendment. THE FIRST AMENDMENT.* Only one in four (26%) can name all three branches of the government. (In 2011, 38% could name all three branches.)* One in three (33%) can't name any branch of government. None. Not even one.* A majority (53%) believe the Constitution affords undocumented immigrants no rights. However, everyone in the US is entitled to due process of law and the right to make their case before the courts, at the least.(And the First Amendment protects the rights to free speech, free exercise of religion, freedom of the press and the rights of people to peaceably assemble, in case you were wondering.)"Protecting the rights guaranteed by the Constitution presupposes that we know what they are," said Annenberg Director Kathleen Hall Jamieson. "The fact that many don't is worrisome."The Annenberg poll is far from the first to reveal not only our collective ignorance about the basic tenets of democracy but also the fact that we are even less informed than we were in the past.Take this Pew Research Center poll from 2010. When asked to name the chief justice of the Supreme Court, less than three in 10 (28%) correctly answered John Roberts. That compares unfavorably to the 43% who rightly named William Rehnquist as the chief justice in a Pew poll back in 1986.What did the 72% of people who didn't name Roberts as the chief justice in 2010 say instead, you ask? A majority (53%) said they didn't know. Eight percent guessed Thurgood Marshall, who was never a chief justice of the Court and, perhaps more importantly, had been dead for 17 years when the poll was taken. Another 4% named Harry Reid, who is not now nor ever was a Supreme Court Justice.What we don't know about the government -- executive, legislative and judicial branches -- is appalling. It's funny -- until you realize that lots and lots of people whose lives are directly affected by what the federal government does and doesn't do have absolutely no idea about even the most basic principles of how this all works.It leads to huge amounts of discontent from the public when they realize that no politician can make good on the various and sundry promises they make on the campaign trail. 2654

If Santa were to find his way to Baltimore, Maryland, 34th Street might be the perfect place to land his sleigh and Bob Hoshier might be the perfect person to welcome him to the neighborhood.The 57-year-old man has lived on this block since the 1980s, the year he first hung up a few strands of Christmas light. His neighbors eventually got in on the decorating and now, every year, this strip of row houses is covered so thickly in Christmas lights that planes landing at nearby Baltimore Washington International Airport might mistake it for a landing strip.And this year, more than ever, Hoshier knew his gift to the neighborhood had to shine."It's been a terrible year. With the amount of people out of work, the kids that aren’t gonna have a great Christmas, and this is free, isn’t going to cost them anything," Hoshier said as he watched people walk up and down the block admiring the lights.Turns out Hoshier isn't alone in his love for light. Sales of Christmas lights are up nearly 20 percent nationwide in 2020."With the way everyone is hunkered down in their houses, it puts a little joy on kids' faces,” Hoshier said. “You only have to put one string of lights up, you don’t have to go crazy as we do.”But the holidays aside, there might be something much deeper at play when it comes to Americans’ newfound fascination with Christmas lights this year. In a year defined by darkness, psychology professor Dr. Krystine Batcho sees a reason behind those skyrocketing light sales."Holidays themselves are wonderful social or community markers for time. It reminds us that there’s a cycle to nature, the seasons' cycle," said Dr. Batcho, who teaches at Le Moyne College in Syracuse, New York.With so many of our routines upended, putting up lights can be a marker in time. A way for our subconscious to reset."None of us can stop time or reverse it, but when you put up those lights, you’re saying, ‘I’m going to tell the world it’s time to take a break,’" she added.In a year that has seen its fair share of darkness, Dr. Batcho sees these tiny little bulbs as lighting the way forward."It’s an act of hope, and we all are anticipating the end of the pandemic, so this takes on more meaning, more purpose,” she said. 2234

I just received this from the Attorney General. Those in our caucus who refused to take precautions are responsible for Dick Hinch's death. pic.twitter.com/mMLwkPE7F2— William M Marsh MD (@wmarshcc8) December 10, 2020 235

If flying is one of your fears, you're not alone. One class has been helping people overcome the fear for decades, by debunking some of the concerns keeping you on the ground."The plane just dropped suddenly," one woman remembers."We actually went up in an airplane and found out afterwards we had gone up in a hurricane," another woman recalls."What really scares me is somebody blowing something up on purpose," one traveler says."I actually thought I was going to die, says another traveler."It's led to some odd routines. "I have to like touch all four sides of the door on the way in and you know with the seats," says one passenger. "And count to 100 during take off."It has almost led do some missed opportunities."I thought ok I'll just never fly again I'm old I don't care," one woman says. "But my daughter is going to college and I want to go with her."That's why these people have decided to not only share but face their fears in this Fear of Flying Clinic. Students learn it's not the fear that's the problem but the way they think about it. And once that changes so does the fear."It's not easy to do because you do have a whole set up of automatic beliefs that are causing you trouble," says one of the class instructors.That's why debunking students' biggest fears is so important."I have some very disappointing news for you all about turbulence," says commercial pilot Captain Mark Connell. "We don't care. It doesn't make much difference to us."As scary as it might feel, Captain Connell compares a plane hitting turbulence to a car hitting a pothole. He covers everything from turbulence and weather, to pilot training and preparedness."There's something helpful about that to think to yourself well he flies planes all the time and he's not scared so I probably shouldn't be scared either," says Mimi Kravetz.Kravetz has been scared of flying since she was 10."When there's turbulence on an airplane, my heart starts beating quicker. I feel really panicky. I can't focus. I can't sleep and I wanted to get out of that feeling," Kravetz says.Now she's ready to face her fear. "It'll be interesting on Monday to try and go in to see if I can replace my current set of thoughts with a set of new ones," Kravetz says.And get into the air with as much ease as the plane she's riding in.      2351

If Monday's opening statements were any indication, Judge Amy Coney Barrett's nomination to the Supreme Court will face a bitter partisan fight in the days and weeks ahead.Given the timing — less than a month ahead of the 2020 general election — and the implications of appointing a sixth Supreme Court justice nominated by a Republican president, Democrats painted a bleak picture of America should Barrett be nominated to serve on the Supreme Court.Barrett's confirmation process was already set to be fraught with political controversy, given that Republicans successfully blocked President Barack Obama's nomination of Judge Merrick Garland for over half a year ahead of the 2016 presidential election, claiming that voters should have a say in the confirmation processIn fact, Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, used her opening statement to share a 2016 quote from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, in which he said he would wait to fill a Supreme Court seat if it came open between the opening of the primary process and the 2020 election.Feinstein also added that Democrats intended to focus on the "consequence" of "rushing" a Supreme Court nominee through the Senate.Senators will question Barrett beginning at 9 a.m. ET Tuesday, a process that will last into Wednesday. Graham says he hopes to have the confirmation hearing process wrapped up by Thursday.Democrats warn of loss of health careSeveral Democrats noted that in the past, President Donald Trump has only promised to nominate justices who will undo the Affordable Care Act — the law that enacted public health care and offered more consumer protections. They also pointed to Barrett's past criticism of Supreme Court decisions that have upheld parts of the law.Other Democrats, like Sen. Cory Booker, argued that Barrett's nomination was a ploy by Republicans to undo public healthcare initiatives and protections afforded by the Affordable Care Act, saying that a Barrett nomination would look like "deciding between buying medicine and buying groceries."Sen. Kamala Harris — the current Democratic vice presidential nominee — echoed those statements, claiming that President Donald Trump was attempting to "bypass the will of the American people" so they can strike down the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Mazie Hirono, herself a cancer survivor, wondered aloud if she would have survived had she been in a position that many Americans may find themselves in without government-backed healthcare.Graham has said that he expects Barrett to be confirmed to the Supreme Court a week before the Nov. 3 election. On Nov. 10, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a key case to determine the legality of portions of the ACA.COVID-19 fears shape hearingSeveral Democrats called out their Republican colleagues for even holding hearings amid a pandemic. Appearing virtually, Harris claimed it was "reckless" for the Judiciary Committee to hold in-person hearings and called out Graham for not requiring Senators to test negative for the virus before appearing in the room.At least two of the senators on the committee — Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Sen. Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina — have recently tested positive for the virus. Both at Barrett's nomination ceremony at the White House in late September — an event that has been described as a "superspreader" after about a dozen people in attendance, including President Donald Trump, tested positive for COVID-19. Lee, having been cleared by a Congressional physician, appeared in person. Tillis appeared on video teleconference.Graham said Monday that the hearing room had been deemed by the Capitol architect to be in compliance with CDC social distancing guidelines. Other Democrats said their time would be better spent working on passing more COVID-19 stimulus — something Trump has been willing to entertain in recent days.Republicans defend Barrett's character, call out those questioning her faithRepublicans defended Barrett's character by accusing Democrats of attacking her Catholic faith, often pointing to constitutional statues against "religious tests" as a qualifier for public office. Sen Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, specifically accused Harris of "anti-Catholic bigotry" by questioning past judiciary appointments fitness for office due to their membership in the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic organization.Sen. Joni Ernst, R-IA, further defended Barrett's character against those who she says had labeled her a "handmaid," saying that such accusations were "demeaning to women.""We don't have to fit a narrow definition of womanhood," Ernst said. At this point, Republican Senators have the votes to confirm Barrett. Graham has said he expects the process to be finished in the next two weeks — about seven days ahead of election day.Barrett pays homage to Scalia, GinsburgIn her opening statement, which was obtained and published by several media outlets, Barrett paid tribute to the late Justice Antonin Scalia — a conservative icon for whom Barrett worked for as a clerk early in her career. She said she shared in Scalia's philosophy of "textualism" — apply the law directly as it is written."A judge must apply the law as written, not as the judge wishes it were," Barrett said.Her opening statement also offered condolences to the justice whose seat she hopes to fill, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg."I have been nominated to fill Justice Ginsburg's seat, but no one will ever take her place," Barrett will say. "I will be forever grateful for the path she marked and the life she led." 5554