当前位置:黑龙江地方站首页 > 龙江新闻 > 正文

宽城区中医医院专家门诊健步社区长春市宽城区铁北医院客服中心

2019年10月15日 12:06:55    日报  参与评论()人

长春市中心医院怎么样好吗长春省第三人民医院正规的吗吉林省中西医结合医院产妇做检查好吗 President Bush Meets with Prime Ministers of the Bahamas, Barbados and Belize   PRESIDENT BUSH: Secretary Rice and I have had the pleasure of welcoming three of our neighbors -- neighborhood's strong leaders: the Prime Ministers of the Bahamas, Barbados and Belize.   And we had a discussion like you would expect neighbors to have -- how do we work together for our mutual benefit. We talked about trade and tourism. We talked about how to make sure that our security needs are met without interrupting the ability for our people to travel as freely as possible and for the ability of people to be able to make a good living as a result of tourism.   We talked about the region. I assured the leaders that the neighborhood is important to the ed States of America. We oftentimes talk about dealing with the Middle East or dealing on the continent of Africa. But it was important for these leaders to know that we believe that a good, strong, healthy, vibrant neighborhood is in the interests of the ed States. And so we had a good, friendly, important discussion, and I can't thank the leaders enough for coming. I appreciate very much you being here -- two of whom have just recently won elections -- good, fair, clean elections.   And I reminded them that there's no stronger advocate for democracy than my administration and I admire the fact that you agreed to run, had the courage of your convictions and took your message to the people. And then, of course, there's the old senior man here who's been around quite a while. (Laughter.) You've seen a lot come and go and, so, Mr. Prime Minister, why don't you say a few remarks, if you don't mind.   PRIME MINISTER INGRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. President. We've had a wonderful session this morning. We're very pleased and grateful that the U.S. President invited us to come. We have discussed with him a number of issues of relevance and concern to ourselves, including a desire on our part to have the Caribbean Basin Initiative Act extended -- expires in September of this year. And we talked about tourism, the impact that the current increase in the price of oil is having on travel. We talked about security and democracy.   And my two colleagues, who are recent Prime Ministers, David Thompson of Barbados and Dean Barrow of Belize, were able to engage in a full, frank discussion. And as for myself, this is my fourth time to have been so fortunate to have been to this place. Thank you, Mr. President.   PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes, sir. Thank you all very much. 200806/41150Statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee Anita HillOpening Statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee delivered 11 October 1991, Washington, D.C.[Contains adult language and subject matter][AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio]Ms. Hill: Mr. Chairman, Senator Thurmond, members of the committee:My name is Anita F. Hill, and I am a professor of law at the University of Oklahoma. I was born on a farm in Okmulgee County, Oklahoma, in 1956. I am the youngest of 13 children. I had my early education in Okmulgee County. My father, Albert Hill, is a farmer in that area. My mother's name is Irma Hill. She is also a farmer and a housewife.My childhood was one of a lot of hard work and not much money, but it was one of solid family affection, as represented by my parents. I was reared in a religious atmosphere in the Baptist faith, and I have been a member of the Antioch Baptist Church in Tulsa, Oklahoma, since 1983. It is a very warm part of my life at the present time.For my undergraduate work, I went to Oklahoma State University and graduated from there in 1977. I am attaching to this statement a copy of my resume for further details of my education. Senator Biden: It will be included in the record as if . Ms. Hill: Thank you. I graduated from the university with academic honors and proceeded to the Yale Law School, where I received my JD degree in 1980. Upon graduation from law school, I became a practicing lawyer with the Washington, DC, firm of Ward, Hardraker, and Ross.In 1981, I was introduced to now Judge Thomas by a mutual friend. Judge Thomas told me that he was anticipating a political appointment, and he asked if I would be interested in working with him. He was, in fact, appointed as Assistant Secretary of Education for Civil Rights. After he was -- After he had taken that post, he asked if I would become his assistant, and I accepted that position. In my early period there, I had two major projects. The first was an article I wrote for Judge Thomas's signature on the education of minority students. The second was the organization of a seminar on high-risk students which was abandoned because Judge Thomas transferred to the EEOC where he became the chairman of that office. During this period at the Department of Education, my working relationship with Judge Thomas was positive. I had a good deal of responsibility and independence. I thought he respected my work and that he trusted my judgment. After approximately three months of working there, he asked me to go out socially with him.What happened next and telling the world about it are the two most difficult things -- experiences of my life. It is only after a great deal of agonizing consideration and sleepless number -- a great number of sleepless nights that I am able to talk of these unpleasant matters to anyone but my close friends. I declined the invitation to go out socially with him and explained to him that I thought it would jeopardize at what -- at -- at the time I considered to be a very good working relationship. I had a normal social life with other men outside of the office. I believed then, as now, that having a social relationship with a person who was supervising my work would be ill-advised. I was very uncomfortable with the idea and told him so. I thought that by saying no and explaining my reasons my employer would abandon his social suggestions. However, to my regret, in the following few weeks, he continued to ask me out on several occasions. He pressed me to justify my reasons for saying no to him. These incidents took place in his office or mine. They were in the form of private conversations which not -- would not have been overheard by anyone else. My working relationship became even more strained when Judge Thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. On these occasions, he would call me into his office for reports on education issues and projects, or he might suggest that, because of the time pressures of his schedule, we go to lunch to a government cafeteria. After a brief discussion of work, he would turn the conversation to a discussion of sexual matters.His conversations were very vivid. He spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes. He talked about pornographic materials depicting individuals with large penises or large breasts involved in various sex acts. On several occasions, Thomas told me graphically of his own sexual prowess.Because I was extremely uncomfortable talking about sex with him at all, and particularly in such a graphic way, I told him that I did not want to talk about these subjects. I would also try to change the subject to education matters or to nonsexual personal matters such as his background or his beliefs. My efforts to change the -- the subject were rarely successful.Throughout the period of these conversations, he also, from time to time, asked me for social engagements. My reaction to these conversations was to avoid them by eliminating opportunities for us to engage in extended conversations. This was difficult because at the time I was his only assistant at the Office of Education -- or Office for Civil Rights.During the latter part of my time at the Department of Education, the social pressures and any conversation of his offensive behavior ended. I began both to believe and hope that our working relationship could be a proper, cordial, and professional one.When Judge Thomas was made chair of the EEOC, I needed to face the question of whether to go with him. I was asked to do so, and I did. The work itself was interesting, and at that time it appeared that the sexual overtures which had so troubled me had ended. I also faced the realistic fact that I had no alternative job. While I might have gone back to private practice, perhaps in my old firm or at another, I was dedicated to civil rights work, and my first choice was to be in that field. Moreover, the Department of Education itself was a dubious venture. President Reagan was seeking to abolish the entire department.For my first months at the EEOC, where I continued to be an assistant to Judge Thomas, there were no sexual conversations or overtures. However, during the fall and winter of 1982, these began again. The comments were random and ranged from pressing me about why I didn't go out with him to remarks about my personal appearance. I remember his saying that some day I would have to tell him the real reason that I wouldn't go out with him.He began to show displeasure in his tone and voice and his demeanor and his continued pressure for an explanation. He commented on what I was wearing in terms of whether it made me more or less sexually attractive. The incidents occurred in his inner office at the EEOC.One of the oddest episodes I remember was an occasion in which Thomas was drinking a Coke in his office. He got up from the table at which we were working, went over to his desk to get the Coke, looked at the can and asked, "Who has pubic hair on my Coke?" On other occasions, he referred to the size of his own penis as being larger than normal, and he also spoke on some occasions of the pleasures he had given to women with oral sex.At this point, late 1982, I began to feel severe stress on the job. I began to be concerned that Clarence Thomas might take out his anger with me by degrading me or not giving me important assignments. I also thought that he might find an excuse for dismissing me.In January of 1983, I began looking for another job. I was handicapped because I feared that, if he found out, he might make it difficult for me to find other employment and I might be dismissed from the job I had. Another factor that made my search more difficult was that there was a period -- this was during a period of a hiring freeze in the government. In February 1983, I was hospitalized for five days on an emergency basis for an acute -- for acute stomach pain, which I attributed to stress on the job.Once out of the hospital, I became more committed to find other employment and sought further to minimize my contact with Thomas. This became easier when Allison Duncan became office director, because most of my work was then funneled through her and I had contact with Clarence Thomas mostly in staff meetings. In the spring of 1983, an opportunity to teach at Oral Roberts University opened up. I participated in a seminar -- taught an afternoon session and seminar at Oral Roberts University. The dean of the -- of the university saw me teaching and inquired as to whether I would be interested in furthering -- pursuing a career in teaching, beginning at Oral Roberts University. I agreed to take the job in large part because of my desire to escape the pressures I felt at the EEOC, due to Judge Thomas.When I informed him that I was leaving in July, I recall that his response was that now I would no longer have an excuse for not going out with him. I told him that I still preferred not to do so. At some time after that meeting, he asked if he could take me to dinner at the end of the term. When I declined, he assured me that the dinner was a professional courtesy only and not a social invitation. I reluctantly agreed to accept that invitation, but only if it was at the very end of a working day.On, as I recall, the last day of my employment at the EEOC in the summer of 1983, I did have dinner with Clarence Thomas. We went directly from work to a restaurant near the office. We talked about the work I had done, both at Education and at the EEOC. He told me that he was pleased with all of it except for an article and speech that I had done for him while we were at the Office for Civil Rights. Finally, he made a comment that I will vividly remember. He said that if I ever told anyone of his behavior that it would ruin his career. This was not an apology, nor was it an explanation. That was his last remark about the possibility of our going out or reference to his behavior. In July of 1983, I left Washington, D.C. area and I've had minimal contacts with Judge Clarence Thomas since. I am of course aware from the Press that some questions have been raised about conversations I had with Judge Clarence Thomas after I left the EEOC. From 1983 until today, I have seen Judge Thomas only twice. On one occasion, I needed to get a reference from him, and on another he made a public appearance in Tulsa. On one occasion he called me at home and we had an inconsequential conversation. On one occasion he called me without reaching me, and I returned the call without reaching him, and nothing came of it. I have, on at least three occasions, been asked to [act] as a conduit to him for others. I knew his secretary, Diane Holt. We had worked together at both EEOC and Education. There were occasions on which I spoke to her, and on some of these occasions undoubtedly I passed on some casual comment to then Chairman Thomas. There were a series of calls in the first three months of 1985, occasioned by a group in Tulsa, which wished to have a civil rights conference. They wanted Judge Thomas to be the speaker and enlisted my assistance for this purpose. I did call in January and February to no effect, and finally suggested to the person directly involved, Susan Cahall, that she put the -- that she put the matter into her own hands and call directly. She did so in March of 1985. In connection with that March invitation, Ms. Cahall wanted conference materials for the seminar and some research was needed. I was asked to try to get the information and did attempt to do so. There was another call about another possible conference in the July of 1985. In August of 1987, I was in Washington, D.C. and I did call Diane Holt. In the course of this conversation, she asked me how long I was going to be in town and I told her. It is recorded in the message as August 15. It was, in fact, August 20th. She told me about Judge Thomas's marriage and I did say, "Congratulate him." It is only after a great deal of agonizing consideration that I am able to talk of these unpleasant matters to anyone except my closest friends. As I've said before these last few days have been very trying and very hard for me, and it hasn't just been the last few days this week. It has actually been over a month now that I have been under the strain of this issue. Telling the world is the most difficult experience of my life, but it is very close to having to live through the experience that occasion this meeting. I may have used poor judgment early on in my relationship with this issue. I was aware, however, that telling at any point in my career could adversely affect my future career. And I did not want early on to burn all the bridges to the EEOC. As I said, I may have used poor judgment. Perhaps I should have taken angry or even militant steps, both when I was in the agency, or after I left it. But I must confess to the world that the course that I took seemed the better as well as the easier approach. I declined any comment to newspapers, but later when Senate staff asked me about these matters I felt I had a duty to report. I have no personal vendetta against Clarence Thomas. I seek only to provide the committee with information which it may regard as relevant. It would have been more comfortable to remain silent. It took no initiative to inform anyone -- I took no initiative to inform anyone. But when I was asked by a representative of this committee to report my experience, I felt that I had to tell the truth. I could not keep silent. 200806/41465四平妇幼保健医院咨询电话

长春市第一医院预约电话THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Today I want to talk to you about some important policies affecting taxpayers and homeowners this holiday season. On Thursday, the ed States Senate passed a bill to fix the alternative minimum tax, or AMT. The AMT was designed to ensure that the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes. But when Congress passed the AMT decades ago, it was not indexed for inflation. As a result, the AMT's higher tax burden is creeping up on more and more middle-class families, and as many as 25 million Americans would be subject to the AMT. On average, these taxpayers would have to send an extra ,000 to the IRS next year. This is a huge tax increase that taxpayers do not deserve and that Congress must stop. I congratulate the ed States Senate for acting to do so. Now it's up to the House of Representatives to move the bill. They've aly delayed the bill so long that billion in tax refund checks could be delayed next year. I urge the House of Representatives to get the Senate-passed AMT relief bill to my desk before they adjourn so I can sign it and protect millions of families from higher taxes and avert any further delay in the tax refund checks next year. I also know many Americans are concerned about meeting their mortgage obligations. The private sector and the government both have a role to play. More than three months ago, I announced a series of targeted actions to help responsible homeowners avoid foreclosure. And on Thursday I met with Treasury Secretary Paulson and Housing Secretary Jackson, who updated me on the progress. The first step we took was to launch a new initiative at the Federal Housing Administration called "FHA Secure." This program gives the FHA greater flexibility to offer refinancing to homeowners who have good credit histories but cannot afford their current payments. In just three months, the FHA has helped more than 35,000 people refinance their homes. And in the coming year, the FHA expects this program to help more than 300,000 families. Second, we helped assemble the HOPE NOW Alliance, which includes lenders, loan servicers, investors, and mortgage counselors. HOPE NOW is an example of the government bringing together members of the private sector to voluntarily address a national challenge -- without taxpayer subsidies or government mandates. This group has agreed on a set of industry-wide standards to help struggling homeowners by refinancing an existing loan into a new private mortgage, or by moving them into an FHA Secure loan, or by freezing their current interest rates for five years. Lenders are aly refinancing and modifying mortgages on a case-by-case basis. By taking a systemic approach, HOPE NOW will be able to help large groups of homeowners all at once. HOPE NOW estimates that up to 1.2 million homeowners could be eligible for assistance. And HOPE NOW has set up a counseling hotline that Americans can call 24 hours a day. I urge homeowners who are worried about rising mortgage payments to call 1-888-995-HOPE to get help. Third, the federal government is working to reduce the likelihood of similar problems in the future. Regulators are taking action to make the mortgage industry more transparent, reliable, and fair. Our goal is to ensure that homeowners receive complete, accurate, and understandable information about their mortgages. These measures will help many struggling homeowners -- and Congress has the potential to help even more. Yet in the three months since I made my proposals, Congress has not sent me a single bill to help homeowners. If Members are serious about responding to the challenges in the housing market, they can start by taking several important steps. Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the FHA. This bill could allow the FHA to help 250,000 families by the end of 2008. Congress needs to temporarily reform the tax code to help homeowners refinance during this time of housing market stress. And Congress needs to pass funding to support mortgage counseling. With this funding, we could help more homeowners choose the mortgage that is right for them. As well, Congress needs to pass legislation to reform Government Sponsored Enterprises like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. By strengthening the independent regulation of these institutions, we can ensure they focus on their mission to expand homeownership in a fiscally responsible way. These common-sense measures have been before Congress for months. Congress needs to pass these measures quickly -- and send them to my desk, so we can help homeowners in need and protect the American Dream for all our citizens. Thank you for listening. 200801/23822长春一院生殖科 梅河口妇女医院治疗宫颈糜烂好吗

长岭县妇女儿童医院的地址【演讲文稿】This week, I went to Memphis, Tennessee, where I spoke to the graduating class of Booker T. Washington High School. Graduations are always happy occasions. But this commencement was especially hopeful – because of just how much the kids at Booker T. Washington High School had overcome. This is a school in the middle of a tough neighborhood in South Memphis. There’s a lot of crime. There’s a lot of poverty. And just a few years ago, only about half of the students at the school graduated. Just a handful went off to college each year.But folks came together to change all that. Under the leadership of a dynamic principal and devoted teachers, they started special academies for ninth graders – because they found that that’s when a lot of kids were lost. They made it possible for students to take AP classes or vocational courses. Most importantly, they didn’t just change the curriculum; they created a culture that prizes hard work and discipline, and that shows every student that they matter. Today, four out five students at the school earn a diploma. 70 percent continue their education, many the first in their families to go to college. So Booker T. Washington High School is no longer a story about what’s gone wrong in education. It’s a story about how we can set it right.We need to encourage this kind of change all across America. We need to reward the reforms that are driven not by Washington, but by principals and teachers and parents. That’s how we’ll make progress in education – not from the top down, but from the bottom up. And that’s the guiding principle of the Race to the Top competition my administration started two years ago. The idea is simple: if states show that they’re serious about reform, we’ll show them the money. And it’s aly making a difference throughout the country. In Tennessee, where I met those students, they’ve launched an innovative residency program so that new teachers can be mentored by veteran educators. In Oregon, Michigan and elsewhere, grants are supporting the work of teachers who are lengthening the school day, offering more specialized classes, and making the changes necessary to improve struggling schools.Our challenge now is to allow all fifty states to benefit from the success of Race to the Top. We need to promote reform that gets results while encouraging communities to figure out what’s best for their kids. That why it’s so important that Congress replace No Child Left Behind this year – so schools have that flexibility. Reform just can’t wait.And if anyone doubts this, they ought to head to Booker T. Washington High. They ought to meet the inspiring young people who overcame so much, and worked so hard, to earn their diplomas – in a school that believed in their promise and gave them the opportunity to succeed. We need to give every child in America that chance. That’s why education reform matters. Thanks for listening, and have a great weekend.201105/137329 21世纪杯全国英语演讲比赛 第六名 美国经典英文演讲100篇总统演讲布莱尔首相演讲美国总统布什演讲快报 200808/46692长春妇幼保健院正规蛟河妇女医院门诊部在哪里

长春妇女较好医院
长春流产较佳时期
长春市一院要预约吗赶集解答
长春市公交医院治疗妇科炎症好吗
时空互动长春市中医大附属二院网友评论
二道区妇女医院简介
长春协和医院咨询
榆树市儿童医院诊疗中心怎么样中医报吉林第一人民医院收费怎样
管分享长春人流手术哪里做比较好好医门户
(责任编辑:图王)
 
五大发展理念

龙江会客厅

长春哪家医院做流产正规卫生
长春市妇科病哪家医院好 梅河口妇女医院在那飞度云大夫 [详细]
松原市做无痛人流多少钱
在长春哪家医院做流产手术比较好 榆树市第二人民医院做无痛人流多少钱 [详细]
长春市二院门诊怎么走
长春208医院女子妇科听说不错,有谁去过没? 爱解答吉林妇幼保健医院几点营业中国新闻 [详细]
吉林省长春第四人民医院专家挂号多少钱
周新闻吉林长春市第二医院在哪啊 蛟河妇幼保健院好么快乐信息松原人民医院男科怎么样 [详细]