Back the ridiculous bill that you had intended to bring up today but did not have the votes for. They spoke out. And i am grateful to them. You know, in some respects, you look around this room and think is this a chamber of congress or is this a Doctors Office . We might as well have stethoscopes and speculums. That is what you are doing. You are trying to come between a woman and her physician. There is a lot of who block h oopla because the anniversary of roe versus wade. But roe versus wade was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States of america. Each of us, when we became members of this body, swor we would upholde the constitution. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle spent hours and hours, trying to somehow find ways to undo constitutional decisions by the Supreme Court. So we are here again. Having another debate. We will have another debate. But american women in this country are far more interested in equal pay for equal work, for paid sick leave, for a ch
Extremist effort. Their partisan base will be happy, but at the expense of the health of many women and families in our country. This bill will have a serious impact on the familys ability to make their own Health Care Decisions. It will raise taxes on hardworking americans, just if they happen to choose a health care that plan that this majority doesnt like. And for what . Some of my republican colleagues can score cheap political points. This is not what the American People want. They want an agenda that lifts people up. They want us to be working on legislation that creates jobs, boost paychecks in this country and strengthens our economy. This bill will do none of these things. It is nothing but a cynical attempt to put politics where it doesnt belong. Vote no on this rule and vote no on this blatant political gambity. I know how embarrassing it is for the republicans because of their own snaffue within their own caucus, but lets get on to the real business of creating more jobs in
Words that should apply to all children cannot apply to the most helpless of all children. Mr. Speaker, we honor Abraham Lincoln most because he found the courage as president of the United States in the days of slavery, and he found the humanity within himself to recognize the image of god stamped on the soul of slaves, that the Supreme Court sa were not human. And that the tide of Public Opinion didnt recognize as protectble under the law protectable under the law. Could it still be that president barack obama might consider that perspective . As well as his own legacy and even eternity itself, and recognize that those little unborn children look so desperately to him now for help. Could it be that the president might finally remember that on the pages of the bible on which he laid his hands were the words written in red, in as much as you have done it unto one of the least of these, buy brethren, youve done it unto me. Whether he does or not its time for those of us in this chamber
Phone and basic a. M. Radio that was as big as your hand. The same newspaper would report on the latest advanced research on the pain experienced by unborn children focused on the research of an oxfordtrained neonatal pediatrician who held an appointment at harvard medical school. If the fetus is beyond 20 weeks of gestation, i would assume that there will be pain caused to the fetus and i believe it will be severe and excruciating pain. A few years later the terrifying facts uncovered in the gand jury report regarding dr. Gosnell, would contain references to a neonatal expert who said the cutting of babies spinal cords intended to be lateterm aborted would cause them, and i quote, a tremendous amount of pain. Congress has the power and the responsibility to acknowledge these developments in our understanding of the ability of unborn children to feel pain by prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, postfertilization the point at which evidence shows the unborn can experience
They are embedded sidebyside with regular iraqi forces and have full access to all of the Iraqi Government buildings. I believe that the United States had taken a more aggressive position charlie against isis . Senator rubio against isis and a more stronger presence in iraq. It may have triggered them to respond in kind with a text their agents. Charlie what is your principal argument against an iranian deal that seems to be on the table now . Senator rubio my primary objection is that allows around to obtain the capability to enrich uranium or processed plutonium. There are other countries that have nuclear energy. Iran does not need it. They are oilrich. Assuming they want it, there is a way to do it away other countries do by importing the material. The fact they can retain a country that sponsors terrorism that is developing longrange rockets, a country that we know has been working on acquiring a Nuclear Weapon capability despite their life and has always had a secret component ca