Bakers. I am not sure whether it is good or bad but there are plenty of people smarter than me who did think it was bad for health. To as a judge, it is my job defer to the political process and not impose my own sense of whether or not it is bad for health on america. You can see the opposite presumption where judges are empowered to do what you want, to decide which are arbitrary in which are not. You honestly and candidly say not want tothey did construe it the way you want is because it would call into question a lot of regulation and can see since the new deal, much of what the government now says helps with safety regulation, maximum our prolonged law laws. Maximum per hour laws go into effect. That is why they say it is a recipe for mass judicial activism. I do not think any of the embraced it. Ices ity explicitly rejected because they think the judicial preferences the way to go. In the face of uncertainty, there should be deference. Thatre jews so confident judges are equipped
Stakeholders. This is ultimately a matter for Security Council to decide. That being said, i would certainly welcome the Councils Engagement and guidance to advance the middle east peace process. I have been personally meeting and engaging with the leaders of palestine and israel and leaders in the region and Global Leadership as a member of the quartet and as the secretarygeneral of the United Nations. We are strongly urging again that the israelis and palestinians, the leadership, they should sit down together and resolve all this. The Security Council can take their actions, but it is ultimately up to two parties, two leaders, so that they can discuss all the pending issues. I believe that they have identified all the issues. They know what are the fundamental issues to resolve. I have been urging, and im as urging again, that those two leaders should discuss this matter so they can realise a twostate solution, twostate vision where israeli and Palestinian People can live side by si
And now to london for Prime Ministers question time, live from the british house of commons. Every wednesday while parliament is in session Prime Minister David Cameron takes questions from the members of the house of commons. Prior to question time the house is wrapping up of the business. This is live coverage on cspa cspan2. Could she indicate to the house what discussion she had with the government and the republic of ireland around these issues ahead of any possible discussion . I had regular discussions about this matter, including a number of meetings both in Northern Ireland and in dublin. We are keen to Work Together to encourage a report to be found, to encourage the Political Parties in Northern Ireland to reconcile their differences. On question 10. Thank you very much, mr. Speaker. Does she agree with me, and i welcome her very much has been achieved and we should now proceed to element as much as possible reading the legislation and resolving the differences that are ther
Pat collins, news4. They are there to protect you if you get into an accident. But thousands of guard rails across virginia may hold a h hidden that could make a crash worse, even deadly. Transportation reporter, adam tuss, joins us live from fairfax tonight with more on the danger and what vdot plans to do about it. Adam . Reporter hey, jim. Virginia is now the first state in the entire country to say that it will replace detective guard rails. Take a look here on route 50 in fairfax. Of course, we drive past these kinds of guard rails on a daily basis. Dont think twice about them. But there could be a real danger with the design. When you hit a guardrail, the head of the rail is supposed to absorb the impact and push all the metal away from the vehicle. But Transportation Leaders say a company that manufacturers rail heads, as theyre known, made a costcutting Design Change in 2005, without telling federal officials. And that Design Change could turn rail heads into weapons. In essenc
Member of lpr 2011. I would much rather hear you speak than joe biden, so thank you. That bar is not very high. The real question is, from our perspective, from my perspective here out in the real world we hear about all of these investigations by the house and by the senate and all these hearings and all these hearings and all these hearings and nothing happens. At what point, what needs to take place to actually have an independent investigation on benghazi . Yeah. I think the answer is we are not going to get to the truth, real truth of benghazi anytime soon and there is two reasons for this. The first is the administration truly has something to hide. The first thing, i think what is indisputable or not perfectly provable in court of law, what is indisputable the entire response to benghazi was framed by the politics t was making sure that the president didnt look bad. That bass the first and most important thing they were concerned about and they never want to admit that. The seco