Macaca
07-07 08:36 AM
Bush Struggles With Pelosi and Reid (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BUSH_PELOSI_REID?SITE=AZTUC&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT) By BEN FELLER Associated Press Writer, Jul 7
Ben Feller covers the White House for The Associated Press.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- When President Bush invited lawmakers for a picnic, an approaching storm threatened to derail the event. His spokesman, Tony Snow, suggested that Democratic leaders in Congress secretly wanted it that way.
"They've been seeding the clouds," he said.
A little joke, a little suspicion. It seemed appropriate for Bush's relationship with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
In public, there are promises to work together, then unmistakable acrimony. Private dealings are respectful, but not fully trustful.
Where ill will seeps out between Bush and the two Democratic leaders, it is not based on personal animus, those close to them say. Rather, it is rooted in vastly different views of how to run the country, and how much say each side has in running it.
Pelosi and Reid say Bush blithely dismisses their roles as leaders of a coequal branch of government; Bush says they overreach and meddle, never more so than in the case of the war in Iraq.
How well they get along, a fascination in Washington, is important in a much broader sense: It affects what they get done for the country.
On that front, progress has been slow during the first half-year of this divided government.
Bush and Democratic leaders agreed on new trade-policy guidelines, but Congress later refused to renew his fast-track trade power. Bush vetoed the Democrats' bid to expand stem cell research, a move that Reid and Pelosi called deplorable.
The president's immigration overhaul is dead. A potential energy agreement looks shaky at best. Bush is also in a worsening standoff with Congress over the firing of U.S. attorneys, and a huge fight is brewing over the main spending bills that keep the government in operation.
And, of course, there's the war.
"It's hard to know how they would get along without Iraq," said Charles Jones, who studies relations between Congress and the president as a nonresident senior fellow for The Brookings Institution.
"There are some issues on which they would probably work pretty effectively together, but the overlay of Iraq and the intense conflicts spills over," Jones said. "It makes it difficult for them just to say, 'Well, let's forget Iraq and work nicely on other issues.'"
The White House disputes that spillover, citing quiet negotiations taking place to renew Bush's education law and work with Democrats on the immigration legislation. The immigration bill died when conservatives in Bush's own party rebelled against it.
Iraq may be the better test case of Bush's relationship with Reid and Pelosi.
It took more than three months for Bush and Congress to agree on a war funding bill, gobbling up valuable and finite legislative time.
Bush vetoed the Democrats' first try because it included a timeline for U.S. troop withdrawal. Then came a grim meeting in which Bush, Pelosi and Reid chose negotiators but got little else done.
In the days that followed, Pelosi miffed the White House by holding a vote to pay for the war in stages, drawing another veto threat. Another negotiation session broke down.
Ultimately, hemmed in by time, both sides had to give or risk the political catastrophe of leaving combat troops unfunded.
So Democrats gave up the timeline for withdrawal. Bush agreed to add domestic spending to the bill and establish benchmarks for measuring progress in Iraq.
"The vote showed what's possible when we work together," the president said.
The reality is that the compromise was forced upon them all, because no one wanted to cut off money for the troops.
Still, quietly, some trust built through the experience. Bush's chief of staff, Josh Bolten, appreciated that Reid kept his word during negotiations; Reid respected that no details leaked from those private talks. He now says that Bush is listening more, but only compared with zero cooperation in prior years.
Bush's tendency has never been to engage Congress, said James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University.
"He doesn't have a close relationship with either one of them," Thurber said, referring to Pelosi and Reid. "I think that makes a difference. I don't see any evidence that he has come around to engaging the opposition party the way (Bill) Clinton did."
Bush, Reid and Pelosi all dismiss the idea that they don't like one another despite the constant public harping.
When the cameras are off, the tone is different, said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, who has sat with Reid and Pelosi in private sessions with Bush.
"It's not an acrimonious kind of thing," McConnell said. "In all the meetings I've been in, there's never been a lack of courtesy. I don't think there's anything personal. We are just in different places. Everybody fully understands that we have different agendas."
Ben Feller covers the White House for The Associated Press.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- When President Bush invited lawmakers for a picnic, an approaching storm threatened to derail the event. His spokesman, Tony Snow, suggested that Democratic leaders in Congress secretly wanted it that way.
"They've been seeding the clouds," he said.
A little joke, a little suspicion. It seemed appropriate for Bush's relationship with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
In public, there are promises to work together, then unmistakable acrimony. Private dealings are respectful, but not fully trustful.
Where ill will seeps out between Bush and the two Democratic leaders, it is not based on personal animus, those close to them say. Rather, it is rooted in vastly different views of how to run the country, and how much say each side has in running it.
Pelosi and Reid say Bush blithely dismisses their roles as leaders of a coequal branch of government; Bush says they overreach and meddle, never more so than in the case of the war in Iraq.
How well they get along, a fascination in Washington, is important in a much broader sense: It affects what they get done for the country.
On that front, progress has been slow during the first half-year of this divided government.
Bush and Democratic leaders agreed on new trade-policy guidelines, but Congress later refused to renew his fast-track trade power. Bush vetoed the Democrats' bid to expand stem cell research, a move that Reid and Pelosi called deplorable.
The president's immigration overhaul is dead. A potential energy agreement looks shaky at best. Bush is also in a worsening standoff with Congress over the firing of U.S. attorneys, and a huge fight is brewing over the main spending bills that keep the government in operation.
And, of course, there's the war.
"It's hard to know how they would get along without Iraq," said Charles Jones, who studies relations between Congress and the president as a nonresident senior fellow for The Brookings Institution.
"There are some issues on which they would probably work pretty effectively together, but the overlay of Iraq and the intense conflicts spills over," Jones said. "It makes it difficult for them just to say, 'Well, let's forget Iraq and work nicely on other issues.'"
The White House disputes that spillover, citing quiet negotiations taking place to renew Bush's education law and work with Democrats on the immigration legislation. The immigration bill died when conservatives in Bush's own party rebelled against it.
Iraq may be the better test case of Bush's relationship with Reid and Pelosi.
It took more than three months for Bush and Congress to agree on a war funding bill, gobbling up valuable and finite legislative time.
Bush vetoed the Democrats' first try because it included a timeline for U.S. troop withdrawal. Then came a grim meeting in which Bush, Pelosi and Reid chose negotiators but got little else done.
In the days that followed, Pelosi miffed the White House by holding a vote to pay for the war in stages, drawing another veto threat. Another negotiation session broke down.
Ultimately, hemmed in by time, both sides had to give or risk the political catastrophe of leaving combat troops unfunded.
So Democrats gave up the timeline for withdrawal. Bush agreed to add domestic spending to the bill and establish benchmarks for measuring progress in Iraq.
"The vote showed what's possible when we work together," the president said.
The reality is that the compromise was forced upon them all, because no one wanted to cut off money for the troops.
Still, quietly, some trust built through the experience. Bush's chief of staff, Josh Bolten, appreciated that Reid kept his word during negotiations; Reid respected that no details leaked from those private talks. He now says that Bush is listening more, but only compared with zero cooperation in prior years.
Bush's tendency has never been to engage Congress, said James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University.
"He doesn't have a close relationship with either one of them," Thurber said, referring to Pelosi and Reid. "I think that makes a difference. I don't see any evidence that he has come around to engaging the opposition party the way (Bill) Clinton did."
Bush, Reid and Pelosi all dismiss the idea that they don't like one another despite the constant public harping.
When the cameras are off, the tone is different, said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, who has sat with Reid and Pelosi in private sessions with Bush.
"It's not an acrimonious kind of thing," McConnell said. "In all the meetings I've been in, there's never been a lack of courtesy. I don't think there's anything personal. We are just in different places. Everybody fully understands that we have different agendas."
wallpaper enhanced Jeff Bridges,
needhelp!
01-14 06:38 PM
Texas fellas :
Please sign up on this thread to volunteer for this Saturday's Booth in Richardson for getting maximum local visibility for IV letter campaign.
Your hard work will be rewarded with some goodies!
Please sign up on this thread to volunteer for this Saturday's Booth in Richardson for getting maximum local visibility for IV letter campaign.
Your hard work will be rewarded with some goodies!
abc
06-14 02:21 PM
With this mejob workload of I-140 filiing in next 2 months, I-140 procesing times will again retrogress.
so, can we change jobs even after 6 months of I-485 submission ??
Is I-140 approval required for AC21
so, can we change jobs even after 6 months of I-485 submission ??
Is I-140 approval required for AC21
2011 Jeff Bridges is shown in a
T-O
04-08 04:15 AM
last one I guess. That's me holding my IPod.. :D AWEsome!! :P
more...
new2H1&GC
12-18 01:36 PM
Hello,
Got H1B this year via consultant,valid from Oct 1st to 2010. Applied for AOS(dervative) and got EAD, AP and I-485 receipt notice by Oct end. So I think my status is AOS now.
I haven't been put on project yet.
Planning to travel next month using AP.
On return I plan to find another job using EAD.
I wanted to know if and how using AP to re-enter effects H1B status.
Also will this "bench" period effect GC processing in anyway?
Thanks so much for your replies..
Also i would appreciate if gurus could suggest what documents to carry to show at POE, along with AP.
Thanks again!!!
Got H1B this year via consultant,valid from Oct 1st to 2010. Applied for AOS(dervative) and got EAD, AP and I-485 receipt notice by Oct end. So I think my status is AOS now.
I haven't been put on project yet.
Planning to travel next month using AP.
On return I plan to find another job using EAD.
I wanted to know if and how using AP to re-enter effects H1B status.
Also will this "bench" period effect GC processing in anyway?
Thanks so much for your replies..
Also i would appreciate if gurus could suggest what documents to carry to show at POE, along with AP.
Thanks again!!!
nandakumar
05-30 12:37 PM
'khelanphelan', who was kicked out of IV has started his disgusting and malicious campaign against IV in murthy.com forum.
folks who are members of murthy.com forum please reply to his postings in the section '140/485 Concurrent Filing' topic "Can we create a Group to call/mail/fax Senators to support 485 filing even without PD"
folks who are members of murthy.com forum please reply to his postings in the section '140/485 Concurrent Filing' topic "Can we create a Group to call/mail/fax Senators to support 485 filing even without PD"
more...
karanp25
08-26 09:00 PM
I tried calling Nebraska Service Center using the 1-800 number and then entering the POJ options. But it seems USCIS has a new system in place and there's no way to reach the Service Center anymore.
Looks like they ended another means of communication---no more POJ? Please correct me, if someone knows the new options. Thanks!
Looks like they ended another means of communication---no more POJ? Please correct me, if someone knows the new options. Thanks!
2010 quot;Young Jeff Bridges.
brick2006
11-03 05:26 PM
bump
more...
Macaca
05-19 07:30 AM
A New Reality in Washington, but Can It Last? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19assess.html) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
hair 2010 Tags: Jeff Bridges Tron
obelix
08-27 07:16 PM
Those who were able to upgrade to premium processing before Jul 2, did you get a new receipt number for the upgrade? Or was the old receipt number valid?
more...
Macaca
02-18 06:55 PM
Some paras from In Majority, Democrats Run Hill Much as GOP Did (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/17/AR2007021701352.html).
Democrats pledged to bring courtesy to the Capitol when they assumed control of Congress last month. But from the start, the new majority used its muscle to force through its agenda in the House and sideline Republicans.
And after an initial burst of lawmaking, the Democratic juggernaut has kept on rolling.
Of nine major bills passed by the House since the 110th Congress began, Republicans have been allowed to make amendments to just one, a measure directing federal research into additives to biofuels. In the arcane world of Capitol Hill, where the majority dictates which legislation comes before the House and which dies on a shelf, the ability to offer amendments from the floor is one of the minority's few tools.
Last week, the strong-arming continued during the most important debate the Congress has faced yet -- the discussion about the Iraq war. Democrats initially said they would allow Republicans to propose one alternative to the resolution denouncing a troop buildup but, days later, they thought better of it.
And yet, significant numbers of House Republicans have voted along with Democrats on the legislation passed so far -- a fact that somewhat mutes criticism about iron-fisted tactics.
In the first weeks of the new Congress, however, Democrats bypassed the usual legislative committees, refused to allow any amendments and took their agenda straight to the floor for passage. They said they needed a clear path to pass a handful of popular measures that were the basis of their successful November campaign, including expanded money for stem cell research, an increase in the federal minimum wage and implementation of recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission.
Democrats said they would impose "regular order," the rules that permit the minority to participate more widely, in short order.
But even after passing their domestic agenda, Democratic leaders have continued to marginalize Republicans, preventing them from having a voice in legislation such as a bill to withhold federal pensions from lawmakers convicted of ethics felonies and a $463 billion bill to fund the federal government for the rest of this fiscal year.
Last week's debate on the Iraq war, culminating in its passage Friday by a vote of 246 to 182, was conducted under a "closed rule," which means Republicans could not offer alternatives. "I understand what they did on their agenda," said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho). "But to do a closed rule on something like this is a huge mistake. We're talking about war and peace. You don't play politics with war."
While they did not allow amendments on the Iraq debate, the Democrats gave every member of the chamber five minutes to speak on the resolution -- an unprecedented amount of debate on a nonbinding resolution, according to Thomas E. Mann, a scholar at Brookings Institution. He said that is more than the Republicans offered Democrats when the GOP passed a resolution last spring supporting the war in Iraq.
Democrats pledged to bring courtesy to the Capitol when they assumed control of Congress last month. But from the start, the new majority used its muscle to force through its agenda in the House and sideline Republicans.
And after an initial burst of lawmaking, the Democratic juggernaut has kept on rolling.
Of nine major bills passed by the House since the 110th Congress began, Republicans have been allowed to make amendments to just one, a measure directing federal research into additives to biofuels. In the arcane world of Capitol Hill, where the majority dictates which legislation comes before the House and which dies on a shelf, the ability to offer amendments from the floor is one of the minority's few tools.
Last week, the strong-arming continued during the most important debate the Congress has faced yet -- the discussion about the Iraq war. Democrats initially said they would allow Republicans to propose one alternative to the resolution denouncing a troop buildup but, days later, they thought better of it.
And yet, significant numbers of House Republicans have voted along with Democrats on the legislation passed so far -- a fact that somewhat mutes criticism about iron-fisted tactics.
In the first weeks of the new Congress, however, Democrats bypassed the usual legislative committees, refused to allow any amendments and took their agenda straight to the floor for passage. They said they needed a clear path to pass a handful of popular measures that were the basis of their successful November campaign, including expanded money for stem cell research, an increase in the federal minimum wage and implementation of recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission.
Democrats said they would impose "regular order," the rules that permit the minority to participate more widely, in short order.
But even after passing their domestic agenda, Democratic leaders have continued to marginalize Republicans, preventing them from having a voice in legislation such as a bill to withhold federal pensions from lawmakers convicted of ethics felonies and a $463 billion bill to fund the federal government for the rest of this fiscal year.
Last week's debate on the Iraq war, culminating in its passage Friday by a vote of 246 to 182, was conducted under a "closed rule," which means Republicans could not offer alternatives. "I understand what they did on their agenda," said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho). "But to do a closed rule on something like this is a huge mistake. We're talking about war and peace. You don't play politics with war."
While they did not allow amendments on the Iraq debate, the Democrats gave every member of the chamber five minutes to speak on the resolution -- an unprecedented amount of debate on a nonbinding resolution, according to Thomas E. Mann, a scholar at Brookings Institution. He said that is more than the Republicans offered Democrats when the GOP passed a resolution last spring supporting the war in Iraq.
hot Jeff Bridges.
prdgl
06-28 01:41 PM
Can a person join a new employer for doing his LC, based on already sent out ads ???
what they are telling me is that the ad is very general for EB2 which was sent out even before one joined the company. so my question would be that can a person go ahead and use the already sent out ads or one should raise some red falgs, not to go for it ???
please Drop in some of your knowledge on this...
what they are telling me is that the ad is very general for EB2 which was sent out even before one joined the company. so my question would be that can a person go ahead and use the already sent out ads or one should raise some red falgs, not to go for it ???
please Drop in some of your knowledge on this...
more...
house Jeff Bridges at Tron: Legacy
gcwanter
06-21 02:21 PM
I think you can get state id..that has the photo..
tattoo The world of Tron in 1982.
tbo
04-06 11:34 PM
so old but very funny for some reason
more...
pictures Tags: Jeff Bridges Tron Legacy
fatjoe
10-22 10:52 AM
41 views and not even a single response...
Come on.. please tell me , at least tell me what you think..., if it ok, or it might create some problems
Come on.. please tell me , at least tell me what you think..., if it ok, or it might create some problems
dresses TRON: LEGACY. Jeff Bridges and
anonimo
05-05 10:00 PM
Hello, I apologyze for not giving my name away first of all, secondly I need to know what my options are if my father and mother who are permanent residents in the USA can file an I-130 for me? They obtained their legal status thru the department of labor but at the time they were approved I was already 21 years of age (the whole process started in 2000and lasted for 5 years or so); one lawyer told me that I cannot do anything since I was over 21 but I just have been in a different lawyer who told me that yes I can adjust my status thank to a grandfather law that can help me to achieve my goal in working legally in this country. I am an unmarried daughter and 27 years of age at this time.
I just don't want to spend those $5,500 can this lawyer is asking me for his services, I appreciate very much your replies and my family will too
Again, thank you
I just don't want to spend those $5,500 can this lawyer is asking me for his services, I appreciate very much your replies and my family will too
Again, thank you
more...
makeup Jeff Bridges Turns Back the
Tech Writer
04-07 06:18 AM
Hi,
My company is planning to build a software using Silverlight technology. As a writer, I have created CHMs for desktop applications and web helps for web applications.
Is there a different or new approach available to create online helps for Silverlight applications?
Looking for some great samples/links/pointers on how to handle online help for Silverlight based applications.
Thanks
George
My company is planning to build a software using Silverlight technology. As a writer, I have created CHMs for desktop applications and web helps for web applications.
Is there a different or new approach available to create online helps for Silverlight applications?
Looking for some great samples/links/pointers on how to handle online help for Silverlight based applications.
Thanks
George
girlfriend Tron Legacy: The Trailer
coolfun
04-01 12:50 AM
I know this is really stupid but I can't seem to find the answer to this one:
- I am doing a paper filing of 1040. Do I need to send 1040 as a two sided print out or single sided printouts?
The CA 540 specifically says single sided printouts but am not able to find this information for 1040.
Thanks a ton for your help.
- I am doing a paper filing of 1040. Do I need to send 1040 as a two sided print out or single sided printouts?
The CA 540 specifically says single sided printouts but am not able to find this information for 1040.
Thanks a ton for your help.
hairstyles Jimmy Fallon (as Neil Young)
akhilmahajan
07-09 11:19 AM
I am in boston and can definitely join...........
SGP
03-26 08:01 AM
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$GOOD MORNING GC$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Deadline = April 30th, 2011
Goal = 5000 votes on survey (see I-485 filing w/o current PD thread) and momentum to continue with this campaign.The survey is a platform to gather and push for launching action items. Based on response by 04/30/2011 - IV will decide whether to even proceed with initiative or not.
Actions - 1) Vote on survey.
2)Email ivcoordinator@gmail.com with PD, ph#,email & subject "I485 filing impacted�,
3)Print/Circulate Fliers and spread FB, wiki link (see "support thread")
This is a supporting thread to the "Want to File I-485 without Current Priority Date? Gather here" thread started by pappu.
As suggested by pappu/starsun, this supporting thread provides impacted members with additional information and tools to help the initiative.
Visit Immigration Voice Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Employment_Based_Green_Card#Process_.28EB1.2C_EB2. 2C_and_EB3.29) - for overview of Employment Based - Green Card process
Visit I485 Filing w/o current PD Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date) - for overview of this initiative
As pappu stated in the first post of the above referenced thread - some of the ongoing efforts include finding how many IV members would get benefit from such a provision and get basic details such as username/Priority Date of impacted members. Future action items might include drafting documents and letters to support this provision. There maybe actions such as sending emails etc. However we would not be able to open a public action item unless we can have thousands of our members willing to participate in a grassroots action item. This survey intends to understand the needs of our membership for this provision and collect grassroots information.
The fact is we have a dedicated group of volunteers (and we need more) who have been trying their best to spread the message about this initiative so that a strong grass-roots support can be created leading up to launch of the public action items. So far we have around 1100 people who have responded. Based on quick calculations carried out using PERM data, it is estimated that there are at least 60K-70K EB applicants waiting to file I-485/EAD/AP (this is a very conservative estimate..the actual number could be much more). Grass-roots initiatives require time and patience and we request maximum number of impacted folks to participate actively.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What can you do to participate?
1) Vote on the poll/survey created by Pappu.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here.html
Then please send an email to ivcoordinator@gmail.com (starsun) with subject - "I485 filing without current PD - Impacted Member". Include your a) IV username b) Email address c) Phone #, d) State of Residence e) Priority Date - so that grassroot efforts can be coordinated
2) Print out below Flier and circulate at all asian/indian malls/groceries/theaters. Forward the flier to your friends/co-workers and ask them to do the same.
I485 Filing Initiative Flier (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/images/a/a8/Flier_I485_latest2.pdf)
3) Volunteers have created a facebook community and an Immigration Voice WIKI page to spread the message about this initiative. Please circulate these links among your friends/co-workers who will be helped.
Please "Share" and "Link" and "send to friend" the facebook community via your Facebook account. Also include these two links when you post on the IV forum.
Facebook - IV I485 filing w/o current PD initiative community (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/Immigration-Voice-Grass-roots-Campaigns/150562351660693?v=info)
(Just FYI that you might have to be logged in for the above link to direct to the facebook community. Alternately, search for "Immigration Voice Grass-roots Campaigns" to find the community after logging in. Search "Immigration Voice" to go to the IV's main facebook page)
Immigration Wiki -
I485 Filing Initiative - IV Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM these members for additional info:
nmdial ; geevikram ; vbkris77 ; ashwin_27 ; snathan
Dedicated members can also join the leaders group: http://groups.google.com/group/485-filing-iv-initiative
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline = April 30th, 2011
Goal = 5000 votes on survey (see I-485 filing w/o current PD thread) and momentum to continue with this campaign.The survey is a platform to gather and push for launching action items. Based on response by 04/30/2011 - IV will decide whether to even proceed with initiative or not.
Actions - 1) Vote on survey.
2)Email ivcoordinator@gmail.com with PD, ph#,email & subject "I485 filing impacted�,
3)Print/Circulate Fliers and spread FB, wiki link (see "support thread")
This is a supporting thread to the "Want to File I-485 without Current Priority Date? Gather here" thread started by pappu.
As suggested by pappu/starsun, this supporting thread provides impacted members with additional information and tools to help the initiative.
Visit Immigration Voice Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Employment_Based_Green_Card#Process_.28EB1.2C_EB2. 2C_and_EB3.29) - for overview of Employment Based - Green Card process
Visit I485 Filing w/o current PD Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date) - for overview of this initiative
As pappu stated in the first post of the above referenced thread - some of the ongoing efforts include finding how many IV members would get benefit from such a provision and get basic details such as username/Priority Date of impacted members. Future action items might include drafting documents and letters to support this provision. There maybe actions such as sending emails etc. However we would not be able to open a public action item unless we can have thousands of our members willing to participate in a grassroots action item. This survey intends to understand the needs of our membership for this provision and collect grassroots information.
The fact is we have a dedicated group of volunteers (and we need more) who have been trying their best to spread the message about this initiative so that a strong grass-roots support can be created leading up to launch of the public action items. So far we have around 1100 people who have responded. Based on quick calculations carried out using PERM data, it is estimated that there are at least 60K-70K EB applicants waiting to file I-485/EAD/AP (this is a very conservative estimate..the actual number could be much more). Grass-roots initiatives require time and patience and we request maximum number of impacted folks to participate actively.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What can you do to participate?
1) Vote on the poll/survey created by Pappu.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here.html
Then please send an email to ivcoordinator@gmail.com (starsun) with subject - "I485 filing without current PD - Impacted Member". Include your a) IV username b) Email address c) Phone #, d) State of Residence e) Priority Date - so that grassroot efforts can be coordinated
2) Print out below Flier and circulate at all asian/indian malls/groceries/theaters. Forward the flier to your friends/co-workers and ask them to do the same.
I485 Filing Initiative Flier (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/images/a/a8/Flier_I485_latest2.pdf)
3) Volunteers have created a facebook community and an Immigration Voice WIKI page to spread the message about this initiative. Please circulate these links among your friends/co-workers who will be helped.
Please "Share" and "Link" and "send to friend" the facebook community via your Facebook account. Also include these two links when you post on the IV forum.
Facebook - IV I485 filing w/o current PD initiative community (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/Immigration-Voice-Grass-roots-Campaigns/150562351660693?v=info)
(Just FYI that you might have to be logged in for the above link to direct to the facebook community. Alternately, search for "Immigration Voice Grass-roots Campaigns" to find the community after logging in. Search "Immigration Voice" to go to the IV's main facebook page)
Immigration Wiki -
I485 Filing Initiative - IV Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM these members for additional info:
nmdial ; geevikram ; vbkris77 ; ashwin_27 ; snathan
Dedicated members can also join the leaders group: http://groups.google.com/group/485-filing-iv-initiative
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eyeongc
11-18 10:23 AM
Guys,
Me (as primary) and my wife are July 2007 filers and have our EAD and AP till end of 2010. I also have my H1b approved till 2012 but not stamped yet. My wife currently is in AOS status (comp didn't file for her H4 ext when they applied for my 7th yr H1b ext) but she has not used her EAD. We are planning to travel India next month and get our passport stamped (H1b for myself and H4 for my wife). I've couple of questions
1) Can someone confirm getting H4 for my wife will be treated as abandoning her I-485 because she is currently in AOS status? I don't think so but just want to confirm
2) In form DS156 for my wife what should I answer to this question "Has anyone ever filed an Immigrant Visa Petition on your behalf ?" or to be specific I-485 is treated as immigrant visa petition or I-140 is (in which case answer to this question will be no as her gc is applied as dependent)?
Thanks
Me (as primary) and my wife are July 2007 filers and have our EAD and AP till end of 2010. I also have my H1b approved till 2012 but not stamped yet. My wife currently is in AOS status (comp didn't file for her H4 ext when they applied for my 7th yr H1b ext) but she has not used her EAD. We are planning to travel India next month and get our passport stamped (H1b for myself and H4 for my wife). I've couple of questions
1) Can someone confirm getting H4 for my wife will be treated as abandoning her I-485 because she is currently in AOS status? I don't think so but just want to confirm
2) In form DS156 for my wife what should I answer to this question "Has anyone ever filed an Immigrant Visa Petition on your behalf ?" or to be specific I-485 is treated as immigrant visa petition or I-140 is (in which case answer to this question will be no as her gc is applied as dependent)?
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment