cjagtap
08-12 06:01 PM
Its okay to file the 485 at either texas or nebraska. Normally the lawyers file 485 to the same center where your 140 got approved. from.
wallpaper The hair in front is straight
Pooja
07-06 08:16 AM
Did anyone's I-485 was approved after July 3rd?
Thanks
Thanks
Canuck
01-12 02:51 PM
Hi,
I already sent the group request but haven't received a phone call yet. Do you know who the chapter leader is so that I can contact him?
Thanks.
I already sent the group request but haven't received a phone call yet. Do you know who the chapter leader is so that I can contact him?
Thanks.
2011 Bangs are back.
harrydr
10-04 11:38 PM
Hello members at IV,
Just wanted to know what does it mean when other members state that their case is EB2 I, EB2 ROW, so on and so forth. How can i find out what is my case filed to? Thanks in advance.
Just wanted to know what does it mean when other members state that their case is EB2 I, EB2 ROW, so on and so forth. How can i find out what is my case filed to? Thanks in advance.
more...
bslraju
08-16 10:11 PM
Hey ! I have been trying to find out folks from vermont.
I was glad when i found you guys here.
I did spoke few folks from NH as i couldnt find any one from vermont.
I will be going to DC Rally. Whats up with you?
-Raju
I was glad when i found you guys here.
I did spoke few folks from NH as i couldnt find any one from vermont.
I will be going to DC Rally. Whats up with you?
-Raju
go_guy123
11-28 12:47 PM
Immigration is a politically charged issue in Congress..the main opposition is in the Congress and not the Senate
more...
popnfresh24
07-19 11:02 PM
well that's even better... i was thinkink it closed as soon as it turned the 20th haha... ah well :)
2010 dresses He has straight hair
Macaca
07-22 05:33 PM
For Real Drama, Senate Should Engage In a True Filibuster (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_8/ornstein/19415-1.html) By Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at American Enterprise Institute, July 18, 2007
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
more...
rockyrock
08-02 07:00 PM
On I-765 item# 11 it asks us "Date". Which date are they referring to? Cause I had applied for OPT EAD twice (duration of 6 months each). Can someone pls let me know.....
hair front bangs hairstyle. blonde
kisana
07-25 03:53 PM
Hi,
I was working on H1B till one month back, recetly I joined permanent position on EAD. I need to renew my wifes EAD. Though I dod not need it but for driving license they want some immigration document, so I am planning to e-file for my wife's EAD. I have couple of questions
1. There is question for Current Immigration status. I belive since I mobved to EAD my wif's status is AOS pending. But from the option I do not see any option near to that. What should be right choice. It is not a manadatory field can I leave it blank.
2. There is question for Provide information regarding eligibility status. What should i put there , I am thginking to keep AOS Pending.
3. Somebody told me that I can not e-file for my wife.
Gurus please suggest. I am waiting for your responses.
I was working on H1B till one month back, recetly I joined permanent position on EAD. I need to renew my wifes EAD. Though I dod not need it but for driving license they want some immigration document, so I am planning to e-file for my wife's EAD. I have couple of questions
1. There is question for Current Immigration status. I belive since I mobved to EAD my wif's status is AOS pending. But from the option I do not see any option near to that. What should be right choice. It is not a manadatory field can I leave it blank.
2. There is question for Provide information regarding eligibility status. What should i put there , I am thginking to keep AOS Pending.
3. Somebody told me that I can not e-file for my wife.
Gurus please suggest. I am waiting for your responses.
more...
Blog Feeds
03-19 10:40 AM
Just released from the Press Secretary's Office: In June, I met with members of both parties, and assigned Secretary Napolitano to work with them and key constituencies around the country to craft a comprehensive approach that will finally fix our broken immigration system. I am pleased to see that Senators Schumer and Graham have produced a promising, bipartisan framework which can and should be the basis for moving forward. It thoughtfully addresses the need to shore up our borders, and demands accountability from both workers who are here illegally and employers who game the system. My Administration will be consulting...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/president-praises-schumergraham-framework.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/president-praises-schumergraham-framework.html)
hot hair front bangs hairstyle.
intheyan
08-12 01:57 PM
.............
more...
house Straight hairstyles
cscslow
07-25 01:38 PM
Does anyone know how slow/fast/better is the Counsular Processing back in India if you ever become eligible to do that?
Is itbetter than applying 485 here and waiting .......ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz
Don't go for it. It may be fast but you are working with too many variables that may go wrong. I went back home last year for CP and suddenly I became a victim of retrogression. I missed my cutoff date by two days. Then I had to wait for about 3 months to get my H1 stamp. I was lucky that I didn't lose my job here.
Is itbetter than applying 485 here and waiting .......ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz
Don't go for it. It may be fast but you are working with too many variables that may go wrong. I went back home last year for CP and suddenly I became a victim of retrogression. I missed my cutoff date by two days. Then I had to wait for about 3 months to get my H1 stamp. I was lucky that I didn't lose my job here.
tattoo straight hair with side angs.
hellomms
02-12 12:06 PM
The ridiculous amount of time DOL is spending on the Perm Audits in just incomprehensible. They still approved 1 may be 2 application a day, thats my assumption. Last time I saw they are still processing audited-applications filed in Aug/Sept 2007.
Any word on how what their plan is? They really do have bunch inefficient people working for government!!!
Any word on how what their plan is? They really do have bunch inefficient people working for government!!!
more...
pictures wedding hair bangs trial
Janisaris
10-23 11:34 AM
As per the new information USCIS is planning to finish receipt update by end of the month. My application was filed on July 19th and received by B Fisher at NSC. All the folks who applied with me got their checks cashed last week.
My I140 was approved from NSC last year.
How many people are in the same boat. I know from other threads there are still people waiting from July 2nd.
My I140 was approved from NSC last year.
How many people are in the same boat. I know from other threads there are still people waiting from July 2nd.
dresses LACE FRONT WIG - Tyra Bangs
tfakhan
01-10 10:43 AM
I was trying to find out if one can transfer from b1/b2 visa category to H1- B visa within the valid period of stay(i.e before the expiry of the I-94).
more...
makeup blonde hair with front bangs.
ranand00
03-01 09:55 AM
Hi
My h1b expires of 09/30/2010.
my drivers license expires on 5/31/2010.
I have ead that expires in jan 2011.
my h1b extension will be filed around june 2010.
can I use ead card to renew my drivers license till jan 2011.
around jan 2011 I could use extended h1b to renew my drivers license.
Can I do this. All I want to use my EAD card is for drivers license renewal.
Thanks
anand
My h1b expires of 09/30/2010.
my drivers license expires on 5/31/2010.
I have ead that expires in jan 2011.
my h1b extension will be filed around june 2010.
can I use ead card to renew my drivers license till jan 2011.
around jan 2011 I could use extended h1b to renew my drivers license.
Can I do this. All I want to use my EAD card is for drivers license renewal.
Thanks
anand
girlfriend blonde with long straight hair
gcformeornot
04-23 09:34 AM
what are the security checks involved with the green card process, and when do they come up?
up sometimes during 140 stage(security). But 100% during 485 stage.
The check I know is called "Name Check" done at 485 stage.
up sometimes during 140 stage(security). But 100% during 485 stage.
The check I know is called "Name Check" done at 485 stage.
hairstyles hair front bangs hairstyle.
imconfused
07-02 10:51 PM
everyone here talks abt geting GC asap.. even though most of us are swearin at the USCIS/DOS whtevr, deep down we all want GCs. but after thi sJuly VB, do u have faith/trust in the system now? assume that they accept our application and what if they give out GCs 2-3 yrsfrom now, what makes u think they cant come back and say it was a mistake and u have to give ur GC back?
If they can do what they did today, and get away with it, they can do anything. its no differnet from Telgi scam/Laloo gobar/chara scam, so many scams in india. they get away once, they get away again. the middle class/average/educated tax payers like us suffer.
If they can do what they did today, and get away with it, they can do anything. its no differnet from Telgi scam/Laloo gobar/chara scam, so many scams in india. they get away once, they get away again. the middle class/average/educated tax payers like us suffer.
reshma
01-27 05:15 PM
could any body please let me know which time is the best time for checking/taking interview appointment from VFS site as from 3 to 4 days onwards i am checking for the availabity dstes in VFS site for scheduling appointment but there is no dates available for our language.
I read somewhere regarding the partiicular time(as soon as after updating the available dates in that site) , at that time if we check the VFS site if any appointments are available for that day it will show else no dates in that full day. thank you for all .
I read somewhere regarding the partiicular time(as soon as after updating the available dates in that site) , at that time if we check the VFS site if any appointments are available for that day it will show else no dates in that full day. thank you for all .
felix31
01-16 10:11 PM
if you already have a prospective employer who will sponsor you, just fill out everything and have your lawyer ship the application april 1st.
No comments:
Post a Comment