pappu
12-07 09:06 PM
i did send the fax. Was reading news and thought i should make a post.
if you have sent the fax, pls start making phone calls. there are several lawmakers to call
if you have sent the fax, pls start making phone calls. there are several lawmakers to call
wallpaper printable world map with
Macaca
03-01 11:02 AM
Some paras from The Myth of the Middle (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801817.html)
One explanation for all this is that politicians are acting against the will of their compromise-loving constituents. Another is that Republicans and Democrats are simply being good representatives. We think the evidence supports the second interpretation.
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) surveyed more than 24,000 Americans who voted in 2006. The Internet-based survey compiled by researchers at 30 universities produced a sample that almost perfectly matched the national House election results: 54 percent of the respondents reported voting for a Democrat, while 46 percent said they voted for a Republican. The demographic characteristics of the voters surveyed also closely matched those in the 2006 national exit poll. If anything, the CCES respondents claimed they were more "independent" than those in the exit poll.
The CCES survey asked about 14 national issues: the war in Iraq (the invasion and the troops), abortion (and partial birth abortion), stem cell research, global warming, health insurance, immigration, the minimum wage, liberalism and conservatism, same-sex marriage, privatizing Social Security, affirmative action, and capital gains taxes. Not surprisingly, some of the largest differences between Democrats and Republicans were over the Iraq war. Fully 85 percent of those who voted for Democratic House candidates felt that it had been a mistake to invade Iraq, compared with only 18 percent of voters who cast ballots for Republicans.
When we combined voters' answers to the 14 issue questions to form a liberal-conservative scale (answers were divided into five equivalent categories based on overall liberalism vs. conservatism), 86 percent of Democratic voters were on the liberal side of the scale while 80 percent of Republican voters were on the conservative side. Only 10 percent of all voters were in the center. The visual representation of the nation's voters isn't a nicely shaped bell, with most voters in the moderate middle. It's a sharp V.
The evidence from this survey isn't surprising; nor are the findings new. For the past three decades, the major parties and the electorate have grown more divided -- in what they think, where they live and how they vote. It may be comforting to believe our problems could be solved if only those vile politicians in Washington would learn to get along. The source of the country's division, however, is nestled much closer to home.
One explanation for all this is that politicians are acting against the will of their compromise-loving constituents. Another is that Republicans and Democrats are simply being good representatives. We think the evidence supports the second interpretation.
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) surveyed more than 24,000 Americans who voted in 2006. The Internet-based survey compiled by researchers at 30 universities produced a sample that almost perfectly matched the national House election results: 54 percent of the respondents reported voting for a Democrat, while 46 percent said they voted for a Republican. The demographic characteristics of the voters surveyed also closely matched those in the 2006 national exit poll. If anything, the CCES respondents claimed they were more "independent" than those in the exit poll.
The CCES survey asked about 14 national issues: the war in Iraq (the invasion and the troops), abortion (and partial birth abortion), stem cell research, global warming, health insurance, immigration, the minimum wage, liberalism and conservatism, same-sex marriage, privatizing Social Security, affirmative action, and capital gains taxes. Not surprisingly, some of the largest differences between Democrats and Republicans were over the Iraq war. Fully 85 percent of those who voted for Democratic House candidates felt that it had been a mistake to invade Iraq, compared with only 18 percent of voters who cast ballots for Republicans.
When we combined voters' answers to the 14 issue questions to form a liberal-conservative scale (answers were divided into five equivalent categories based on overall liberalism vs. conservatism), 86 percent of Democratic voters were on the liberal side of the scale while 80 percent of Republican voters were on the conservative side. Only 10 percent of all voters were in the center. The visual representation of the nation's voters isn't a nicely shaped bell, with most voters in the moderate middle. It's a sharp V.
The evidence from this survey isn't surprising; nor are the findings new. For the past three decades, the major parties and the electorate have grown more divided -- in what they think, where they live and how they vote. It may be comforting to believe our problems could be solved if only those vile politicians in Washington would learn to get along. The source of the country's division, however, is nestled much closer to home.
ngopikrishnan
03-12 08:34 PM
Any input / help on this topic will be much appreciated.
2011 Map with Flags - World Map
ecrangan
05-26 01:59 PM
Hi Guys:
My wife received the H1 approval notice today. Her employer notified her today morning. Good luck to all those who are waiting for the approval.
Thanks
RRR
My wife received the H1 approval notice today. Her employer notified her today morning. Good luck to all those who are waiting for the approval.
Thanks
RRR
more...
HalfDog
07-11 01:19 PM
thats...freaking weird. GJ :D
Macaca
07-28 04:46 PM
Reid Eyes Rules Changes To Restrict Amendments (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_10/news/19488-1.html) By Emily Pierce, ROLL CALL STAFF, July 23, 2007
After nearly seven months of battling Republican filibusters and controversial amendments on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Friday he may seek to change Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor.
Reid said Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) would be tasked with exploring what rules changes should be made.
Noting that there has been a "growing breakdown between the majority and minority in terms of how to get things done," Howard Gantman, Feinstein's chief of staff for the Rules panel, said the committee would conduct a "comprehensive review" and look at the rules on the germaneness of amendments and how long Senators have to review proposals before voting on them.
"Sen. Feinstein is very serious about looking at the vast range of amendments that are brought in at the last minute that are not germane," said Gantman. He added that the panel's focus would be on "how to better get things done."
Reid spokesman Jim Manley cautioned that Reid "has no intention of unilaterally seeking a rules change."
However, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) scoffed at the notion of limiting or restricting Senators' ability to offer amendments, which he likened to freedom of speech.
"Look, nobody's going to shut anybody up in the Senate," he said at a press conference Friday. "There's going to be robust debate. You can just write that down. And I understand Sen. Reid's frustrations, but we're not going to establish any speech police in the Senate - not now, not ever."
Reid apparently reached his boiling point Thursday night when Republicans used Senate budget rules to offer a number of non-germane amendments to a student loan financing bill.
"What went on last night was ridiculous," Reid said on the Senate floor. "We should change those rules. ... We will have to take a look at that."
Reid said Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and ranking member Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) managed the student loan measure "very well until it ran into the rule that we have here that allows unending amendments on any subject forever, literally, before you get to final passage."
Because the higher education bill - by virtue of its status as a budget reconciliation measure - was immune to filibuster, Senate rules permitted unlimited amendments to be offered and voted on. On Thursday night, in particular, Senators were given only a few minutes to review the substance of some amendments before they were asked to vote on them.
As is customary with budget and reconciliation measures, Senators engaged in a long series of back-to-back votes, known as a "vote-a-rama," at the end of the debate. But Democrats said Republicans' insistence on having 14 non-germane votes - including six related to cutting taxes, three related to immigration and two related to terrorism - was excessive.
When Democrats pushed back with their own non-germane amendment expressing the Senate's opinion that President Bush should not pardon Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, Scooter Libby, Republicans tried to force a vote on former President Bill Clinton's controversial pardons.
But before the Senate could vote on that, Reid asked that both the Libby vote and the GOP pardons amendment be stricken from the Congressional Record, and the chamber voted on final passage of the bill.
Manley explained: "These so-called vote-a-ramas are bad for the system, and they may lead to bad policy. As have leaders in the past, all Sen. Reid was doing was expressing his frustration at the Republicans' desire to score cheap political points at the expense of a good-faith effort to pass a bill that will make college education more affordable for more Americans."
Even though Reid is seeking a Rules panel review, the rules governing Thursday night's debate actually fall under the Congressional Budget Act. If Reid were to seek a change in the Budget Act, the Senate would have to pass legislation and it would have to be signed into law by the president.
However, changes to Senate rules require 67 votes to pass.
After nearly seven months of battling Republican filibusters and controversial amendments on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Friday he may seek to change Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor.
Reid said Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) would be tasked with exploring what rules changes should be made.
Noting that there has been a "growing breakdown between the majority and minority in terms of how to get things done," Howard Gantman, Feinstein's chief of staff for the Rules panel, said the committee would conduct a "comprehensive review" and look at the rules on the germaneness of amendments and how long Senators have to review proposals before voting on them.
"Sen. Feinstein is very serious about looking at the vast range of amendments that are brought in at the last minute that are not germane," said Gantman. He added that the panel's focus would be on "how to better get things done."
Reid spokesman Jim Manley cautioned that Reid "has no intention of unilaterally seeking a rules change."
However, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) scoffed at the notion of limiting or restricting Senators' ability to offer amendments, which he likened to freedom of speech.
"Look, nobody's going to shut anybody up in the Senate," he said at a press conference Friday. "There's going to be robust debate. You can just write that down. And I understand Sen. Reid's frustrations, but we're not going to establish any speech police in the Senate - not now, not ever."
Reid apparently reached his boiling point Thursday night when Republicans used Senate budget rules to offer a number of non-germane amendments to a student loan financing bill.
"What went on last night was ridiculous," Reid said on the Senate floor. "We should change those rules. ... We will have to take a look at that."
Reid said Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and ranking member Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) managed the student loan measure "very well until it ran into the rule that we have here that allows unending amendments on any subject forever, literally, before you get to final passage."
Because the higher education bill - by virtue of its status as a budget reconciliation measure - was immune to filibuster, Senate rules permitted unlimited amendments to be offered and voted on. On Thursday night, in particular, Senators were given only a few minutes to review the substance of some amendments before they were asked to vote on them.
As is customary with budget and reconciliation measures, Senators engaged in a long series of back-to-back votes, known as a "vote-a-rama," at the end of the debate. But Democrats said Republicans' insistence on having 14 non-germane votes - including six related to cutting taxes, three related to immigration and two related to terrorism - was excessive.
When Democrats pushed back with their own non-germane amendment expressing the Senate's opinion that President Bush should not pardon Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, Scooter Libby, Republicans tried to force a vote on former President Bill Clinton's controversial pardons.
But before the Senate could vote on that, Reid asked that both the Libby vote and the GOP pardons amendment be stricken from the Congressional Record, and the chamber voted on final passage of the bill.
Manley explained: "These so-called vote-a-ramas are bad for the system, and they may lead to bad policy. As have leaders in the past, all Sen. Reid was doing was expressing his frustration at the Republicans' desire to score cheap political points at the expense of a good-faith effort to pass a bill that will make college education more affordable for more Americans."
Even though Reid is seeking a Rules panel review, the rules governing Thursday night's debate actually fall under the Congressional Budget Act. If Reid were to seek a change in the Budget Act, the Senate would have to pass legislation and it would have to be signed into law by the president.
However, changes to Senate rules require 67 votes to pass.
more...
updown
10-16 11:09 PM
I would really appreciate it, if someone could give me some advice.
Here is my situation, in January 2005, I married my girlfriend, who I had dated for little over a year. She is a US born citizen, so we decided to file for my permanent residency upon marriage. Upon receipt of my Green Card in Jan 2008, I filed for naturalization. Our relationship started heading south last year. We tried counseling and it didn't work out. We finally decided to part our ways amicably in Sep, 2009.
I am 34 years old and for reasons unknown to me, I am showing signs of age. I have been also getting some pressure from my family in India to remarry. Though I do not have any plans to marry immediately, I wasn't sure if my getting naturalized in February 2009 would have any impact on marrying someone from India sometime next year?
Please let me know, if there are any cooling off period required?
Thank you.
Here is my situation, in January 2005, I married my girlfriend, who I had dated for little over a year. She is a US born citizen, so we decided to file for my permanent residency upon marriage. Upon receipt of my Green Card in Jan 2008, I filed for naturalization. Our relationship started heading south last year. We tried counseling and it didn't work out. We finally decided to part our ways amicably in Sep, 2009.
I am 34 years old and for reasons unknown to me, I am showing signs of age. I have been also getting some pressure from my family in India to remarry. Though I do not have any plans to marry immediately, I wasn't sure if my getting naturalized in February 2009 would have any impact on marrying someone from India sometime next year?
Please let me know, if there are any cooling off period required?
Thank you.
2010 Countries of the world english
bestin
10-02 04:58 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
Alabaman
01-19 01:00 PM
I'd guess around $1,400 (+/- $200)
How to Calculate Unemployment | eHow.com (http://www.ehow.com/how_4464449_calculate-unemployment.html)
How to Calculate Unemployment | eHow.com (http://www.ehow.com/how_4464449_calculate-unemployment.html)
hair countries of the world
hopeless
08-24 02:43 PM
I need feedback from you guys. I have researched this lawyer before I got her to start my greencard and the feedbacks seems that she is efficient and knowledgeable. However, since we signed the contract with her, things have been moving so slow. She doesn't want to talk to me or give me status updates when asked. She has all the information needed from me and my employer to start the prevailing wage request but a month has passes and nothing has been requested yet. Has anybody here experience the same thing?
more...
STAmisha
11-02 08:47 AM
Please let me know if 140 processing times is based on receipt date or notice date?
I'm a concurrent 140-485 filer, filed on July 2 2007. My notice date on I-140 says August 16, 2007, where as my friend who filed only140 on july 2 has Notice date of july 12. Does that mean his will be processed first?
I'm a concurrent 140-485 filer, filed on July 2 2007. My notice date on I-140 says August 16, 2007, where as my friend who filed only140 on july 2 has Notice date of july 12. Does that mean his will be processed first?
hot Gave had short maps,world on
SAP
01-26 12:00 AM
FOlks,
I am tired of this GC process like u all are. the following is my situation.
Currently on H1B and 140 cleared with company B, no 485 applied missed the boat during the VISA bulletin fiasco(USCIS money making scam)
i have a future GC with COMPANY A, 485 applied, i have EAD/AP also.
i am tired of my current job, too much exploitation, i want to change, so my question is can i just take some other permanent employment using this EAD/AP
My question is as this future GC with COMPANY A and i have never worked for this company A. can i do a AC21 and move on ?
does AC21 apply future GC. ?
Appreciate any thoughts in this matter
Thanks
SAP
I am tired of this GC process like u all are. the following is my situation.
Currently on H1B and 140 cleared with company B, no 485 applied missed the boat during the VISA bulletin fiasco(USCIS money making scam)
i have a future GC with COMPANY A, 485 applied, i have EAD/AP also.
i am tired of my current job, too much exploitation, i want to change, so my question is can i just take some other permanent employment using this EAD/AP
My question is as this future GC with COMPANY A and i have never worked for this company A. can i do a AC21 and move on ?
does AC21 apply future GC. ?
Appreciate any thoughts in this matter
Thanks
SAP
more...
house Read more Kids World Map
joreal
08-25 04:29 PM
hi,
I have approved labor & I-140 with my employer and they filed for my H1B extension. If i would like to change the employer, what is the process i should go through with new employer regarding my GC? will they have to apply labor again for me or can they use this approved labor & I-140 and continue my GC from then so that i will not lose my priority date? If they cannot use my labor, is there any other way to use my priority date.Please advise on how to proceed...
Thanks in advance...
I have approved labor & I-140 with my employer and they filed for my H1B extension. If i would like to change the employer, what is the process i should go through with new employer regarding my GC? will they have to apply labor again for me or can they use this approved labor & I-140 and continue my GC from then so that i will not lose my priority date? If they cannot use my labor, is there any other way to use my priority date.Please advise on how to proceed...
Thanks in advance...
tattoo See their Child Survival
jacomonguy
03-16 05:49 AM
HI, i filed for my sons GC with an i-130. i received an I-797C saying it had been approved n a priority date of 02/26/2004. we have been waiting for years now i just checked the priority date and its already past that if im reading correctly its now at july 04...i am a US resident. i called the NVC but the automated service told me they are still processing visas from 1999?? What should i do?? can anyone give me decent advice on this? Thank you...
more...
pictures of the world for kids
Pineapple
07-27 03:00 AM
I dont have the answer, but here is another thread which deals with the same issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10806
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10806
dresses Labeled,world map
imh1b
05-19 09:33 AM
How long do these lawsuits take? Can any lawyer file them?
more...
makeup world map with countries
va_dude
07-09 03:27 PM
There is no change really for Advance Parole applicants.
The form 131 is used for more than just AP applicants, its used for refugees and re-entry permits too.
Read this from page 2 of that memo.
Q. Do the revised Form I-131 instructions require advance parole applicants to complete biometrics?
A. Applicants for advance parole are not required to submit biometrics at this time. An applicant for advance parole must continue to submit two identical color photographs of the applicant taken within 30 days of the filing of the Form I-131 application.
The form 131 is used for more than just AP applicants, its used for refugees and re-entry permits too.
Read this from page 2 of that memo.
Q. Do the revised Form I-131 instructions require advance parole applicants to complete biometrics?
A. Applicants for advance parole are not required to submit biometrics at this time. An applicant for advance parole must continue to submit two identical color photographs of the applicant taken within 30 days of the filing of the Form I-131 application.
girlfriend WORLD MAP SHOWING COUNTRIES
Blog Feeds
08-03 12:50 PM
A Federal Judge has certified a nationwide class in a challenge to the USCIS's restrictive interpretation of the "automatic conversion" clause in the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) of 2002. This opens the way for children who have "aged-out" to be reunited with their parents. The USCIS has resisted implementing this important section of law for the past seven years. Just a few weeks ago, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), in Matter of Wang, adopted the government's restrictive interpretation of the automatic conversion clause. On July 16, Federal Judge James Selna (Central District, California), over government objections, made his...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/cspa-update.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/cspa-update.html)
hairstyles Discover the World Map Game
niklshah
05-27 01:16 PM
What will the answer to the question Current immigration status while filing EAD electonically, i am on EAD rite now and i have never used my advance parole.* Pls help..
upuaut8
11-02 01:47 AM
yes. Select it, then check out the left hand panel. I believe that "layout" will have a check box which says, "show object" or something similar. This is what you use to make an object transparent.
This will only work on peices of a grouped object... not the whole group.. keep this in mind.
This will only work on peices of a grouped object... not the whole group.. keep this in mind.
chtting2me
07-02 01:22 PM
Yes i agree with you, Lets prepare our experience and fax them
No comments:
Post a Comment