sathishkrish
07-17 04:33 PM
i agree with you......dont demand..where have u been all these days coming today and asking IV for updated as they owe you...ofcourse bearing the fruits is not the only thing one can do they can contribute as well...will those new poeple who jpined in july will be willing to contribute to IV for fighting for our cuase GIBVE ME A BREAK
I think it is high time we need to set rules and roles for senior member alike - they are supposed to bring people to the group not the otherway around - We are setting a wrong precedence - A guy who has contributed more than you, can ask you to lay off ilikekilo, and that is not far away.
Anyways, Some of the members have become super stars by being here and wanting to do more so let seniors show the real attitude to freshmen.
Thanks for your understanding
I think it is high time we need to set rules and roles for senior member alike - they are supposed to bring people to the group not the otherway around - We are setting a wrong precedence - A guy who has contributed more than you, can ask you to lay off ilikekilo, and that is not far away.
Anyways, Some of the members have become super stars by being here and wanting to do more so let seniors show the real attitude to freshmen.
Thanks for your understanding
wallpaper Justin Bieber Photographed In
.jpg "justin bieber 2011 tour")
arian2002
08-17 11:56 AM
My drivers license is expiring in October as well as my H-1B. My company has applied for H-1B renewal in July and it seems it will not get renewed before end of October. I have an approved I-140. Does anyone know if I can get my license renewed without the new H-1B approval notice in hand? Thanks everyone in advance.
dummgelauft
04-13 12:40 PM
You are talking about needs? Then US needs all EB's over illegals by much, much more than US needs EB1 over EBn (n>1). So let's not talk of who contributes and who does not. It doesn't matter, all have same raw deal
If there was the slightest doubt that you are technically qualified person, you removed it 100% by by giving that equation Ebn(n>1) LOL!!
If there was the slightest doubt that you are technically qualified person, you removed it 100% by by giving that equation Ebn(n>1) LOL!!
2011 justin bieber 2011 tour
calif
12-07 04:16 PM
* * *
more...
seahawks
09-08 11:40 AM
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
morchu
08-01 12:09 AM
There is nothing complicated here.
Put your wifes status as of the 485 filing date. Means if you are filing in July/August this will be H4.
You can travel in H4. Also no problem in changing status to H1 after october 1st. (She have an H1 approval doesnt mean she is NOW in H1 status. Her change of status is approved from Oct 1st). Please remember that if she doesnt start working in H1 on October 1st, technically, she will Neither be in H1 / H4 status on October 1st. Means she might fall under "adjustee" status.
Assuming that your wife starts in H1 status from Oct 1st, there is no problem in travelling in H1. (she might need to get an H1 visa stamp though).
The other option is she can fall under adjustee status and travel in AP, work in EAD.
Also after 485 approval H4 status doesnt get "illegal" it just gets adjusted.
(Well...... nobody can have two statuses at the same time anyway).
Better check with your lawyer. Becuase when you apply for 485 and get approved your wife's H4 status becomes illegal. So don't know exactly about H1 or H4 on advanced parole. Lawyer is the best person for your case.
Put your wifes status as of the 485 filing date. Means if you are filing in July/August this will be H4.
You can travel in H4. Also no problem in changing status to H1 after october 1st. (She have an H1 approval doesnt mean she is NOW in H1 status. Her change of status is approved from Oct 1st). Please remember that if she doesnt start working in H1 on October 1st, technically, she will Neither be in H1 / H4 status on October 1st. Means she might fall under "adjustee" status.
Assuming that your wife starts in H1 status from Oct 1st, there is no problem in travelling in H1. (she might need to get an H1 visa stamp though).
The other option is she can fall under adjustee status and travel in AP, work in EAD.
Also after 485 approval H4 status doesnt get "illegal" it just gets adjusted.
(Well...... nobody can have two statuses at the same time anyway).
Better check with your lawyer. Becuase when you apply for 485 and get approved your wife's H4 status becomes illegal. So don't know exactly about H1 or H4 on advanced parole. Lawyer is the best person for your case.
more...
GC08
02-04 05:02 PM
I don't think Americans are that short sighted or narrow minded to want to steal your social security money. I know, i read a lot of press releases on how their social security is in a mess. They will fix it. I have no doubt about it.
Who thought India would be in such a limelight and then go on to be economic power before year 2000?
In a short span of 6-7 years the whole world changed. Coming to social security, by the time you will be in need of Social security, it will be decades and that is lot of time for a change. Who knows, we may be even taking a flight to Mars or worse 'nuked'.
Just be positive and drink a high gravity beer.
How do you know that they are not? Look at all the deficits, the American government is going to bankcrupcy if nothing is done. I recently read some article talking about American professors/researchers went to other places, like Austalia, for jobs because their research funding was cut.
Americans are very "near-sighted", to some extent. For issues like legal immigrants, they do not need to be far-sighted and worst, to think about you cause you are just one of the persons in the labor pool for American companies to use. Sometime ago, I heard on NPR talking about those Mexican migrant workers. Basically, Americans brought them to America during the time of labor shortage and kicked them out like trash during tough times.
That's always the case.. You are here for Americans to use ... wether you are farmers or professionals. My supervisors once even said that new comers had always been at the bottom of America.
Being positive is one thing, being realistic is another. :cool:
Who thought India would be in such a limelight and then go on to be economic power before year 2000?
In a short span of 6-7 years the whole world changed. Coming to social security, by the time you will be in need of Social security, it will be decades and that is lot of time for a change. Who knows, we may be even taking a flight to Mars or worse 'nuked'.
Just be positive and drink a high gravity beer.
How do you know that they are not? Look at all the deficits, the American government is going to bankcrupcy if nothing is done. I recently read some article talking about American professors/researchers went to other places, like Austalia, for jobs because their research funding was cut.
Americans are very "near-sighted", to some extent. For issues like legal immigrants, they do not need to be far-sighted and worst, to think about you cause you are just one of the persons in the labor pool for American companies to use. Sometime ago, I heard on NPR talking about those Mexican migrant workers. Basically, Americans brought them to America during the time of labor shortage and kicked them out like trash during tough times.
That's always the case.. You are here for Americans to use ... wether you are farmers or professionals. My supervisors once even said that new comers had always been at the bottom of America.
Being positive is one thing, being realistic is another. :cool:
2010 “My World Tour: Justin Bieber
zCool
07-27 03:17 PM
Do you work for some desi consultant who is trying to hold you?
Even then Attoreny making willful mistake to help your employer hold you is rare..
I have never heard you not needing signature.
In fact not having signature is reason enough for denial.
Even then Attoreny making willful mistake to help your employer hold you is rare..
I have never heard you not needing signature.
In fact not having signature is reason enough for denial.
more...
ryan
02-03 04:09 PM
That is correct. Mixing and matching with certifications doesn't work. Although I don't know about CPA, if it goes towards professional degree.
Hey there, I have a three year bachelor's (from Australia) and an American CPA. I believe the two can be evaluated to an Ameircan Master's equivalent. Please, check with your lawyers. It should be possible.
Hey there, I have a three year bachelor's (from Australia) and an American CPA. I believe the two can be evaluated to an Ameircan Master's equivalent. Please, check with your lawyers. It should be possible.
hair justin bieber 2011 tour uk.
pappu
07-18 02:14 PM
=======================
Message from IV
IV does not recommend any such actions.
We are aware of the issue and if there is any acion item, we will post it.
also be aware of what we posted earlier on this issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
=========================
Message from IV
IV does not recommend any such actions.
We are aware of the issue and if there is any acion item, we will post it.
also be aware of what we posted earlier on this issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
=========================
more...
shirish
03-26 11:32 AM
According to my knowledge it has to be after the college. You cannot be fulltime employed and full time student at the same time.
So in nutshell. B.S + 5 years exp (After completing BS) and also the job must demand for BS + 5 years exp.Else you cannot file under EB2.
Thanks guys... I believe my experiences are "progressive" (whatever that means) in a sense that during 5 years of work I progressed accordignly and to the level that the job description / ad for my position would require BS plus 5 years of experience.
What I don't get and was not quite sure about was the fact that 2 of those 5 years were during college. 5 years of experience is 5 years - I don't get why they would not like it. It is normal for people to work full time and go to college full time. When you get hired, if you have 5 years of full time experience, the prospective employer could not care less that 2 years of that were gained during last 2 years of college.
Dunno ... with USCIS and their rules ...
I asked my lawyer (duahhaaaa) and he said it's ok ... but I don't trust him.
M.
So in nutshell. B.S + 5 years exp (After completing BS) and also the job must demand for BS + 5 years exp.Else you cannot file under EB2.
Thanks guys... I believe my experiences are "progressive" (whatever that means) in a sense that during 5 years of work I progressed accordignly and to the level that the job description / ad for my position would require BS plus 5 years of experience.
What I don't get and was not quite sure about was the fact that 2 of those 5 years were during college. 5 years of experience is 5 years - I don't get why they would not like it. It is normal for people to work full time and go to college full time. When you get hired, if you have 5 years of full time experience, the prospective employer could not care less that 2 years of that were gained during last 2 years of college.
Dunno ... with USCIS and their rules ...
I asked my lawyer (duahhaaaa) and he said it's ok ... but I don't trust him.
M.
hot Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
puvathoor
02-17 11:02 AM
"U" does not mean quota is done for FY 08...it may be "U" becoz for those categoreis, quarterly quota exhausted....USCIS normally does not grab the entire FY's quota at one time...they do it quarterly basis.
Even i think definitely before Oct itself, EB2 India moves ahead.
Pasted below is language from the Jan 2008 Visa Bulletin..
-------------------
D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATE RETROGRESSION FOR JANUARY
It has been necessary to once again retrogress the India Employment Second preference cut-off date. This is a direct result of continued heavy applicant demand for numbers by CIS for adjustment of status cases despite the retrogression which occurred for December. It is likely that the annual limit for this category will be reached within the next few months, at which time the category would become “unavailable” for the remainder of fiscal year 2008.
-----------------
Based upon the above information in the Jan 2008 VB, I cannot digest that they use visa numbers on a quarterly basis.. I can appreciate visa numbers becoming available in later part of 2008 FY because of spillover from the other categories ( EB1) or ROW categories..
Also, Agree that credibility of this quote is to be questioned.. This is a very specific date / comment (I doubt State dept can predict April #s a month in advance of the actual date of release. Additionally, as discussed in many forums, because of the new no NC required if > 180 days, a lot of older PD applications in all categories will start getting visa # allocated. This is probably starting only in late Feb and pick up steam in March... I would think that state dept will wait and see how many visa # s are being allocated before making a drastic move on any visa categories..
I did some more searches on the Search engines and it did return out this statement across a few law firms' websites..
http://www.subhani-law.com/subhanilaw_subidx_news.aspx?main_idx=GAdmin2003551 43026
So the potential of a movement in the 2nd half because of spill over from Eb1 India / China to Eb2 India / China remains..
There is reason to be optimistic..
Even i think definitely before Oct itself, EB2 India moves ahead.
Pasted below is language from the Jan 2008 Visa Bulletin..
-------------------
D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATE RETROGRESSION FOR JANUARY
It has been necessary to once again retrogress the India Employment Second preference cut-off date. This is a direct result of continued heavy applicant demand for numbers by CIS for adjustment of status cases despite the retrogression which occurred for December. It is likely that the annual limit for this category will be reached within the next few months, at which time the category would become “unavailable” for the remainder of fiscal year 2008.
-----------------
Based upon the above information in the Jan 2008 VB, I cannot digest that they use visa numbers on a quarterly basis.. I can appreciate visa numbers becoming available in later part of 2008 FY because of spillover from the other categories ( EB1) or ROW categories..
Also, Agree that credibility of this quote is to be questioned.. This is a very specific date / comment (I doubt State dept can predict April #s a month in advance of the actual date of release. Additionally, as discussed in many forums, because of the new no NC required if > 180 days, a lot of older PD applications in all categories will start getting visa # allocated. This is probably starting only in late Feb and pick up steam in March... I would think that state dept will wait and see how many visa # s are being allocated before making a drastic move on any visa categories..
I did some more searches on the Search engines and it did return out this statement across a few law firms' websites..
http://www.subhani-law.com/subhanilaw_subidx_news.aspx?main_idx=GAdmin2003551 43026
So the potential of a movement in the 2nd half because of spill over from Eb1 India / China to Eb2 India / China remains..
There is reason to be optimistic..
more...
house justin bieber 2011 tour dates
benbear
11-09 09:07 AM
It is safe to say notice date in Sept equal to receipting by USCIS in Sept, because at notice date, USCIS actually open your file then send receipt.
So,from , EB receipt in Sept vs. receipt in Oct = 2:1
150k in Sept. include both EB(100K) and FB (50K).
(Note: assume received FB every month 50K. 50K is a reasonable assumption,
otherwise it's no way for USCIS to approve 800K AOS a year.)
Since EB in Sept vs. Oct is 2:1, so total EB receipting in Oct. should be 50K.
Out of the 655k total, the key is lead time for FB approval, how many month?
This is the key! If we assume average FB approval takes 6 month,
then EB out of the 655k is 655K-50Kx6=355K.
Add the 50K EB in Oct. Total EB backlog is 405K.
Still the key is average FB approval time, any gurus has any idea.
I am sure the time is not 12 month. If it's 12 month,
then EB backlog= 655K-50Kx12+50K=105k. :D:D:D Which is impossible!!
That same link you gave tells us that 655k is pending/back-log for AOS....
So,from , EB receipt in Sept vs. receipt in Oct = 2:1
150k in Sept. include both EB(100K) and FB (50K).
(Note: assume received FB every month 50K. 50K is a reasonable assumption,
otherwise it's no way for USCIS to approve 800K AOS a year.)
Since EB in Sept vs. Oct is 2:1, so total EB receipting in Oct. should be 50K.
Out of the 655k total, the key is lead time for FB approval, how many month?
This is the key! If we assume average FB approval takes 6 month,
then EB out of the 655k is 655K-50Kx6=355K.
Add the 50K EB in Oct. Total EB backlog is 405K.
Still the key is average FB approval time, any gurus has any idea.
I am sure the time is not 12 month. If it's 12 month,
then EB backlog= 655K-50Kx12+50K=105k. :D:D:D Which is impossible!!
That same link you gave tells us that 655k is pending/back-log for AOS....
tattoo justin bieber 2011 tour.
piyu7444
04-11 12:08 AM
They did not ask for old pay stubs. Interview was in Feb 08 so asked for 07 pay stub but not for 06 05 or 04.
About job responsibility.......I actually started stating what my current job responsibility is.........for real what is on LC is a subset of what I was describing so my guess is that the officer must have concluded that it matches to LC (she was looking at the document which had LC job responsibilities) and she moved to next question. If it did not match or there was some fumbling in answering the question she might have grilled me....:)
About job responsibility.......I actually started stating what my current job responsibility is.........for real what is on LC is a subset of what I was describing so my guess is that the officer must have concluded that it matches to LC (she was looking at the document which had LC job responsibilities) and she moved to next question. If it did not match or there was some fumbling in answering the question she might have grilled me....:)
more...
pictures justin bieber 2011 tour dates
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
dresses justin bieber 2011 tour.
nda050325
07-16 06:27 PM
I am not sure why the previous employer is required to provide a response to the RFE. It is the current employer (or the petitioner) who should respond to the RFE.
Can you provide more details on the RFE ?
Can you provide more details on the RFE ?
more...
makeup Justin+ieber+2011+tour+
purplehazea
06-11 04:31 PM
I dont want your colour to change but media keeps writing stuff,i guess we are intelligent enough to make our informed judgements.
I do respect your view if you hold that as per your own judgement but I feel the time calls for teaming up with President rather than going after him.
This will do us good I guess.Rest, its your color,you can decide which one you want to wear:)
:) Alright lets leave the prez alone :p . Just curious, do you think this can move through senate, house and conference committee by august? I am following this drama for 2 years and my conclusion is that legislative action takes a lot of time from initiation to completion. With presidential politics building up for next year's election it will be very challenging to pass any law with the limited time on hand.
I do respect your view if you hold that as per your own judgement but I feel the time calls for teaming up with President rather than going after him.
This will do us good I guess.Rest, its your color,you can decide which one you want to wear:)
:) Alright lets leave the prez alone :p . Just curious, do you think this can move through senate, house and conference committee by august? I am following this drama for 2 years and my conclusion is that legislative action takes a lot of time from initiation to completion. With presidential politics building up for next year's election it will be very challenging to pass any law with the limited time on hand.
girlfriend justin bieber 2011 tour dates.
razis123
06-16 04:42 PM
nope..neither for LC or 140...
Raziz,
Did you get any queries ever? I mean RFEs?
Raziz,
Did you get any queries ever? I mean RFEs?
hairstyles justin bieber 2011 tour dates
GC_1000Watt
12-03 02:43 AM
Just for updating everyone, I got my stamping done successfully at Tijuana. They give the passport next day as expected, so just make sure to make the arrangement for the night. It's pretty cool for H-1B people both for full-time plus contractors, albeit for contractors they sometimes will call/e-mail your employer to verify. It will usually happen in a day or two and they'll issue the visa then. Let me know if anyone wants any particular details on Tijuana/H-1B stamping there.
Many congratulations. I will appreciate if you can share your experience in detail.
1)The documents you carried along with you.
2)Hotel where you stayed
3)Did you have the tourist visa for mexico?
4)Did you get H1B for 3 years or less?
5)Questions VO asked.
Thanks.
Many congratulations. I will appreciate if you can share your experience in detail.
1)The documents you carried along with you.
2)Hotel where you stayed
3)Did you have the tourist visa for mexico?
4)Did you get H1B for 3 years or less?
5)Questions VO asked.
Thanks.
blizkreeg
01-26 12:44 PM
Seriously, who cares that Andhra bagged 7 ranks. How on earth is it relevant to the discussion going on here? Plus this isn't a forum for Indians only(and I'm Indian).
Stop posting these nonsense, amateur messages.
Stop posting these nonsense, amateur messages.
walking_dude
09-07 01:08 PM
IV Core,
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
No comments:
Post a Comment