sdckkbc
09-23 05:12 PM
My Original PERM labor certificate was lost in mail so we filed my I-140 without the PERM LC and asked USCIS to obtain the certificate from DoL. USCIS got the labour certificate from DoL and sent the original LC to us as an RFE to get my employer's and my signature on the perm certificate. My employer by mistake signed the labor certificate where I was supposed to sign :(. We have now covered his sign with white paint and I would be signing at correct place and sending back to USCIS. Do you think any white ink or over writing on original PERM certificate would matter in adjudication of my 140?
wallpaper Emo Hair Highlights for
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.
dealsnet
02-11 06:48 PM
GOOGLE IS YOUR FRIEND.
DON'T START A THREAD FOR THIS.
CHECK WIKIPEDIA.can some kind souls please explain to me what is the meaning of 'retrogression'?
thank you
:confused:
DON'T START A THREAD FOR THIS.
CHECK WIKIPEDIA.can some kind souls please explain to me what is the meaning of 'retrogression'?
thank you
:confused:
2011 hairstyles and highlights. Short Hairstyles Highlights.
kondur_007
04-20 08:43 PM
My wife is planning on going to India in summer, and she has either misplaced or lost her i94 card. What should i do now?
Was it at I 94 given at the airport or was it something that came attached to approval notice with extension/change of status?
Do you know for sure that it was not expired?
Do you have a copy of it?
When is your wife coming back from India (for how long she is visiting)?
Was it at I 94 given at the airport or was it something that came attached to approval notice with extension/change of status?
Do you know for sure that it was not expired?
Do you have a copy of it?
When is your wife coming back from India (for how long she is visiting)?
more...
senk1s
10-24 08:20 PM
I've got some questions/comment to understand your situation
1. How do you know it is stuck in security check? What is your attorney's suggestion
For regular EB applications you can apply for 485 when priority date is current
2. EAD is generally adjudicated within 90 days
3. She should have a visa of her own - if she cannot be your dependant
1. How do you know it is stuck in security check? What is your attorney's suggestion
For regular EB applications you can apply for 485 when priority date is current
2. EAD is generally adjudicated within 90 days
3. She should have a visa of her own - if she cannot be your dependant
sargon
10-20 11:51 AM
please reply to linked thread.
more...
Blog Feeds
07-27 03:40 PM
One of the comments on my post earlier today about the killed Border Patrol agent seemed pretty harsh - accusing most BP agents of being restrictionists with bad motives. I still think that's harsh and most Border Patrol agents are honestly out to do the necessary job of protecting our country's borders. But the timing of a major scandal involving Customs and Border Patrol certainly will make many people question just who the agency is hiring. According to the NY Times: After federal border agents detained several Mexican immigrants in western New York in June, an article about the incident...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/feds-investigating-border-patrol-agents-racist-web-posting.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/feds-investigating-border-patrol-agents-racist-web-posting.html)
2010 layered, angled hairstyle
sk.aggarwal
04-08 02:08 PM
Now hiring of foreign workers won�t be an easy job for the employers. The government is on its way to make foreign worker rules tougher from this very week.
canada immigration (http://www.canadaupdates.com), canada immigration news (http://www.canadaupdates.com)
HAVE A INFORMATIVE SUBJECT... tougher immigration rules where????
canada immigration (http://www.canadaupdates.com), canada immigration news (http://www.canadaupdates.com)
HAVE A INFORMATIVE SUBJECT... tougher immigration rules where????
more...
Macaca
10-27 10:14 AM
America has a persuadable center, but neither party appeals to it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/25/AR2007102502774.html) By Jonathan Yardley (yardleyj@washpost.com) | Washington Post, October 28, 2007
THE SECOND CIVIL WAR: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America By Ronald Brownstein, Penguin. 484 pp. $27.95
These are difficult times for American politics at just about all levels, but especially in presidential politics, which has been poisoned -- the word is scarcely too strong -- by a variety of influences, none more poisonous than what Ronald Brownstein calls "an unrelenting polarization . . . that has divided Washington and the country into hostile, even irreconcilable camps." There is nothing new about this, he quickly acknowledges, and "partisan rivalry most often has been a source of energy, innovation, and inspiration," but what is particularly worrisome now "is that the political system is more polarized than the country. Rather than reducing the level of conflict, Washington increases it. That tendency, not the breadth of the underlying divisions itself, is the defining characteristic of our era and the principal cause of our impasse on so many problems."
Most people who pay reasonably close attention to American politics will not find much to surprise them in The Second Civil War, but Brownstein -- who recently left the Los Angeles Times to become political correspondent for Atlantic Media and who is a familiar figure on television talk shows -- has done a thorough job of amassing all the pertinent material and analyzing it with no apparent political or ideological axe to grind. He isn't an especially graceful prose stylist, and he's given to glib, one-word portraits -- on a single page he gives us "the burly Joseph T. Robinson," "the bullet-headed Sam Rayburn," "the mystical Henry A. Wallace" and "the flinty Harold Ickes" -- but stylistic elegance is a rare quality in political journalism in the best of times, and in these worst of times it can be forgiven. What matters is that Brownstein knows what he's talking about.
He devotes the book's first 175 pages -- more, really, than are necessary -- to laying the groundwork for the present situation. Since the election of 1896, he argues, "the two parties have moved through four distinct phases": the first, from 1896 to 1938, when they pursued "highly partisan strategies," the "period in modern American life most like our own"; the second, from the late New Deal through the assassination of John F. Kennedy, "the longest sustained period of bipartisan negotiation in American history," an "ideal of cooperation across party lines"; the third, from the mid-1960s to the mid-1990s, "a period of transition" in which "the pressures for more partisan confrontation intensified"; and the fourth, "our own period of hyperpartisanship, an era that may be said to have fully arrived when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted on a virtually party-line vote to impeach Bill Clinton in December 1998."
As is well known, the lately departed (but scarcely forgotten) Karl Rove likes to celebrate the presidency of William McKinley, which serious historians generally dismiss out of hand but in which Rove claims to find strength and mastery. Perhaps, as Brownstein and others have suggested, this is because Rove would like to be placed alongside Mark Hanna, the immensely skilled (and immensely cynical) boss who was the power behind McKinley's throne. But the comparison is, indeed, valid in the sense that the McKinley era was the precursor of the Bush II era, which "harkened back to the intensely partisan strategies of McKinley and his successors." Bush's strategies are now widely regarded as failures, not merely among his enemies but also among his erstwhile allies on Capitol Hill, who grouse about "White House incompetence or arrogance." But Brownstein places these complaints in proper context:
"Yet many conservatives recognized in Bush a kindred soul, not only in ideology, but more importantly in temperament. Because their goals were transformative rather than incremental, conservative activists could not be entirely satisfied with the give and take, the half a loaf deal making, of politics in ordinary times. . . . In Bush they found a leader who shared that conviction and who demonstrated, over and again, that in service of his goals he was willing to sharply divide the Congress and the country."
This, as Brownstein notes, came from the man who pledged to govern as "a uniter, not a divider." Bush's service as governor of Texas had been marked by what one Democrat there called a "collaborative spirit," but "he is not the centrist as president that he was as governor." This cannot be explained solely by the influence of Rove, who appeared to be far more interested in placating the GOP's hard-right "base" than in enacting effective legislation. Other influences probably included a Democratic congressional leadership that grew ever more hostile and ideological, the frenzied climate whipped up by screamers on radio and television, and Bush's own determination not to repeat his father's second-term electoral defeat. But whatever the precise causes, the Bush Administration's "forceful, even belligerent style" assured nothing except deadlock on the Hill, even on issues as important to Bush as immigration and Social Security "reform."
Brownstein's analysis of the American mood is far different from Bush/Rove's. He believes, and I think he's right, that there is "still a persuadable center in American politics -- and that no matter how effectively a party mobilized its base, it could not prevail if those swing voters moved sharply and cohesively against it," viz., the 2006 midterm elections. He also believes, and again I think he's right, that coalition politics is the wisest and most effective way to govern: "The party that seeks to encompass and harmonize the widest range of interests and perspectives is the one most likely to thrive. The overriding lesson for both parties from the Bush attempt to profit from polarization is that there remains no way to achieve lasting political power in a nation as diverse as America without assembling a broad coalition that locks arms to produce meaningful progress against the country's problems." As Lyndon Johnson used to say to those on the other side of the fence, "Come now, let us reason together."
Yet there's not much evidence that many in either party have learned this rather obvious lesson. Several of the (remarkably uninspired) presidential candidates have made oratorical gestures toward the politics of inclusion, but from Hillary Clinton to Rudolph Giuliani they're practicing interest-group politics of exclusion as delineated in the Gospel According to Karl Rove. Things have not been helped a bit by the Democratic leadership on the Hill, which took office early this year with great promises of unity but quickly lapsed into an ineffective mixture of partisan rhetoric and internal bickering. Brownstein writes:
"Our modern system of hyperpartisanship has unnecessarily inflamed our differences and impeded progress against our most pressing challenges. . . . In Washington the political debate too often careens between dysfunctional poles: either polarization, when one party imposes its will over the bitter resistance of the other, or immobilization, when the parties fight to stalemate. . . . Our political system has virtually lost its capacity to formulate the principled compromises indispensable for progress in any diverse society. By any measure, the costs of hyperpartisanship vastly exceed the benefits."
Brownstein has plenty of suggestions for changing things, from "allowing independents to participate in primaries" to "changing the rules for drawing districts in the House of Representatives." Most of these are sensible and a few are first-rate, but they have about as much chance of being adopted as I do of being president. The current rush by the states to be fustest with the mostest in primary season suggests how difficult it would be to achieve reform in that area, and the radical gerrymandering of Texas congressional districts engineered by Tom DeLay makes plain that reform in that one won't be easy, either. Probably what would do more good than anything else would be an attractive, well-organized, articulate presidential candidate willing, in Adlai Stevenson's words, "to talk sense to the American people." Realistically, though, what we can look for is more meanness, divisiveness and cynicism. It's the order of the day, and it's not going away any time soon.
THE SECOND CIVIL WAR: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America By Ronald Brownstein, Penguin. 484 pp. $27.95
These are difficult times for American politics at just about all levels, but especially in presidential politics, which has been poisoned -- the word is scarcely too strong -- by a variety of influences, none more poisonous than what Ronald Brownstein calls "an unrelenting polarization . . . that has divided Washington and the country into hostile, even irreconcilable camps." There is nothing new about this, he quickly acknowledges, and "partisan rivalry most often has been a source of energy, innovation, and inspiration," but what is particularly worrisome now "is that the political system is more polarized than the country. Rather than reducing the level of conflict, Washington increases it. That tendency, not the breadth of the underlying divisions itself, is the defining characteristic of our era and the principal cause of our impasse on so many problems."
Most people who pay reasonably close attention to American politics will not find much to surprise them in The Second Civil War, but Brownstein -- who recently left the Los Angeles Times to become political correspondent for Atlantic Media and who is a familiar figure on television talk shows -- has done a thorough job of amassing all the pertinent material and analyzing it with no apparent political or ideological axe to grind. He isn't an especially graceful prose stylist, and he's given to glib, one-word portraits -- on a single page he gives us "the burly Joseph T. Robinson," "the bullet-headed Sam Rayburn," "the mystical Henry A. Wallace" and "the flinty Harold Ickes" -- but stylistic elegance is a rare quality in political journalism in the best of times, and in these worst of times it can be forgiven. What matters is that Brownstein knows what he's talking about.
He devotes the book's first 175 pages -- more, really, than are necessary -- to laying the groundwork for the present situation. Since the election of 1896, he argues, "the two parties have moved through four distinct phases": the first, from 1896 to 1938, when they pursued "highly partisan strategies," the "period in modern American life most like our own"; the second, from the late New Deal through the assassination of John F. Kennedy, "the longest sustained period of bipartisan negotiation in American history," an "ideal of cooperation across party lines"; the third, from the mid-1960s to the mid-1990s, "a period of transition" in which "the pressures for more partisan confrontation intensified"; and the fourth, "our own period of hyperpartisanship, an era that may be said to have fully arrived when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted on a virtually party-line vote to impeach Bill Clinton in December 1998."
As is well known, the lately departed (but scarcely forgotten) Karl Rove likes to celebrate the presidency of William McKinley, which serious historians generally dismiss out of hand but in which Rove claims to find strength and mastery. Perhaps, as Brownstein and others have suggested, this is because Rove would like to be placed alongside Mark Hanna, the immensely skilled (and immensely cynical) boss who was the power behind McKinley's throne. But the comparison is, indeed, valid in the sense that the McKinley era was the precursor of the Bush II era, which "harkened back to the intensely partisan strategies of McKinley and his successors." Bush's strategies are now widely regarded as failures, not merely among his enemies but also among his erstwhile allies on Capitol Hill, who grouse about "White House incompetence or arrogance." But Brownstein places these complaints in proper context:
"Yet many conservatives recognized in Bush a kindred soul, not only in ideology, but more importantly in temperament. Because their goals were transformative rather than incremental, conservative activists could not be entirely satisfied with the give and take, the half a loaf deal making, of politics in ordinary times. . . . In Bush they found a leader who shared that conviction and who demonstrated, over and again, that in service of his goals he was willing to sharply divide the Congress and the country."
This, as Brownstein notes, came from the man who pledged to govern as "a uniter, not a divider." Bush's service as governor of Texas had been marked by what one Democrat there called a "collaborative spirit," but "he is not the centrist as president that he was as governor." This cannot be explained solely by the influence of Rove, who appeared to be far more interested in placating the GOP's hard-right "base" than in enacting effective legislation. Other influences probably included a Democratic congressional leadership that grew ever more hostile and ideological, the frenzied climate whipped up by screamers on radio and television, and Bush's own determination not to repeat his father's second-term electoral defeat. But whatever the precise causes, the Bush Administration's "forceful, even belligerent style" assured nothing except deadlock on the Hill, even on issues as important to Bush as immigration and Social Security "reform."
Brownstein's analysis of the American mood is far different from Bush/Rove's. He believes, and I think he's right, that there is "still a persuadable center in American politics -- and that no matter how effectively a party mobilized its base, it could not prevail if those swing voters moved sharply and cohesively against it," viz., the 2006 midterm elections. He also believes, and again I think he's right, that coalition politics is the wisest and most effective way to govern: "The party that seeks to encompass and harmonize the widest range of interests and perspectives is the one most likely to thrive. The overriding lesson for both parties from the Bush attempt to profit from polarization is that there remains no way to achieve lasting political power in a nation as diverse as America without assembling a broad coalition that locks arms to produce meaningful progress against the country's problems." As Lyndon Johnson used to say to those on the other side of the fence, "Come now, let us reason together."
Yet there's not much evidence that many in either party have learned this rather obvious lesson. Several of the (remarkably uninspired) presidential candidates have made oratorical gestures toward the politics of inclusion, but from Hillary Clinton to Rudolph Giuliani they're practicing interest-group politics of exclusion as delineated in the Gospel According to Karl Rove. Things have not been helped a bit by the Democratic leadership on the Hill, which took office early this year with great promises of unity but quickly lapsed into an ineffective mixture of partisan rhetoric and internal bickering. Brownstein writes:
"Our modern system of hyperpartisanship has unnecessarily inflamed our differences and impeded progress against our most pressing challenges. . . . In Washington the political debate too often careens between dysfunctional poles: either polarization, when one party imposes its will over the bitter resistance of the other, or immobilization, when the parties fight to stalemate. . . . Our political system has virtually lost its capacity to formulate the principled compromises indispensable for progress in any diverse society. By any measure, the costs of hyperpartisanship vastly exceed the benefits."
Brownstein has plenty of suggestions for changing things, from "allowing independents to participate in primaries" to "changing the rules for drawing districts in the House of Representatives." Most of these are sensible and a few are first-rate, but they have about as much chance of being adopted as I do of being president. The current rush by the states to be fustest with the mostest in primary season suggests how difficult it would be to achieve reform in that area, and the radical gerrymandering of Texas congressional districts engineered by Tom DeLay makes plain that reform in that one won't be easy, either. Probably what would do more good than anything else would be an attractive, well-organized, articulate presidential candidate willing, in Adlai Stevenson's words, "to talk sense to the American people." Realistically, though, what we can look for is more meanness, divisiveness and cynicism. It's the order of the day, and it's not going away any time soon.
hair blonde hair highlights on
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..
more...
casinoroyale
07-01 09:34 AM
B1 is purely-non-immigrant-intent visa while H1 is dual-intent. Given this, I do not see any harm entering on B1 while you have a valid I-797 presumably starting Oct 1st? So, after returning you can appear for H1 visa stamp and later enter using H1.
This is my personal opinion, please take attorney's advise.
This is my personal opinion, please take attorney's advise.
hot hairstyle highlights. pink
polapragada
09-24 12:40 AM
HI
Should I do AOS or CP?
Which one would get me the green card faster?
Thanks
CP would be quick
Should I do AOS or CP?
Which one would get me the green card faster?
Thanks
CP would be quick
more...
house hairstyles highlights and
veda
08-15 09:33 AM
Please post your commnets
tattoo highlights hairstyle.
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
more...
pictures Hair Style Hair Highlights
vallabhu
02-04 01:10 PM
Hi guys, How can i find out processing times for I290 B on I140 denial from Texas service center.
My appeal for Motion to reopen (Appeal to Commissioner) reached them on 1/25/08 and I saw LUD on 2/1/08.
My appeal for Motion to reopen (Appeal to Commissioner) reached them on 1/25/08 and I saw LUD on 2/1/08.
dresses funky hair highlights
coralfl
10-09 10:54 AM
My wife did not have SSN when her FP was done. I would not suggest writing ITIN either.
But must write the A# from FP notice onto the form.
But must write the A# from FP notice onto the form.
more...
makeup Gray Hair, Highlights,
fromnaija
10-26 01:41 PM
105-year-old realizes dream of citizenship (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-naturalize26oct26,1,6009025.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california)
The children obtained a green card for their mother and brought her to Palm Desert six years ago, after their father died in Tehran.
She is luckier than most of us as she became a citizen in only six years! Most of us here are still waiting for GC after 10 years!
The children obtained a green card for their mother and brought her to Palm Desert six years ago, after their father died in Tehran.
She is luckier than most of us as she became a citizen in only six years! Most of us here are still waiting for GC after 10 years!
girlfriend hairstyles highlights and
atlfp
12-17 01:00 AM
Forget about justice. There is only business. The logic is very simple:
Current Situation: You target some perceived very deep pockets customers and try to sell yourself to them, but now you realize that they are just some idiots;
What are the alternatives: You can continue to push/educate these idoits, or try to sell your self to somebody else. You may make less profit up front, but if you truely have something, you might be able to make more out of it in the long run;
What if everything fails: No matter how good your product is, if you are unable to sell it, regardless if it is because your stupidity or your clients/potential clients' stupidity, as long as you didn't captalize it, your product worth nothing.
The bottom line: when a business fails, nobody thinks/cares about how good your product is, on the contray, everything thinks you are an idoit that makes a product that doesn't sell.
What you can do at least: Wake up and forget about justice, there is none.
Current Situation: You target some perceived very deep pockets customers and try to sell yourself to them, but now you realize that they are just some idiots;
What are the alternatives: You can continue to push/educate these idoits, or try to sell your self to somebody else. You may make less profit up front, but if you truely have something, you might be able to make more out of it in the long run;
What if everything fails: No matter how good your product is, if you are unable to sell it, regardless if it is because your stupidity or your clients/potential clients' stupidity, as long as you didn't captalize it, your product worth nothing.
The bottom line: when a business fails, nobody thinks/cares about how good your product is, on the contray, everything thinks you are an idoit that makes a product that doesn't sell.
What you can do at least: Wake up and forget about justice, there is none.
hairstyles Highlights On Brown Hair
seekerofpeace
09-17 09:20 AM
Guys,
I am thinking of sending those letters again....what better things to do in life awaiting GCs....at least it will help USPS get some revenues.
I know many in the forum have sent letters. Can anyone send a consolidated list of addresses for
No drama Obama, all drama Biden, Napolitano, TSC headquarters or the links to them
Thanks in advance,
SoP
I am thinking of sending those letters again....what better things to do in life awaiting GCs....at least it will help USPS get some revenues.
I know many in the forum have sent letters. Can anyone send a consolidated list of addresses for
No drama Obama, all drama Biden, Napolitano, TSC headquarters or the links to them
Thanks in advance,
SoP
fai
03-26 10:03 PM
I'm not sure if the medium qualifies, but I figured I might as well submit it. thanks!
http://catherine.fadedsky.net/selfportraitsmall.jpg
http://catherine.fadedsky.net/selfportraitsmall.jpg
Blog Feeds
08-10 12:00 PM
South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has said many times in the past that the GOP needs to move back to the middle on immigration reform. He's putting his money where his mouth is and is leading the GOP's pro-immigration wing as they work behind the scenes shaping the bill likely to be introduced in the next few weeks. The support of at least half a dozen Republican Senators will be critical since there will no doubt be Democrats who don't vote with their party.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/08/graham-likely-to-replace-mccain-as-gop-champion-of-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/08/graham-likely-to-replace-mccain-as-gop-champion-of-immigration-reform.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment