kernel_flash
01-21 03:24 AM
Here is my first official entry
Made in hurry !!!!
Preview
http://megaswf.com/view/74494201d407c983ec7ffcd16de342e0.html
Cheers
Kernel
Made in hurry !!!!
Preview
http://megaswf.com/view/74494201d407c983ec7ffcd16de342e0.html
Cheers
Kernel
wallpaper Re: Happy Birthday Zack
hunv
10-08 01:44 PM
Hi
My wife H1B was approved under Consular Processing. She got job offer now and it is a Consulting job to Hire. We applied COS at CSC by Premium processing. Reached application on Sep 28 and Status is Acceptance by then.
1 ) Everything is genuine and in the client letter it is mentioned as 6 Months contract to hire. Are there any posibbilities of getting H1B approved for only 6 months from now.
2 ) Are there any chances of rejection
3) Sincle past week it is under "Acceptance" stage. I know i have to be patient.
4) Can we expect some decision from them this week as client is waiting.
5) At what time CSC updates the case. Is there any particular time they update the case online.
Thanks
My wife H1B was approved under Consular Processing. She got job offer now and it is a Consulting job to Hire. We applied COS at CSC by Premium processing. Reached application on Sep 28 and Status is Acceptance by then.
1 ) Everything is genuine and in the client letter it is mentioned as 6 Months contract to hire. Are there any posibbilities of getting H1B approved for only 6 months from now.
2 ) Are there any chances of rejection
3) Sincle past week it is under "Acceptance" stage. I know i have to be patient.
4) Can we expect some decision from them this week as client is waiting.
5) At what time CSC updates the case. Is there any particular time they update the case online.
Thanks
hprl
04-17 11:04 AM
Hi guys, cannot find this topic in previous threads. Appreciate it if someone can advise!
My situation is: I'm still waiting to file for I-485 with approved PERM and I-140. I'll get married right after I submit my I-485 when visa number is available and petition for her I-485. Can my future wife in China take consular processing in US consulate in China while I'm just waiting for approval in US? Normally, does she get it earlier than me since she'd ask for consular processing?
Thanks.
My situation is: I'm still waiting to file for I-485 with approved PERM and I-140. I'll get married right after I submit my I-485 when visa number is available and petition for her I-485. Can my future wife in China take consular processing in US consulate in China while I'm just waiting for approval in US? Normally, does she get it earlier than me since she'd ask for consular processing?
Thanks.
2011 Re: Happy Birthday Zack
Blog Feeds
10-23 09:20 AM
A study done last year by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service ("USCIS") found as many as one-in-five H-1B applications were affected by either fraud or "technical violations," of the H-1B program. This may be the impetus behind USCIS� increased anti-fraud enforcement efforts. Whatever the reason behind such stepped-up efforts, there is no doubt that the USCIS has begun making more and more "surprise visits" to the U.S. work sites of companies that sponsor H-1B visa holders. The Office of Fraud Detection and National Security ("FDNS"), a division housed within USCIS National Security and Records Verification Directorate, was created in...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2009/08/h1b-fraud-fee-money-well-spent-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2009/08/h1b-fraud-fee-money-well-spent-.html)
more...
hebron
04-01 04:10 PM
Hi,
I have already filed my I-485 in Aug 2007. My employer is moving to a new office space in the same city. It is almost 2 miles from where I'm working now. Do I need to notify USCIS of this change? If so, how would I do it? Could anyone please suggest.
Thanks!
I have already filed my I-485 in Aug 2007. My employer is moving to a new office space in the same city. It is almost 2 miles from where I'm working now. Do I need to notify USCIS of this change? If so, how would I do it? Could anyone please suggest.
Thanks!
Macaca
11-16 08:35 AM
Pelosi: War, Immigration Hurt Public Approval of Congress (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/15/AR2007111501631.html) Speaker Says Clinton Can 'Hold Her Own' By David S. Broder and Chris Cillizza | Washington Post Staff Writers, November 15, 2007
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today blamed Congress' failure to bring an end to the war in Iraq and deal effectively with the reform of immigration laws as the primary causes of the institution's near-record low approval ratings.
In an interview at the U.S. Capitol, Pelosi said the Democratic takeover of Congress had raised expectations on action to end the conflict in Iraq, and that the Senate's initial willingness to tackle immigration reform followed by its failure to do so left the American public disappointed in Congress.
The House on Wednesday night passed spending legislation that sought to tie funding for the Iraq war to hard deadlines for beginning troop withdrawals, a proposal that has little hope of passage in the Senate.
"People thought it was a problem that could be solved and when it didn't happen I think it was a big disappointment," she said. "Usually those low numbers relate to expectations and there were high expectations" on both Iraq and immigration.
Pelosi made her comments in an interview for washingtonpost.com's "PostTalk" program (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/11/15/VI2007111501443.html?hpid=topnews), just hours before seven of her party's presidential candidates are scheduled to gather in Las Vegas for a televised debate.
Pelosi said that the heavy wave of criticism directed at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) in recent days stemmed from her status as the frontrunner, not as the lone woman in the race. "I believe that any 'picking on' ... [of] Senator Clinton has to do with her being a frontrunner," she said. "Frontrunners always have to undergo that."
Pelosi, who had a chance to closely evaluate six of the candidates at last weekend's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Iowa (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/11/AR2007111101732.html), said that she saw up close that night that Clinton can "hold her own."
Discussing her own rise to the speakership, Pelosi said she did little to emphasize her gender in lining support within the caucus. "The last thing I could have said to any of my colleagues would have been: 'Vote for me because we need a woman in the leadership.'"
On Wednesday night, the House narrowly passed a measure -- 218 to 203 -- that would tie funding for the Iraq war to a specific redeployment plan for the troops in the country.
Pelosi cast the Bush administration's plan to draw down 30,000 American troops from the country as "inadequate," arguing that such a proposal would leave more soldiers in Iraq next year than were there in November 2006.
Citing a story in Thursday's Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/14/AR2007111402524.html), Pelosi said that leading U.S. generals have concluded that the stubbornness of the Shiite government in Iraq is causing more problems than al Qaeda or other insurgent groups. "The government is not taking political steps," said Pelosi.
While Pelosi said she hoped the House action would help move the debate forward, she acknowledged that Senate action on the bill was unlikely.
Pelosi sounded a conciliatory note on the current spending showdown with the White House but repeatedly referenced the President's much larger requests for Iraq funding when discussing Democratic priorities like children's health insurance and medical research.
She did, however, express confidence that a deal would be reached with the president on the remaining appropriations bills -- dismissing the possibility of a repeat of the 1995-1996 government shutdown that left House Republicans deflated and President Clinton triumphant.
While admitting that she must do a better job at ensuring the American people are aware of what the Democratic-led House has accomplished in its first 10 months, she expressed confidence that her party's brand was still strong.
She repeatedly cited polling that showed Democrats with a double-digit leads over their Republican counterparts in both specific battleground congressional districts as well as nationally.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today blamed Congress' failure to bring an end to the war in Iraq and deal effectively with the reform of immigration laws as the primary causes of the institution's near-record low approval ratings.
In an interview at the U.S. Capitol, Pelosi said the Democratic takeover of Congress had raised expectations on action to end the conflict in Iraq, and that the Senate's initial willingness to tackle immigration reform followed by its failure to do so left the American public disappointed in Congress.
The House on Wednesday night passed spending legislation that sought to tie funding for the Iraq war to hard deadlines for beginning troop withdrawals, a proposal that has little hope of passage in the Senate.
"People thought it was a problem that could be solved and when it didn't happen I think it was a big disappointment," she said. "Usually those low numbers relate to expectations and there were high expectations" on both Iraq and immigration.
Pelosi made her comments in an interview for washingtonpost.com's "PostTalk" program (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/11/15/VI2007111501443.html?hpid=topnews), just hours before seven of her party's presidential candidates are scheduled to gather in Las Vegas for a televised debate.
Pelosi said that the heavy wave of criticism directed at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) in recent days stemmed from her status as the frontrunner, not as the lone woman in the race. "I believe that any 'picking on' ... [of] Senator Clinton has to do with her being a frontrunner," she said. "Frontrunners always have to undergo that."
Pelosi, who had a chance to closely evaluate six of the candidates at last weekend's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Iowa (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/11/AR2007111101732.html), said that she saw up close that night that Clinton can "hold her own."
Discussing her own rise to the speakership, Pelosi said she did little to emphasize her gender in lining support within the caucus. "The last thing I could have said to any of my colleagues would have been: 'Vote for me because we need a woman in the leadership.'"
On Wednesday night, the House narrowly passed a measure -- 218 to 203 -- that would tie funding for the Iraq war to a specific redeployment plan for the troops in the country.
Pelosi cast the Bush administration's plan to draw down 30,000 American troops from the country as "inadequate," arguing that such a proposal would leave more soldiers in Iraq next year than were there in November 2006.
Citing a story in Thursday's Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/14/AR2007111402524.html), Pelosi said that leading U.S. generals have concluded that the stubbornness of the Shiite government in Iraq is causing more problems than al Qaeda or other insurgent groups. "The government is not taking political steps," said Pelosi.
While Pelosi said she hoped the House action would help move the debate forward, she acknowledged that Senate action on the bill was unlikely.
Pelosi sounded a conciliatory note on the current spending showdown with the White House but repeatedly referenced the President's much larger requests for Iraq funding when discussing Democratic priorities like children's health insurance and medical research.
She did, however, express confidence that a deal would be reached with the president on the remaining appropriations bills -- dismissing the possibility of a repeat of the 1995-1996 government shutdown that left House Republicans deflated and President Clinton triumphant.
While admitting that she must do a better job at ensuring the American people are aware of what the Democratic-led House has accomplished in its first 10 months, she expressed confidence that her party's brand was still strong.
She repeatedly cited polling that showed Democrats with a double-digit leads over their Republican counterparts in both specific battleground congressional districts as well as nationally.
more...
team trim
05-26 10:24 AM
I�m eb3 all other countries. My nationality is Canadian. Since a GC is not available shouldn�t the EAD I received be good for 2 years?
2010 MMPR #10 - Happy Birthday Zack.
sukhwinderd
09-13 07:14 AM
i just got my FP.
rest is in signature
rest is in signature
more...
Blog Feeds
03-12 08:40 PM
As Rodney King famously remarked, "Why can't we all get along?" As Democrats and Republicans in Congress have spent the past year beating each other up regarding the health care bill, do we want the same thing to happen with immigration this year? At the moment, President Obama cannot even find two Republican senators out of 40 to support Comprehensive Immigration Reform. And anyone who thinks that all Democrats are united in support of CIR must be drinking the Kool-Aid. But does this mean that immigration reform is DOA in 2010? Not necessarily. There are individual pieces of immigration legislation...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/reform-the-legal-immigration-system.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/reform-the-legal-immigration-system.html)
hair Happy Birthday Zack
Vagus
01-09 03:05 PM
Did you get RFE on renewal or applying for the first time. Did you do E filing of application.
more...
Macaca
06-10 05:53 AM
Why Washington Can�t Get Much Done (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/10/weekinreview/10broder.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) By JOHN M. BRODER (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html), June 10, 2007
MEMBERS of Congress � with the possible exceptions of Senator Robert C. Byrd and Representative John D. Dingell � come and go. So do presidents and even Supreme Court justices.
But some big issues come to the nation�s capital and never leave, despite the politicians� best efforts to wrap them up and send them packing. Immigration is one.
Efforts to craft a grand compromise on the perennially nettlesome issue of how to deal with the millions who want to settle in this country collapsed in the Senate in spectacular fashion Thursday night, even though President Bush and the Senate leadership desperately wanted a deal. Almost everyone in Washington believes that America�s immigration laws are an unenforceable mess. But confronted with real legislation built on real compromises, the Senate sank beneath murderous political, geographic and ideological crosscurrents. Despite vows of senators to resuscitate the bill, it may be months � or years � before Congress again comes close to passing a major overhaul of immigration law.
But immigration is only one of several major policy matters on which virtually all Americans agree that something has to be done, even as Washington seems mired in dysfunction. What will happen when Congress turns next to energy legislation? Or global warming? Health care? Social Security?
It sometimes seems that it takes a catastrophe to create consensus. The Great Depression, Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11 all shattered partisan divisions and led, at least for a time, to enhanced presidential power and a rush of bipartisan lawmaking (some of which political leaders later came to regret). Today, however, the partisan chasm in Washington is deeper than it has been in 100 years, according to some academic studies, as moderate blocs in both parties have all but vanished.
�Remember,� said Thomas E. Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, �these are really big problems and they�re really tough. Solving them is going to involve some major changes in the way we live, the way we tax ourselves, the way we get our health care and the way we transport ourselves.�
He added: �Many of these questions are caught up in ideological differences that really are quite fundamental. On all of them right now there is no consensus in the country and therefore the political system has to try to create one where none now exists.�
A sign of how hard it is to fashion a compromise on these big questions is the length of time between major legislative actions on them. It took almost a decade from the collapse of the Clinton administration�s health care initiative in 1994 to the passage of the new Medicare prescription-drug benefit. The federal minimum wage went unchanged for 10 years until this spring. The last major overhaul of immigration law passed in 1986. The most recent significant revision to Social Security came in 1983.
Even the relatively new issue of global warming has been batted around since 1988, when Al Gore began talking about its potentially dire effects. Now, despite a foot-high stack of proposed legislation on the subject, virtually nothing has been done.
Mr. Gore said it was extremely difficult to move the political system when it is paralyzed by partisan passion and beset by well-financed and well-organized interests. He refers to the combination of the oil, coal and automobile industries as the �carbon lobby,� which he said is very difficult to defeat.
Washington, he said, has also failed to act on global warming for much the same reason that it has not tackled the possible future insolvency of Social Security or the problem of 45 million Americans who lack health insurance. �There�s just garden-variety denial,� he said. �It�s unpleasant to think about and easy to push it off.�
Washington often serves as a trailing indicator of public sentiment on an issue, following action in state capitals or responding belatedly to a growing public outcry. Congress and the White House did not seriously begin to move on immigration until two years ago, after the Minutemen, a civilian group, started patrolling the borders and Southwestern state governors declared states of emergency to deal with hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants stealing in from Mexico.
Given the failure of the 1986 immigration legislation to stem the illegal flow, the public is wary of any new government effort to control the borders, said Merle Black, a professor of political science at Emory University in Atlanta. And many lawmakers fear that if they support the current legislation they will be blamed if it fails to live up to its promises. After all, the Medicare drug benefit, too, was a much-heralded attempt to lower the costs of medicines for the elderly, but it created mountains of burdensome paperwork and huge unanticipated costs for the government.
�The public has seen a whole series of performance failures, whether it was the war in Iraq or the response to Katrina,� Professor Black said. �It makes different groups of individuals very skeptical about politicians offering solutions. On top of that, Bush�s approval ratings are so low that he can�t exert any leadership even within his own party.�
Government stasis was not unintended. The Founding Fathers designed the American system of government to cool public passions and created numerous impediments to rash action. They might not be surprised that two decades passed between significant action on immigration law or government old-age pensions. But they might have had trouble conceiving the complexity of the issues facing modern Washington, like global warming or the need to find a way to provide even basic medical care to one in seven Americans.
�It was a pretty simple world Madison was dealing with when he wrote the Federalist Papers,� said Morris P. Fiorina, professor of political science at Stanford University. �His focus was on land, labor and commerce. He was clearly aware of the need to defend the borders, but he was more concerned that you had to limit the reach of government and insure that transitory majorities can�t have their way.�
The molasses pace of governance in America is frustrating to many in and outside Washington. But the framers recognized that the dangers of succumbing to fleeting enthusiasms are often far greater than the slow process of fashioning a consensus from the competing interests of a sectional country.
�I agree that it is a bad thing for it to take an extraordinarily long time to deal with problems,� said Mickey Edwards, a former Republican representative from Oklahoma and now a vice president of the Aspen Institute and a lecturer in government at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. �But I think it is a worse thing to rush into solutions when you�re dealing with a nation of 300 million people.�
He cited Prohibition and the Medicare drug benefit as examples of laws that carried large and unintended consequences.
�I don�t suggest that given enough time you can make everything perfect,� Mr. Edwards said. �But you do need enough time to make sure all views are heard and you can avoid the unforeseen circumstances that plague so many things.�
�You don�t just want them to act,� he said. �You want them to act responsibly.�
MEMBERS of Congress � with the possible exceptions of Senator Robert C. Byrd and Representative John D. Dingell � come and go. So do presidents and even Supreme Court justices.
But some big issues come to the nation�s capital and never leave, despite the politicians� best efforts to wrap them up and send them packing. Immigration is one.
Efforts to craft a grand compromise on the perennially nettlesome issue of how to deal with the millions who want to settle in this country collapsed in the Senate in spectacular fashion Thursday night, even though President Bush and the Senate leadership desperately wanted a deal. Almost everyone in Washington believes that America�s immigration laws are an unenforceable mess. But confronted with real legislation built on real compromises, the Senate sank beneath murderous political, geographic and ideological crosscurrents. Despite vows of senators to resuscitate the bill, it may be months � or years � before Congress again comes close to passing a major overhaul of immigration law.
But immigration is only one of several major policy matters on which virtually all Americans agree that something has to be done, even as Washington seems mired in dysfunction. What will happen when Congress turns next to energy legislation? Or global warming? Health care? Social Security?
It sometimes seems that it takes a catastrophe to create consensus. The Great Depression, Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11 all shattered partisan divisions and led, at least for a time, to enhanced presidential power and a rush of bipartisan lawmaking (some of which political leaders later came to regret). Today, however, the partisan chasm in Washington is deeper than it has been in 100 years, according to some academic studies, as moderate blocs in both parties have all but vanished.
�Remember,� said Thomas E. Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, �these are really big problems and they�re really tough. Solving them is going to involve some major changes in the way we live, the way we tax ourselves, the way we get our health care and the way we transport ourselves.�
He added: �Many of these questions are caught up in ideological differences that really are quite fundamental. On all of them right now there is no consensus in the country and therefore the political system has to try to create one where none now exists.�
A sign of how hard it is to fashion a compromise on these big questions is the length of time between major legislative actions on them. It took almost a decade from the collapse of the Clinton administration�s health care initiative in 1994 to the passage of the new Medicare prescription-drug benefit. The federal minimum wage went unchanged for 10 years until this spring. The last major overhaul of immigration law passed in 1986. The most recent significant revision to Social Security came in 1983.
Even the relatively new issue of global warming has been batted around since 1988, when Al Gore began talking about its potentially dire effects. Now, despite a foot-high stack of proposed legislation on the subject, virtually nothing has been done.
Mr. Gore said it was extremely difficult to move the political system when it is paralyzed by partisan passion and beset by well-financed and well-organized interests. He refers to the combination of the oil, coal and automobile industries as the �carbon lobby,� which he said is very difficult to defeat.
Washington, he said, has also failed to act on global warming for much the same reason that it has not tackled the possible future insolvency of Social Security or the problem of 45 million Americans who lack health insurance. �There�s just garden-variety denial,� he said. �It�s unpleasant to think about and easy to push it off.�
Washington often serves as a trailing indicator of public sentiment on an issue, following action in state capitals or responding belatedly to a growing public outcry. Congress and the White House did not seriously begin to move on immigration until two years ago, after the Minutemen, a civilian group, started patrolling the borders and Southwestern state governors declared states of emergency to deal with hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants stealing in from Mexico.
Given the failure of the 1986 immigration legislation to stem the illegal flow, the public is wary of any new government effort to control the borders, said Merle Black, a professor of political science at Emory University in Atlanta. And many lawmakers fear that if they support the current legislation they will be blamed if it fails to live up to its promises. After all, the Medicare drug benefit, too, was a much-heralded attempt to lower the costs of medicines for the elderly, but it created mountains of burdensome paperwork and huge unanticipated costs for the government.
�The public has seen a whole series of performance failures, whether it was the war in Iraq or the response to Katrina,� Professor Black said. �It makes different groups of individuals very skeptical about politicians offering solutions. On top of that, Bush�s approval ratings are so low that he can�t exert any leadership even within his own party.�
Government stasis was not unintended. The Founding Fathers designed the American system of government to cool public passions and created numerous impediments to rash action. They might not be surprised that two decades passed between significant action on immigration law or government old-age pensions. But they might have had trouble conceiving the complexity of the issues facing modern Washington, like global warming or the need to find a way to provide even basic medical care to one in seven Americans.
�It was a pretty simple world Madison was dealing with when he wrote the Federalist Papers,� said Morris P. Fiorina, professor of political science at Stanford University. �His focus was on land, labor and commerce. He was clearly aware of the need to defend the borders, but he was more concerned that you had to limit the reach of government and insure that transitory majorities can�t have their way.�
The molasses pace of governance in America is frustrating to many in and outside Washington. But the framers recognized that the dangers of succumbing to fleeting enthusiasms are often far greater than the slow process of fashioning a consensus from the competing interests of a sectional country.
�I agree that it is a bad thing for it to take an extraordinarily long time to deal with problems,� said Mickey Edwards, a former Republican representative from Oklahoma and now a vice president of the Aspen Institute and a lecturer in government at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. �But I think it is a worse thing to rush into solutions when you�re dealing with a nation of 300 million people.�
He cited Prohibition and the Medicare drug benefit as examples of laws that carried large and unintended consequences.
�I don�t suggest that given enough time you can make everything perfect,� Mr. Edwards said. �But you do need enough time to make sure all views are heard and you can avoid the unforeseen circumstances that plague so many things.�
�You don�t just want them to act,� he said. �You want them to act responsibly.�
hot It#39;s Zack#39;s 10th irthday
dr.happie
03-25 03:27 AM
Hello
I'm A medical student who has come to do a 1 month internship(Clinical Elective) at a University on a F-1 visa valid till mid may 2009 .My internship here ends at the end of march. I have also 2 internships(cliinical electives) scheduled for the month of May and June as well at ANother University . The main problem is that the other univ require me to be on a B-1 and not on a F-1 . My present school has called them and requested them but they rejected the plea. They want me on B-1 . Now my question is that "Can I change my status from a F-1 to a B-1 while in US" - I have a valid visa which is not yet expired .
It would be appreciated if u can tell me about the forms that I shall need to fill in for the same ? Do I need to hire an attorney for it ?
Please rply
Thanks a million
Dr. Happie
man.yo28@yahoo.com
I'm A medical student who has come to do a 1 month internship(Clinical Elective) at a University on a F-1 visa valid till mid may 2009 .My internship here ends at the end of march. I have also 2 internships(cliinical electives) scheduled for the month of May and June as well at ANother University . The main problem is that the other univ require me to be on a B-1 and not on a F-1 . My present school has called them and requested them but they rejected the plea. They want me on B-1 . Now my question is that "Can I change my status from a F-1 to a B-1 while in US" - I have a valid visa which is not yet expired .
It would be appreciated if u can tell me about the forms that I shall need to fill in for the same ? Do I need to hire an attorney for it ?
Please rply
Thanks a million
Dr. Happie
man.yo28@yahoo.com
more...
house Happy birthday Zack!
kirupa
07-21 06:28 PM
Added...for now, but please be sure to include an image :) Currently nothing is displayed!
tattoo Happy Birthday Zack!
lobstars
05-04 02:57 PM
is this what you meant? it might be helpful anyway:)
board.flashkit.com/board/...did=274366 (http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=274366)
board.flashkit.com/board/...did=274366 (http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=274366)
more...
pictures Happy Birthday Zack Morris!
pthoko
08-29 01:16 PM
Thank You. appreciate your reply....
dresses HAPPY BIRTHDAY ZACK!
Blog Feeds
01-03 07:10 AM
The President has started revealing his plans on immigration for the next year. It sounds like he's planning on trying a do-over with Congress and attempting again to get a comprehensive immigration bill passed. He'll make the case for this in his State of the Union Address. I'm happy the President is still interested in working for change, I sincerely hope he is not making passing a reform bill his SOLE strategy. I'm reminded of Presidents in the past who regularly spoke in favor of something, but you just knew they didn't really care and were just trying to appease...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/obama-to-address-immigration-plans-in-state-of-the-union-address.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/obama-to-address-immigration-plans-in-state-of-the-union-address.html)
more...
makeup Happy Birthday Zach Braff!
kirupa
10-27 02:25 AM
What kind of an audio file are you going to be playing? Will it be something like a sound loop?
The reason I ask is that, on the Windows Phone, you can use the XNA Libraries instead of Silverlight for some media playback scenarios :)
The reason I ask is that, on the Windows Phone, you can use the XNA Libraries instead of Silverlight for some media playback scenarios :)
girlfriend Happy Birthday Zack (2 of 3)
gc_freedom
10-07 05:20 PM
Delete.Looks like old info..
hairstyles Happy Birthday Zack Merrick!
genscn
10-28 02:03 AM
Do my employer need to file I-140 within 45 days of labor certification? Is this a law now?
Macaca
02-17 04:51 PM
The Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law (http://judiciary.house.gov/committeestructure.aspx?committee=4)shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: immigration and naturalization, border security, admission of refugees, treaties, conventions and international agreements, claims against the United States, federal charters of incorporation, private immigration and claims bills, non-border enforcement, other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman, and relevant oversight.
Democrats
Zoe Lofgren (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=30), Chairman, California, 16th
Luis Gutierrez (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=97), Illinois, 4th
Howard L. Berman (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=7), California, 28th
Sheila Jackson Lee (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=31), Texas, 18th
Maxine Waters (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=32), California, 35th
Martin T. Meehan (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=33), Massachusetts, 5th
William D. Delahunt (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=34), Massachusetts, 10th
Linda T. S�nchez (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=39), California, 39th
Artur Davis (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=100), Alabama , 7th
Keith Ellison (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=101), Minnesota, 5th
Republicans
Steve King (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=22), Ranking Member, Iowa, 5th
Elton Gallegly (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=10), California, 24th
Bob Goodlatte (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=11), Virginia, 6th
Daniel E. Lungren (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=50), California, 3rd
J. Randy Forbes (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=21), Virginia, 4th
Louie Gohmert (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=55), Texas, 1st
Democrats
Zoe Lofgren (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=30), Chairman, California, 16th
Luis Gutierrez (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=97), Illinois, 4th
Howard L. Berman (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=7), California, 28th
Sheila Jackson Lee (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=31), Texas, 18th
Maxine Waters (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=32), California, 35th
Martin T. Meehan (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=33), Massachusetts, 5th
William D. Delahunt (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=34), Massachusetts, 10th
Linda T. S�nchez (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=39), California, 39th
Artur Davis (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=100), Alabama , 7th
Keith Ellison (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=101), Minnesota, 5th
Republicans
Steve King (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=22), Ranking Member, Iowa, 5th
Elton Gallegly (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=10), California, 24th
Bob Goodlatte (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=11), Virginia, 6th
Daniel E. Lungren (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=50), California, 3rd
J. Randy Forbes (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=21), Virginia, 4th
Louie Gohmert (http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMember.aspx?id=55), Texas, 1st
Blog Feeds
06-16 08:40 AM
I had breakfast today with a few advocates and an Obama Administration official who noted that the immigration summit will now be held on June 25th. Encouraging. I also learned that the current expectation is that the immigration reform bill will likely start in the Senate and that Senator Reid is hoping for reform legislation to be considered in the fall.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/06/white-house-summit-back-on-the-calendar.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/06/white-house-summit-back-on-the-calendar.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment