Macaca
12-13 06:23 PM
Intraparty Feuds Dog Democrats, Stall Congress (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119750838630225395.html) By David Rogers | Wall Street Journal, Dec 13, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Democrats took control of Congress last January promising a "new direction." A year later, the image that haunts them most is one symbolizing no direction at all: gridlock.
Unfinished work is piling up -- legislation to aid borrowers affected by the housing mess, rescue millions of middle-class families from a big tax increase and put stricter gas-mileage limits on the auto industry. Two months into the new fiscal year, Democrats are still scrambling just to keep the government open.
President Bush and Republicans are contributing to the impasse, but there's another factor: Intraparty squabbling between House Democrats and Senate Democrats is sometimes almost as fierce as the partisan battling.
A fracas between Democrats this week over a proposed $522 billion spending package is the latest example. The spending would keep the government running through the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2008, but it has opened party divisions over funding the Iraq war and lawmakers' home-state projects.
After enjoying an early rise, Congress's approval ratings have fallen since the spring amid the rancor. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, just 19% of respondents said they approved of the job Congress is doing, while 68% disapproved.
Democrats are hoping to get a boost by enacting the tougher auto- mileage standards before Christmas, but other matters, such as a farm bill to continue government price supports, are likely to wait for the new year.
Republicans suffered from the same House-Senate tensions in their 12 years of rule in Congress. But the situation is more acute now for Democrats, who must cope with both Mr. Bush's vetoes and the narrowest of margins in the Senate, leaving them vulnerable to Republican filibusters.
Democrats in the House interpret the 2006 elections as a mandate for change. They are more antiwar and more willing to shed old ways -- such as "earmarks" for legislators' pet projects -- to confront the White House. Senate Democrats, by comparison, remain more tied to tradition and institutional rules that demand consensus before taking action.
"The Senate and House are out of phase with one another," says Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There was a big change last year, a big change that affected the whole House and one-third of the Senate. That's the fundamental disconnect."
Rather than move to the center after 2006, President Bush has moved right to shore up his conservative base. He has also adopted a confrontational veto strategy calculated to disrupt the new Congress and reduce its effectiveness in challenging him on Iraq.
Just yesterday, the president issued his second veto of Democrat- backed legislation to expand government-provided health insurance for the children of working-class families. In his first six years as president, Mr. Bush issued only one veto. Since Democrats took over Congress, he has issued six vetoes, and threats of more hang over the budget talks now.
For Democrats, teamwork is vital to challenging the president, and it's not always forthcoming. A comment by Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, suggests the distant relationship between the two houses. "We have a constitutional responsibility to send legislation over there," said Rep. Rangel. "Quite frankly I don't give a damn what they feel."
Adds Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: "I can tell you when bills will move and you can tell me when the Senate will sell us out."
With 2008 an election year overseen by a lame-duck president, it's unlikely that Congress will be able to break out of its slump.
Sometimes the disputes resemble play-acting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has quietly invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) to blame the Senate if it suits her purpose to explain the slow pace of legislation, according to a person close to Sen. Reid.
At the same time, he can use her as his foil to fend off Republican demands in the Senate: "I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said last week in debate on an energy bill. "She is a strong independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand."
Still, the interchamber differences have real consequences, as seen in the fight over the budget.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd of West Virginia long argued against creating a big package that would combine all the main spending bills. He preferred to confront Mr. Bush with a series of targeted individual bills where he could gain some Republican support and maintain leverage over the president. But Mr. Byrd was undercut by his leadership's failure to allow more time for debate on the Senate floor. After Labor Day, the House began pressing for a single large package.
The $522 billion proposed bill ultimately emerged from weeks of talks that included moderate Republicans. The bill cut $10.6 billion from earlier spending proposals, moving closer to Mr. Bush, while giving him new money he wanted for the State Department as well as a border-security initiative.
No new money was provided specifically for Iraq but the bill gives the Pentagon an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan and body armor for troops in the field. The goal was to provide enough money for Army accounts so its funding would be adequate into April, when a fuller debate could be held on the U.S.'s plans in Iraq.
For Senate Democrats and Mr. Byrd, the effort was a gamble that a moderate center could be found to stand up to Mr. Bush. The more combative Mr. Obey, the House appropriations chairman, was never persuaded this could happen.
After the White House announced its opposition over the weekend, Mr. Obey said Monday that the budget proposal was dead unless changes were made. The effect was to divide Democrats again, instead of putting up a united front against the White House's resistance.
Mr. Obey suggested that lawmakers should be willing to strip out home-state projects, acceding to Mr. Bush's tight line on spending, if that's what it took to make a tough stand on Iraq.
"I am perfectly willing to lose every dollar on the domestic side of the ledger in order to avoid giving them money for the war without conditions," Mr. Obey said. His suggestion met strong resistance from Senate Democrats. At a party luncheon, senators were almost comic in their anger, said one colleague who was present, loudly complaining of being reduced to being "puppets" or "slaves."
On the Senate floor yesterday, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Democrats were showing signs of "attention deficit disorder." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, accused the new majority of being more interested in "finger pointing" and "headlines" than legislation. "It won't get bills signed into law," he said.
While Ms. Pelosi had personally supported Mr. Obey's approach, she instructed the House committee to preserve the projects as it began a second round of spending reductions yesterday, cutting an additional $6.9 billion from the $522 billion package.
The Senate committee's Democratic staff joined in the discussions by evening, but the White House denied reports that a deal had been reached at a spending ceiling above the president's initial request.
If agreement is not reached by the end of next week, lawmakers may have to resort again to a yearlong funding resolution that effectively freezes most agencies at their current levels. This would be a repeat of the collapse of the budget process last year under Republican rule -- not the "new direction" Democrats had hoped for.
Tied in Knots
The House and Senate are struggling to complete several matters before they head home this month.
Appropriations: Only the Pentagon budget is in place for the new fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The House and Senate are struggling to finish a bill covering the rest of the government.
Farm bill: The Senate still hopes to complete its version of a farm bill but negotiations with the House will wait until next year.
AMT relief: The House and Senate have passed legislation limiting the alternative minimum tax's hit on millions of middle-class taxpayers. But they differ about whether to offset the lost revenue.
Medicare: Doctors are set to see a cut in Medicare payments in 2008, which lawmakers want to prevent. The House acted, but Senate hasn't yet.
Housing: Several bills addressing the housing crisis have passed the House but are languishing in the Senate.
WASHINGTON -- Democrats took control of Congress last January promising a "new direction." A year later, the image that haunts them most is one symbolizing no direction at all: gridlock.
Unfinished work is piling up -- legislation to aid borrowers affected by the housing mess, rescue millions of middle-class families from a big tax increase and put stricter gas-mileage limits on the auto industry. Two months into the new fiscal year, Democrats are still scrambling just to keep the government open.
President Bush and Republicans are contributing to the impasse, but there's another factor: Intraparty squabbling between House Democrats and Senate Democrats is sometimes almost as fierce as the partisan battling.
A fracas between Democrats this week over a proposed $522 billion spending package is the latest example. The spending would keep the government running through the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2008, but it has opened party divisions over funding the Iraq war and lawmakers' home-state projects.
After enjoying an early rise, Congress's approval ratings have fallen since the spring amid the rancor. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, just 19% of respondents said they approved of the job Congress is doing, while 68% disapproved.
Democrats are hoping to get a boost by enacting the tougher auto- mileage standards before Christmas, but other matters, such as a farm bill to continue government price supports, are likely to wait for the new year.
Republicans suffered from the same House-Senate tensions in their 12 years of rule in Congress. But the situation is more acute now for Democrats, who must cope with both Mr. Bush's vetoes and the narrowest of margins in the Senate, leaving them vulnerable to Republican filibusters.
Democrats in the House interpret the 2006 elections as a mandate for change. They are more antiwar and more willing to shed old ways -- such as "earmarks" for legislators' pet projects -- to confront the White House. Senate Democrats, by comparison, remain more tied to tradition and institutional rules that demand consensus before taking action.
"The Senate and House are out of phase with one another," says Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There was a big change last year, a big change that affected the whole House and one-third of the Senate. That's the fundamental disconnect."
Rather than move to the center after 2006, President Bush has moved right to shore up his conservative base. He has also adopted a confrontational veto strategy calculated to disrupt the new Congress and reduce its effectiveness in challenging him on Iraq.
Just yesterday, the president issued his second veto of Democrat- backed legislation to expand government-provided health insurance for the children of working-class families. In his first six years as president, Mr. Bush issued only one veto. Since Democrats took over Congress, he has issued six vetoes, and threats of more hang over the budget talks now.
For Democrats, teamwork is vital to challenging the president, and it's not always forthcoming. A comment by Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, suggests the distant relationship between the two houses. "We have a constitutional responsibility to send legislation over there," said Rep. Rangel. "Quite frankly I don't give a damn what they feel."
Adds Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: "I can tell you when bills will move and you can tell me when the Senate will sell us out."
With 2008 an election year overseen by a lame-duck president, it's unlikely that Congress will be able to break out of its slump.
Sometimes the disputes resemble play-acting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has quietly invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) to blame the Senate if it suits her purpose to explain the slow pace of legislation, according to a person close to Sen. Reid.
At the same time, he can use her as his foil to fend off Republican demands in the Senate: "I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said last week in debate on an energy bill. "She is a strong independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand."
Still, the interchamber differences have real consequences, as seen in the fight over the budget.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd of West Virginia long argued against creating a big package that would combine all the main spending bills. He preferred to confront Mr. Bush with a series of targeted individual bills where he could gain some Republican support and maintain leverage over the president. But Mr. Byrd was undercut by his leadership's failure to allow more time for debate on the Senate floor. After Labor Day, the House began pressing for a single large package.
The $522 billion proposed bill ultimately emerged from weeks of talks that included moderate Republicans. The bill cut $10.6 billion from earlier spending proposals, moving closer to Mr. Bush, while giving him new money he wanted for the State Department as well as a border-security initiative.
No new money was provided specifically for Iraq but the bill gives the Pentagon an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan and body armor for troops in the field. The goal was to provide enough money for Army accounts so its funding would be adequate into April, when a fuller debate could be held on the U.S.'s plans in Iraq.
For Senate Democrats and Mr. Byrd, the effort was a gamble that a moderate center could be found to stand up to Mr. Bush. The more combative Mr. Obey, the House appropriations chairman, was never persuaded this could happen.
After the White House announced its opposition over the weekend, Mr. Obey said Monday that the budget proposal was dead unless changes were made. The effect was to divide Democrats again, instead of putting up a united front against the White House's resistance.
Mr. Obey suggested that lawmakers should be willing to strip out home-state projects, acceding to Mr. Bush's tight line on spending, if that's what it took to make a tough stand on Iraq.
"I am perfectly willing to lose every dollar on the domestic side of the ledger in order to avoid giving them money for the war without conditions," Mr. Obey said. His suggestion met strong resistance from Senate Democrats. At a party luncheon, senators were almost comic in their anger, said one colleague who was present, loudly complaining of being reduced to being "puppets" or "slaves."
On the Senate floor yesterday, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Democrats were showing signs of "attention deficit disorder." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, accused the new majority of being more interested in "finger pointing" and "headlines" than legislation. "It won't get bills signed into law," he said.
While Ms. Pelosi had personally supported Mr. Obey's approach, she instructed the House committee to preserve the projects as it began a second round of spending reductions yesterday, cutting an additional $6.9 billion from the $522 billion package.
The Senate committee's Democratic staff joined in the discussions by evening, but the White House denied reports that a deal had been reached at a spending ceiling above the president's initial request.
If agreement is not reached by the end of next week, lawmakers may have to resort again to a yearlong funding resolution that effectively freezes most agencies at their current levels. This would be a repeat of the collapse of the budget process last year under Republican rule -- not the "new direction" Democrats had hoped for.
Tied in Knots
The House and Senate are struggling to complete several matters before they head home this month.
Appropriations: Only the Pentagon budget is in place for the new fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The House and Senate are struggling to finish a bill covering the rest of the government.
Farm bill: The Senate still hopes to complete its version of a farm bill but negotiations with the House will wait until next year.
AMT relief: The House and Senate have passed legislation limiting the alternative minimum tax's hit on millions of middle-class taxpayers. But they differ about whether to offset the lost revenue.
Medicare: Doctors are set to see a cut in Medicare payments in 2008, which lawmakers want to prevent. The House acted, but Senate hasn't yet.
Housing: Several bills addressing the housing crisis have passed the House but are languishing in the Senate.
wallpaper Most Rangoli#39;s patterns are
alex99
02-24 04:23 PM
Hi Friends,
I have to Renew my AP which was expired 2 years back. I work and live in Virginia
and my I-485 is pending at NSC.
At which center should I apply for AP renewal?
Can I e-file for AP?
What is the difference between Paper filigng and e-filing?.
Please help,
Regards,
Alex
I have to Renew my AP which was expired 2 years back. I work and live in Virginia
and my I-485 is pending at NSC.
At which center should I apply for AP renewal?
Can I e-file for AP?
What is the difference between Paper filigng and e-filing?.
Please help,
Regards,
Alex
ItIsNotFunny
05-23 07:30 AM
If the new law passes, what will be impact on existing pending cases in I-485?
2011 geometrical patterns
softcrowd
11-30 07:44 AM
The images of Perm & 140 approvals are found in uslawnet.com.....see the link below...
http://www.uslawnet.com/Englishhome/PERM/PERM_Approval_Faculty_Fastest.htm
http://www.uslawnet.com/Englishhome/PERM/PERM_Approval_Faculty_Fastest.htm
more...
rakesh
04-29 12:13 AM
Hi
I am masters student graduating in June 2011. I got an offer from a big company and it already started h1b premium processing(applied on Mar 31). Now, I received an offer from my dream company and I didn't mention about h1-b processing and want to work for this company. I have few questions and need your suggestions.
1. Reject the first company offer. Not sure if I have to pay, because they applied for H1-B premium processing. How much I have to pay in this case? Can I continue working on OPT in this case?
2. Inform the second company about the first company h1-b processing. What can second company do, if H1-B is already processed? What can second company do, if H1-B is not processed?
Please suggest if there are better ways to handle the situation.
-- How long does it take to get H1-B visa under premium processing, if applied in 65000 pool?
Thanks
Rakesh
I am masters student graduating in June 2011. I got an offer from a big company and it already started h1b premium processing(applied on Mar 31). Now, I received an offer from my dream company and I didn't mention about h1-b processing and want to work for this company. I have few questions and need your suggestions.
1. Reject the first company offer. Not sure if I have to pay, because they applied for H1-B premium processing. How much I have to pay in this case? Can I continue working on OPT in this case?
2. Inform the second company about the first company h1-b processing. What can second company do, if H1-B is already processed? What can second company do, if H1-B is not processed?
Please suggest if there are better ways to handle the situation.
-- How long does it take to get H1-B visa under premium processing, if applied in 65000 pool?
Thanks
Rakesh
manand24
08-03 02:57 PM
Did you guys talk about this already ? I apologize if this has been analyzed already...
Murthy.com issues a Oct visa bulletin prediction based on information from DOS
http://murthy.com/news/n_oct07vb.html
Old information!
Murthy.com issues a Oct visa bulletin prediction based on information from DOS
http://murthy.com/news/n_oct07vb.html
Old information!
more...
hsst
02-25 05:27 PM
I found the following link on USCIS web site
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=97e19c337879d110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=54519c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Does this mean that USCIS is trying to speedup pending 485's ?
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=97e19c337879d110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=54519c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Does this mean that USCIS is trying to speedup pending 485's ?
2010 The designs of rangoli
bharat2008
02-05 08:56 AM
Hi,
I have I-140 approved(ABC company) and have 5 months left in my first 6 year cycle. I was laid off from the job. A New employer XYZ applied for my H1B extension based on I-140 approval and got approved for 3 years.But I was unable to join
XYZ due to family situation and moved back to India.
Questions:
1. Can a new employer apply for H1B extension based on my I-140 approval even though I am not in USA.? My I-140 has not been revoked or cancelled.
or
2.Can I claim the remaining time on my H1B approval(based on I-140) with company XYZ ?I have copy of the H1B approval but not sure if it has been revoked.
Please advice.
Thank you in advance.
I have I-140 approved(ABC company) and have 5 months left in my first 6 year cycle. I was laid off from the job. A New employer XYZ applied for my H1B extension based on I-140 approval and got approved for 3 years.But I was unable to join
XYZ due to family situation and moved back to India.
Questions:
1. Can a new employer apply for H1B extension based on my I-140 approval even though I am not in USA.? My I-140 has not been revoked or cancelled.
or
2.Can I claim the remaining time on my H1B approval(based on I-140) with company XYZ ?I have copy of the H1B approval but not sure if it has been revoked.
Please advice.
Thank you in advance.
more...
minimalist
07-30 03:25 PM
PERM labor certification is for future job. You should be OK.
hair Rangoli design with diya in
coolhunk897
07-21 02:00 PM
I have applied for OPT application (applied first time) in second week of May @ Vermont Service Center.
In last week of June, my employer filed H1B visa via premium processing and it gets approved within a week. H1B start date is Dec 1, 2010.
Last week, I received RFE for my OPT application stating that my status has changed to H1B. Please provide approval receipt. I have sent the approval receipt to USCIS. Current online status of OPT application shows that USCIS office received requested documents and my case is pending.
1. Will it affect my OPT application?
2. My original joining date is already postponed by 2 weeks. Still I am waiting for OPT card. Should I request expedite processing of my OPT application? or should I wait?
Please let me know. Thanks.
In last week of June, my employer filed H1B visa via premium processing and it gets approved within a week. H1B start date is Dec 1, 2010.
Last week, I received RFE for my OPT application stating that my status has changed to H1B. Please provide approval receipt. I have sent the approval receipt to USCIS. Current online status of OPT application shows that USCIS office received requested documents and my case is pending.
1. Will it affect my OPT application?
2. My original joining date is already postponed by 2 weeks. Still I am waiting for OPT card. Should I request expedite processing of my OPT application? or should I wait?
Please let me know. Thanks.
more...
kirupa
07-03 04:17 PM
Added :P
hot Rangoli Designs With Flowers
Comiccmadd
07-06 08:31 AM
My funny monster .
did in Illustrator.
hope u like it.
http://i880.photobucket.com/albums/ac8/Jellyfish103/oiii.jpg
did in Illustrator.
hope u like it.
http://i880.photobucket.com/albums/ac8/Jellyfish103/oiii.jpg
more...
house Geometrical Rangoli Designs:
anyluck?
01-24 10:23 PM
Hi ,
My wife has H1 visa approved under Consular Processing from Company A, so she is still under H4. She got another offer from Company B so we applied for another H1B before H1B quota expired. It is under process.
1 ) we applied for COS from H4 to H1 By Company A by premium processing.
2 ) Company B H1B from H4 is also under process.
Does the order of outcome from either petetions affect another petetion. For example if companie A petetion is approved and then afterwards company B petetion is rejected. will she be in H1 status.
Thanks
My wife has H1 visa approved under Consular Processing from Company A, so she is still under H4. She got another offer from Company B so we applied for another H1B before H1B quota expired. It is under process.
1 ) we applied for COS from H4 to H1 By Company A by premium processing.
2 ) Company B H1B from H4 is also under process.
Does the order of outcome from either petetions affect another petetion. For example if companie A petetion is approved and then afterwards company B petetion is rejected. will she be in H1 status.
Thanks
tattoo Many of the designs are
SlowRoasted
05-01 10:09 PM
pretty nice, needs the alien font though
more...
pictures Rangoli Design: Rangoli Design
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 :)
dresses Rangoli Designs: Free Rangoli
Macaca
03-01 11:02 AM
Some paras from The Myth of the Middle (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801817.html)
One explanation for all this is that politicians are acting against the will of their compromise-loving constituents. Another is that Republicans and Democrats are simply being good representatives. We think the evidence supports the second interpretation.
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) surveyed more than 24,000 Americans who voted in 2006. The Internet-based survey compiled by researchers at 30 universities produced a sample that almost perfectly matched the national House election results: 54 percent of the respondents reported voting for a Democrat, while 46 percent said they voted for a Republican. The demographic characteristics of the voters surveyed also closely matched those in the 2006 national exit poll. If anything, the CCES respondents claimed they were more "independent" than those in the exit poll.
The CCES survey asked about 14 national issues: the war in Iraq (the invasion and the troops), abortion (and partial birth abortion), stem cell research, global warming, health insurance, immigration, the minimum wage, liberalism and conservatism, same-sex marriage, privatizing Social Security, affirmative action, and capital gains taxes. Not surprisingly, some of the largest differences between Democrats and Republicans were over the Iraq war. Fully 85 percent of those who voted for Democratic House candidates felt that it had been a mistake to invade Iraq, compared with only 18 percent of voters who cast ballots for Republicans.
When we combined voters' answers to the 14 issue questions to form a liberal-conservative scale (answers were divided into five equivalent categories based on overall liberalism vs. conservatism), 86 percent of Democratic voters were on the liberal side of the scale while 80 percent of Republican voters were on the conservative side. Only 10 percent of all voters were in the center. The visual representation of the nation's voters isn't a nicely shaped bell, with most voters in the moderate middle. It's a sharp V.
The evidence from this survey isn't surprising; nor are the findings new. For the past three decades, the major parties and the electorate have grown more divided -- in what they think, where they live and how they vote. It may be comforting to believe our problems could be solved if only those vile politicians in Washington would learn to get along. The source of the country's division, however, is nestled much closer to home.
One explanation for all this is that politicians are acting against the will of their compromise-loving constituents. Another is that Republicans and Democrats are simply being good representatives. We think the evidence supports the second interpretation.
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) surveyed more than 24,000 Americans who voted in 2006. The Internet-based survey compiled by researchers at 30 universities produced a sample that almost perfectly matched the national House election results: 54 percent of the respondents reported voting for a Democrat, while 46 percent said they voted for a Republican. The demographic characteristics of the voters surveyed also closely matched those in the 2006 national exit poll. If anything, the CCES respondents claimed they were more "independent" than those in the exit poll.
The CCES survey asked about 14 national issues: the war in Iraq (the invasion and the troops), abortion (and partial birth abortion), stem cell research, global warming, health insurance, immigration, the minimum wage, liberalism and conservatism, same-sex marriage, privatizing Social Security, affirmative action, and capital gains taxes. Not surprisingly, some of the largest differences between Democrats and Republicans were over the Iraq war. Fully 85 percent of those who voted for Democratic House candidates felt that it had been a mistake to invade Iraq, compared with only 18 percent of voters who cast ballots for Republicans.
When we combined voters' answers to the 14 issue questions to form a liberal-conservative scale (answers were divided into five equivalent categories based on overall liberalism vs. conservatism), 86 percent of Democratic voters were on the liberal side of the scale while 80 percent of Republican voters were on the conservative side. Only 10 percent of all voters were in the center. The visual representation of the nation's voters isn't a nicely shaped bell, with most voters in the moderate middle. It's a sharp V.
The evidence from this survey isn't surprising; nor are the findings new. For the past three decades, the major parties and the electorate have grown more divided -- in what they think, where they live and how they vote. It may be comforting to believe our problems could be solved if only those vile politicians in Washington would learn to get along. The source of the country's division, however, is nestled much closer to home.
more...
makeup Rangoli Designs With Flowers:
Blog Feeds
06-25 01:30 PM
From time immemorial, the world has been a dangerous place; no less so today. Those with the means and will have have always relocated to less threatening or merely more desirable locales. In today�s globalized and interconnected era, the European debt crisis, terrorism, declared and undeclared wars, restrictions on religious and political freedom, and the remarkable rise to world leadership of a bi-racial man with roots in Kenya, Indonesia and Hawaii �- all of these developments, and still other enticements, have coalesced to make the United States the world�s premier immigration destination for affluent individuals. The federal government, however, has...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/06/my-entry-2.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/06/my-entry-2.html)
girlfriend Rangoli Designs With Flowers:
silvergga
02-13 03:19 PM
Hello,
I have a RFE for my 485 according to the online status. My PD is current, and NSC's 485 processing time is now July 19, 07. My 485 RD was July 25, 07, so it is likely that they are working on adjudicating my case (and could have approved if there were no RFE).
I am still waiting for the RFE in the mail to know what it is exactly. But, assume that I fulfill their request and mail them the required items immediately, will I need to wait another 6 months before they check my RFE fulfillment? Or do they usually look at the RFE immediately (since they are already working on my case)...
Thanks!
I have a RFE for my 485 according to the online status. My PD is current, and NSC's 485 processing time is now July 19, 07. My 485 RD was July 25, 07, so it is likely that they are working on adjudicating my case (and could have approved if there were no RFE).
I am still waiting for the RFE in the mail to know what it is exactly. But, assume that I fulfill their request and mail them the required items immediately, will I need to wait another 6 months before they check my RFE fulfillment? Or do they usually look at the RFE immediately (since they are already working on my case)...
Thanks!
hairstyles Tags: rangoli designs for
askreddy
02-09 09:51 PM
Hi
I am planning to apply for new PERM under EB2.
Just checking during these days, how long it takes for PERM approval.
Pls update the timing if you or your friends got the approval in EB2.
Thanks
I am planning to apply for new PERM under EB2.
Just checking during these days, how long it takes for PERM approval.
Pls update the timing if you or your friends got the approval in EB2.
Thanks
green2007
09-25 03:38 PM
I just wandering, how long would it takes get decision in I 485 after FP (background check Cleared)?
I just not make sense to me, that a lot of people file on May and June () are getting approval on September 17, 2007, but latest processing time in NSC for I 485 is December 21, 2006. If that case, my I 485 was filed on July 2, 2007, and it will got approve by the end of this year.
Can someone explain to me how this work or how USCIS make a decision for I 485?
RD: July 2,2007
ND: September 8, 2007
FP: October 11, 2007.
Thanks:p
I just not make sense to me, that a lot of people file on May and June () are getting approval on September 17, 2007, but latest processing time in NSC for I 485 is December 21, 2006. If that case, my I 485 was filed on July 2, 2007, and it will got approve by the end of this year.
Can someone explain to me how this work or how USCIS make a decision for I 485?
RD: July 2,2007
ND: September 8, 2007
FP: October 11, 2007.
Thanks:p
pansworld
07-08 02:10 PM
Is it possible to get AILA to give "moral support" to the flower campaign? Maybe they might be able to help gain media attention.
Cheers
Cheers
No comments:
Post a Comment