Blog Feeds
01-05 08:10 AM
Arizona's reputation for right wing lunacy certainly will be enhanced by this effort. Or maybe there's some pretty rational thinking behind SB1070 and eliminating rights for American born citizens of Hispanic descent. 30% of Arizonans are Hispanic. 42% of all students from kindergarten through twelth grade are Hispanic and the percentage goes even higher for the younger grades. Even if the efforts don't stand up to constitutional muster, maybe the real goal is not to get rid of illegal present immigrants, but, rather, all Hispanics, whether they are legal immigrants, born in the US or illegally present. Hispanics vote overwhelmingly...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/arizona-antis-pushing-birthright-citizenship-measure-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/arizona-antis-pushing-birthright-citizenship-measure-.html)
wallpaper the voice judges performance.
greyhair
09-23 10:54 AM
Now Congresswoman Lofgren is also supporting illegals. I always thought that she was in support of high skilled. Skip to the 11th minutes to see the interview of Congresswoman Lofgren.
September 22, 2010 - Guillermo del Toro - The Colbert Report - Full Episode Video | Comedy Central (http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/wed-september-22-2010-guillermo-del-toro)
September 22, 2010 - Guillermo del Toro - The Colbert Report - Full Episode Video | Comedy Central (http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/wed-september-22-2010-guillermo-del-toro)
fatboysam
03-05 04:23 PM
Hi
I had contributed $1000 towards my FSA dependent care account in 2010.
Now, in order to claim this amount, both husband and wife should be working, this is not the case with me, as my wife was not able to find a job in 2010.
Will this amount be reimbursed to me by the FSA management company ? as my son went to a preschool, and i paid the school fees every month.
Thanks
I had contributed $1000 towards my FSA dependent care account in 2010.
Now, in order to claim this amount, both husband and wife should be working, this is not the case with me, as my wife was not able to find a job in 2010.
Will this amount be reimbursed to me by the FSA management company ? as my son went to a preschool, and i paid the school fees every month.
Thanks
2011 called The Voice,
srikondoji
12-07 07:37 PM
i did send the fax. Was reading news and thought i should make a post.
more...
mattz
10-09 09:50 AM
click on layout and then look just below and you will see
the layout specs you can adjust, units, width, height.
the layout specs you can adjust, units, width, height.
santa123
03-12 08:16 AM
The anti-immigration groups seem to be busy with strategic plans to challenge CIR. Hope IV is ready to make a strong case too.
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/digest/2009,0312.shtm#comment
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/digest/2009,0312.shtm#comment
more...
Macaca
07-29 06:14 PM
Partisans Gone Wild (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/27/AR2007072701691.html) By Anne-Marie Slaughter (neverett@princeton.edu) Washington Post, July 29, 2007
Anne-Marie Slaughter is dean of Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
A funny thing is happening in American politics: The fiercest battle is no longer between the left and the right but between partisanship and bipartisanship. The Bush administration, which has been notorious for playing to its hard-right base, has started reaching across the aisle, with its admirable immigration bill (even though it failed), with its new push for a diplomatic strategy toward North Korea and Iran, and above all with its choice of three seasoned moderates for important positions: Robert M. Gates as defense secretary, John D. Negroponte as deputy secretary of state and Robert B. Zoellick as World Bank president.
On the Democratic side, the opening last month of a new foreign policy think tank, the Center for a New American Security, struck a number of bipartisan notes. The Princeton Project on National Security, which I co-directed with fellow Princeton professor John Ikenberry, drew Republicans and Democrats together for more than 2 1/2 years to discuss new ideas, some of which have been endorsed by such presidential candidates as John McCain, a Republican, and John Edwards, a Democrat. Barack Obama is running on a return to a far more bipartisan approach to policy and a far less partisan approach to politics. (Full disclosure: I have contributed to Obama's and Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaigns.)
In short, some sanity may actually be returning to American politics. Perhaps the most interesting development is the belated realization by the Bush administration that its insistence on an ABC ("anything but Clinton") policy has proved deeply damaging.
But the predominant political reaction to this modest outbreak of common sense has been virulent opposition, from both right and left. The true believers in the Bush revolution are furious. John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, sounded the alarm in February with a broadside against the agreement that the State Department and its Asian negotiating partners had reached with North Korea, warning President Bush that it contradicted "fundamental premises" of his foreign policy. Next came yet another intra-administration battle over Iran policy, with David Wurmser, a top vice presidential aide, telling a conservative audience in May that Vice President Cheney believed that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's strategy of at least talking with Iranian officials about Iraq was failing.
From the left, many progressives have responded to the foreign policy failures of the Bush administration by trying to purge their fellow liberals. Tufts professor Tony Smith published a blistering essay on Iraq in The Washington Post several months ago, attacking not neoconservative policymakers but liberal thinkers who had, he argued, become enablers for the neocons and thus were the real villains. More recently, the author Michael Lind wrote in the Nation that the "greatest threat to liberal internationalism comes not from without -- from neoconservatives, realists and isolationists who reject the liberal internationalist tradition as a whole -- but from within." He singled out Ikenberry, Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution, James Lindsay of the University of Texas at Austin and me. These "heretics," he said, "are as dangerous as the infidels." Heretics? Infidels? Sounds like the Spanish Inquisition.
In the blogosphere, pillorying Hillary Clinton is a full-time sport. Her slightest remark, such as a recent assertion that the country needs a female president because there is so much cleaning up to do, elicited this sort of wisdom: "Hillary isn't actually a woman, she's a cyborg, programmed by Bill, to be a ruthless political machine." Obama has come in for his share of abuse as well. His recent speech to Call to Renewal's Pentecost conference, in which he urged Democrats to recognize the role of faith in politics, earned him the following comment from the liberal blogger Atrios: "If . . . you think it's important to confirm and embrace the false idea that Democrats are hostile to religion in order to set yourself apart, then continue doing what you're doing." Left-liberal blog attacks on moderate liberals have reached the point where "mainstream media" bloggers such as Joe Klein at Time magazine are wading in to call for a truce, only to get lambasted themselves.
Students of American politics argue that partisan attacks have their own cycles. George W. Bush ran in 2000 on a platform of placing results over party. But after Sept. 11, 2001, the political advantages of take-no-prisoners, call-every-critic-a-traitor patriotism proved irresistible. And the political and media attack industry that has grown up as a result has too much at stake to give in to the calmer, blander beat of bipartisanship.
It's time, then, for a bipartisan backlash. Politicians who think we need bargaining to fix the crises we face should appear side by side with a friend from the other party -- the consistent policy of the admirably bipartisan co-chairmen of the 9/11 commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton. Candidates who accept that the winner of the 2008 election is going to need a lot of friends across the aisle -- not least to get out of Iraq -- should make a point of finding something to praise in the other party's platform. And as for the rest of us, the consumers of a steady diet of political vitriol, every time we read a partisan attack, we should shoot -- or at least spam -- the messenger.
Partisans Gone Wild, Part II: Web Rage (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301083.html) By Anne-Marie Slaughter, August 3, 2007
Anne-Marie Slaughter is dean of Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
A funny thing is happening in American politics: The fiercest battle is no longer between the left and the right but between partisanship and bipartisanship. The Bush administration, which has been notorious for playing to its hard-right base, has started reaching across the aisle, with its admirable immigration bill (even though it failed), with its new push for a diplomatic strategy toward North Korea and Iran, and above all with its choice of three seasoned moderates for important positions: Robert M. Gates as defense secretary, John D. Negroponte as deputy secretary of state and Robert B. Zoellick as World Bank president.
On the Democratic side, the opening last month of a new foreign policy think tank, the Center for a New American Security, struck a number of bipartisan notes. The Princeton Project on National Security, which I co-directed with fellow Princeton professor John Ikenberry, drew Republicans and Democrats together for more than 2 1/2 years to discuss new ideas, some of which have been endorsed by such presidential candidates as John McCain, a Republican, and John Edwards, a Democrat. Barack Obama is running on a return to a far more bipartisan approach to policy and a far less partisan approach to politics. (Full disclosure: I have contributed to Obama's and Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaigns.)
In short, some sanity may actually be returning to American politics. Perhaps the most interesting development is the belated realization by the Bush administration that its insistence on an ABC ("anything but Clinton") policy has proved deeply damaging.
But the predominant political reaction to this modest outbreak of common sense has been virulent opposition, from both right and left. The true believers in the Bush revolution are furious. John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, sounded the alarm in February with a broadside against the agreement that the State Department and its Asian negotiating partners had reached with North Korea, warning President Bush that it contradicted "fundamental premises" of his foreign policy. Next came yet another intra-administration battle over Iran policy, with David Wurmser, a top vice presidential aide, telling a conservative audience in May that Vice President Cheney believed that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's strategy of at least talking with Iranian officials about Iraq was failing.
From the left, many progressives have responded to the foreign policy failures of the Bush administration by trying to purge their fellow liberals. Tufts professor Tony Smith published a blistering essay on Iraq in The Washington Post several months ago, attacking not neoconservative policymakers but liberal thinkers who had, he argued, become enablers for the neocons and thus were the real villains. More recently, the author Michael Lind wrote in the Nation that the "greatest threat to liberal internationalism comes not from without -- from neoconservatives, realists and isolationists who reject the liberal internationalist tradition as a whole -- but from within." He singled out Ikenberry, Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution, James Lindsay of the University of Texas at Austin and me. These "heretics," he said, "are as dangerous as the infidels." Heretics? Infidels? Sounds like the Spanish Inquisition.
In the blogosphere, pillorying Hillary Clinton is a full-time sport. Her slightest remark, such as a recent assertion that the country needs a female president because there is so much cleaning up to do, elicited this sort of wisdom: "Hillary isn't actually a woman, she's a cyborg, programmed by Bill, to be a ruthless political machine." Obama has come in for his share of abuse as well. His recent speech to Call to Renewal's Pentecost conference, in which he urged Democrats to recognize the role of faith in politics, earned him the following comment from the liberal blogger Atrios: "If . . . you think it's important to confirm and embrace the false idea that Democrats are hostile to religion in order to set yourself apart, then continue doing what you're doing." Left-liberal blog attacks on moderate liberals have reached the point where "mainstream media" bloggers such as Joe Klein at Time magazine are wading in to call for a truce, only to get lambasted themselves.
Students of American politics argue that partisan attacks have their own cycles. George W. Bush ran in 2000 on a platform of placing results over party. But after Sept. 11, 2001, the political advantages of take-no-prisoners, call-every-critic-a-traitor patriotism proved irresistible. And the political and media attack industry that has grown up as a result has too much at stake to give in to the calmer, blander beat of bipartisanship.
It's time, then, for a bipartisan backlash. Politicians who think we need bargaining to fix the crises we face should appear side by side with a friend from the other party -- the consistent policy of the admirably bipartisan co-chairmen of the 9/11 commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton. Candidates who accept that the winner of the 2008 election is going to need a lot of friends across the aisle -- not least to get out of Iraq -- should make a point of finding something to praise in the other party's platform. And as for the rest of us, the consumers of a steady diet of political vitriol, every time we read a partisan attack, we should shoot -- or at least spam -- the messenger.
Partisans Gone Wild, Part II: Web Rage (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301083.html) By Anne-Marie Slaughter, August 3, 2007
2010 the voice judges crazy.
ASR
05-19 07:06 PM
I am silent visitor of this forum for last few months though, I seek some advice form you guys in forum. I just got I140(On May 5th 2008) approved and my priority date 23rd Jan 2004. As per the visa current bulletin I am with in the cutoff dates. I have job offer but I did not accept so far because I 140 was not approved but after I 140 I thought of changing the job (same offer) using AC21 portability, since I fall in current cutoff dates,
My question is this safe to change the job when priority date fall with in current cutoff dates?
GOT RFE on I 140 on Apri 1st 2008
RFE relied on MAY 1st 2008
I 140 aproved on May 05 2008
PD is 23 Jan 2004
My question is this safe to change the job when priority date fall with in current cutoff dates?
GOT RFE on I 140 on Apri 1st 2008
RFE relied on MAY 1st 2008
I 140 aproved on May 05 2008
PD is 23 Jan 2004
more...
kumsoft
07-17 05:43 PM
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22912
hair female judge on The Voice?
ivgclive
09-21 12:25 PM
D
more...
Pagal
04-26 03:05 PM
Hello,
Please report your employer to DOL for discriminatory pay practice, if you think the pay difference is solely 'cause of your immigration status.
And yes, you can change your job when you want through AC 21.. please browse the forum for AC21 process...good luck!
Please report your employer to DOL for discriminatory pay practice, if you think the pay difference is solely 'cause of your immigration status.
And yes, you can change your job when you want through AC 21.. please browse the forum for AC21 process...good luck!
hot Monica Brown Joins “The Voice”
wc_user
10-27 04:24 PM
I asked my attorney if we could anything about the delay in the issuance of EAD. My attorney mentioned that she would send an e-mail to USCIS. Is there an e-mail id that attorneys use to contact USCIS ? Offcourse, I could have asked my attorney, but I thought I would post the question here first.
more...
house the voice teaser
priya777
09-21 10:51 AM
i got ead(secondary person) yestesday.and also i applied H1 B which got approved 1 week back and i want to take SSN. so my question is with
what(H1B or EAD) i should apply for SSN). Do i need to apply SSN with EAD or H1 B? which one will be better ? please let me know.
what(H1B or EAD) i should apply for SSN). Do i need to apply SSN with EAD or H1 B? which one will be better ? please let me know.
tattoo talent show #39;The Voice#39; is
neeidd
04-23 03:53 PM
Hi ,
There is a job opening at client place and job opening title is "JAVA DEVELOPER/SR JAVA ENGINEER" and the responsibilities includes coding Java. I do not have approved Labor certification with me but my Labor application (Signed copy by me) say Job Title as "Programmer/Analyst" and responsibilities includes
"Analyze, design and develop applications using C++, Java, J2EE and Oracle."
Could you please let me know if I can work on EAD for the above job position at the
client place using AC21? I prefer not to talk with client if the labor and client job
requirements does not match.
Thanks
There is a job opening at client place and job opening title is "JAVA DEVELOPER/SR JAVA ENGINEER" and the responsibilities includes coding Java. I do not have approved Labor certification with me but my Labor application (Signed copy by me) say Job Title as "Programmer/Analyst" and responsibilities includes
"Analyze, design and develop applications using C++, Java, J2EE and Oracle."
Could you please let me know if I can work on EAD for the above job position at the
client place using AC21? I prefer not to talk with client if the labor and client job
requirements does not match.
Thanks
more...
pictures the voice judges performance.
GC_Applicant
07-15 11:28 AM
People, please sign the above petition to Chertoff.
We need lot more people to sign it. It wont taken more than a minute.
We need lot more people to sign it. It wont taken more than a minute.
dresses by fellow The Voice judges
acepb
12-19 07:37 PM
I have entered before on AP with 1 month left on the validity without any issues through Newark
more...
makeup The Voice judges to perform
tcfannin
01-12 07:50 AM
I was on H1 visa and laid off from job on 10/30/09. I got severance pay for Nov. and have the pay stubs. I applied for COS from H4 to F1 for my spouse (already in collage) and H1 to F2 for me on 12/9/09. Meanwhile immigration performed spot check at my ex-employers on 12/3/09, so they came to know that i was not working. My employer had not revoked H1 by then. Our COS application was received by USCIS on 12/14/2009, case is currently under Initial Review.
- Will the immigration officers who did spot check inform USCIS that i was out of status?
- Will case get rejected due to delay in applying for COS?
- Will there be any complications in transferring my H1 to new employer as i was out of status for about a month before i applied for COS?
- How to stop F2 COS if i get H1 transfer approved first?
- Will the immigration officers who did spot check inform USCIS that i was out of status?
- Will case get rejected due to delay in applying for COS?
- Will there be any complications in transferring my H1 to new employer as i was out of status for about a month before i applied for COS?
- How to stop F2 COS if i get H1 transfer approved first?
girlfriend NBC The Voice: Christina
aguy
10-16 12:48 AM
Hi,
I received my EAD today, but my I-140/I-485 are pending. Is the EAD of any use right now? I think I have to wait for the I-140 to be approved before changing jobs, right?
Thanks.
I received my EAD today, but my I-140/I-485 are pending. Is the EAD of any use right now? I think I have to wait for the I-140 to be approved before changing jobs, right?
Thanks.
hairstyles house the voice judges singing
vaishnavilakshmi
10-06 01:17 AM
HELLO FRIENDS,
I am not sure if this has been ever discussed or no but will appreciate any pointers on it : Can one keep extending the H4 visa even if EAD is been used?
Thanks In Advance.
Hi,
H4 goes void once u start using EAD.So where is the question of extension of h4.???If u donot use EAD,u can parallelly extend ur h4 visa until ur petitions are pending.
goodluck,
vaishu
I am not sure if this has been ever discussed or no but will appreciate any pointers on it : Can one keep extending the H4 visa even if EAD is been used?
Thanks In Advance.
Hi,
H4 goes void once u start using EAD.So where is the question of extension of h4.???If u donot use EAD,u can parallelly extend ur h4 visa until ur petitions are pending.
goodluck,
vaishu
rkdnc9
09-15 02:06 AM
Hello,
Please guide me in my situation.
I am on OPT right now which is valid thru May 2008. I have already applied for H1 through Company A in April this year. I got a job offer from Company B recently. I would like to join Company B and start working for it on my OPT. Company A failed to provide job for me so I wish to transfer my H1 (once after it is approved) to Company B. Now I have the following questions:
1. What happens to my OPT after I get approved for H1 through Company A?
2. Do I have to stop working for Company B as soon as I get my H1?
3. Can I transfer the H1 I get for Company A to Company B without any paystubs?
4. Can I refuse the H1 and continue to work for Company B on my OPT and then apply for fresh H1 in 2008?
5. Is there any possibility for Company A to cancel my status and make me go back to India?
Please help. I am totally lost and confused.....:confused:
Thanks in advance for any help..
Raj.
Please guide me in my situation.
I am on OPT right now which is valid thru May 2008. I have already applied for H1 through Company A in April this year. I got a job offer from Company B recently. I would like to join Company B and start working for it on my OPT. Company A failed to provide job for me so I wish to transfer my H1 (once after it is approved) to Company B. Now I have the following questions:
1. What happens to my OPT after I get approved for H1 through Company A?
2. Do I have to stop working for Company B as soon as I get my H1?
3. Can I transfer the H1 I get for Company A to Company B without any paystubs?
4. Can I refuse the H1 and continue to work for Company B on my OPT and then apply for fresh H1 in 2008?
5. Is there any possibility for Company A to cancel my status and make me go back to India?
Please help. I am totally lost and confused.....:confused:
Thanks in advance for any help..
Raj.
clif
06-28 12:57 PM
My wife filed I-539 for changing status from H-4 to F-1 at end of May. We have the receipt and the case is now pending. Is it possible for her to request cancellation of this change of status and continue in H-4 status? If so, does anyone know how to ask USCIS for this?
No comments:
Post a Comment