h1techSlave
05-01 09:48 AM
I have some black dots in my Control Panel? What is the meaning of a black dot?
And how does one give black dot to some one? When I try to add reputation to a post, I can only see I approve or I disapprove options. I would imagine I approve=green and I disapprove=red. Where does a black dot fit into this scheme?
how do u know if someone gives u red?
And how does one give black dot to some one? When I try to add reputation to a post, I can only see I approve or I disapprove options. I would imagine I approve=green and I disapprove=red. Where does a black dot fit into this scheme?
how do u know if someone gives u red?
wallpaper sin cara wrestler wiki.
gc28262
06-11 03:30 PM
I keep reading we should fight for out rights and all. I am just curious
where does it say if on is on H1B or F1, he or she has a right to get a GC. GC or citizenship is a privilege, we cant demand it or force someone to give it to us. Its a simple demand and supply situation, there are more visa seekers then there is availability and therefore there is a waiting period. i am not sure why we don't accept the simple fact that there are way too many people from developing country like ours moving to US, and not everyone can be accommodated ASAP. i think US has every right to do what it thinks is best for her, even if we don't agree with that,
And those who say its discrimination, discrimination is when people from Bihar are beaten up on the streets of mumbai cause they are taking jobs away from marathi manus. Had there been so many techies from around the world taking up jobs in India, we would have seen street lynching.
nitinboston,
If you feel you don't deserve a GC, we are fine with that.
However for most of the people on this forum, we deserve it.
Please watch this Aman Kapoor Video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqHz7IGoYWQ
"In order to ask for something, you should feel that you deserve it."
It is that simple !
where does it say if on is on H1B or F1, he or she has a right to get a GC. GC or citizenship is a privilege, we cant demand it or force someone to give it to us. Its a simple demand and supply situation, there are more visa seekers then there is availability and therefore there is a waiting period. i am not sure why we don't accept the simple fact that there are way too many people from developing country like ours moving to US, and not everyone can be accommodated ASAP. i think US has every right to do what it thinks is best for her, even if we don't agree with that,
And those who say its discrimination, discrimination is when people from Bihar are beaten up on the streets of mumbai cause they are taking jobs away from marathi manus. Had there been so many techies from around the world taking up jobs in India, we would have seen street lynching.
nitinboston,
If you feel you don't deserve a GC, we are fine with that.
However for most of the people on this forum, we deserve it.
Please watch this Aman Kapoor Video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqHz7IGoYWQ
"In order to ask for something, you should feel that you deserve it."
It is that simple !
bigboy007
06-02 03:21 PM
But all this applies to New cases right [dual intent option ]???? i still wish its after oct 2008 but as it reads it May 15 2007.
BTw where does it say H1B is not dual intent ?
BTw where does it say H1B is not dual intent ?
2011 sin cara wrestler wiki. sin
ssnd03
04-01 05:00 PM
First of all why do U wanna ask that? Its an employment based visa that ur GC is based on. So, ur employer shud ask that. Why are u asking IVans to do something which is not in their control??? I keep getting red and dont mind if I'm banned. But excuse me...u r misleading IVans. My point is this. We can protest, rally based on the delay. Thats pretty much we can do. Inquiring into a Government agency's internal affairs is none of ur business. And I repeat u dont have any rights to do that as u have NO direct link to USCIS. U have applied thru ur employer and ur employer shud speak for u. Do u even get it? Ur statements and arguments have no logic whatsoever and misleading.
Dard-E-Disco I have read your comments on this thread.. Frankly you are retarded and ignorant.
I485 is an individual application. It has nothing to do with the employer even in the EB cases. The basis for I485 can be an EB I140. USCIS is answerable to the employer for I140 and answerable to the immigrant for I485. However, I don't think you have the mental capability to understand this obvious law.
Immigrants don't get to vote and may not have other rights such a welfare, social securicty etc. But USA as the greatest democracy on earth provides almost all of the rights to citizens and foreigners alike. In fact you can complain to your local, state & federal lawmakers and they will help you in your problems.
And yes a foreigner has the right to complain about any govt. organization including USCIS if their processes are adversely effecting him or her. These are the basic principles of the US democracy.
Even though relatively US has one of the best functional govt.. sometimes it still takes lot of effort and time for the wheels to turn. Thats what IV is trying to achieve.
Having said that I doubt any of this will penetrate your thick skull. Dard-e-disco you are basically a retard!
Dard-E-Disco I have read your comments on this thread.. Frankly you are retarded and ignorant.
I485 is an individual application. It has nothing to do with the employer even in the EB cases. The basis for I485 can be an EB I140. USCIS is answerable to the employer for I140 and answerable to the immigrant for I485. However, I don't think you have the mental capability to understand this obvious law.
Immigrants don't get to vote and may not have other rights such a welfare, social securicty etc. But USA as the greatest democracy on earth provides almost all of the rights to citizens and foreigners alike. In fact you can complain to your local, state & federal lawmakers and they will help you in your problems.
And yes a foreigner has the right to complain about any govt. organization including USCIS if their processes are adversely effecting him or her. These are the basic principles of the US democracy.
Even though relatively US has one of the best functional govt.. sometimes it still takes lot of effort and time for the wheels to turn. Thats what IV is trying to achieve.
Having said that I doubt any of this will penetrate your thick skull. Dard-e-disco you are basically a retard!
more...
lg72
07-24 10:18 PM
fairboy and friends,
Could you please tell me how to check an ad on the AJE website? Can I check the ad for my case using my case number? My case is stuck in DBEC.
Thanks for your help.
Could you please tell me how to check an ad on the AJE website? Can I check the ad for my case using my case number? My case is stuck in DBEC.
Thanks for your help.
willwin
04-01 11:53 AM
If the system is flawed, any effort to work it out to get things done would seem incompetent and inefficient. First off, this guessing game by USCIS of estimating visa applications and asking for visa numbers from DHS is so neondartal and ridiculous.
Process must be automated and centralized to eliminate any human intervention in performing guesstimates. A pool of visas must be made available in the system and must remain available for the next year to be carried over if needs be. That would eliminate pressure on officials to play the game in the dark and rush like maniacs at the end of the fiscal year to catch frogs!
With all the revenue and system they have, do you think this is so tough to streamline? I doubt.
They can, at the minimum, have the cases in sequence, process per FIFO, control PD movements logically. The minimum they can do, easily.
Process must be automated and centralized to eliminate any human intervention in performing guesstimates. A pool of visas must be made available in the system and must remain available for the next year to be carried over if needs be. That would eliminate pressure on officials to play the game in the dark and rush like maniacs at the end of the fiscal year to catch frogs!
With all the revenue and system they have, do you think this is so tough to streamline? I doubt.
They can, at the minimum, have the cases in sequence, process per FIFO, control PD movements logically. The minimum they can do, easily.
more...
cbpds
12-11 03:30 PM
Hi Pappu and IV seniors,
I will contribute to IV generously(monetory and otherwise) if you help us with the prefiling of EAD for approved 140's, atleast USCIS will get money from us every year and it helps us too.
We dont mind standing last in the queue for another 10 years as long as we have EAD.
HELP !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can we check with CIS if they plan to pursue this option (pre-485 step)?
Is there a plan to start a campaign for this? I would be willing to contribute (monetary and effort) if there's such a plan...
I can see there are a lot of folks who would welcome such a plan.
I will contribute to IV generously(monetory and otherwise) if you help us with the prefiling of EAD for approved 140's, atleast USCIS will get money from us every year and it helps us too.
We dont mind standing last in the queue for another 10 years as long as we have EAD.
HELP !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can we check with CIS if they plan to pursue this option (pre-485 step)?
Is there a plan to start a campaign for this? I would be willing to contribute (monetary and effort) if there's such a plan...
I can see there are a lot of folks who would welcome such a plan.
2010 sin cara wiki wrestler. wwe
vbkris77
12-10 06:34 PM
Biggest mistake or unlucky whoever missed July 07 fiasco.
Probably both!!! It ain't gonna happen again unless CIR passes or DoS changes their strategy.
Probably both!!! It ain't gonna happen again unless CIR passes or DoS changes their strategy.
more...
Jimi_Hendrix
11-08 07:02 PM
California U.S. House results by county
Alameda - District 9 100.0% of 548 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Barbara Lee (I)
Dem 117,157 85.6%
John den Dulk
GOP 15,647 11.4%
James Eyer Lib 4,001 2.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 10 100.0% of 88 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Ellen Tauscher (I)
Dem 12,005 60.6%
Darcy Linn
GOP 7,792 39.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 11 100.0% of 99 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Jerry McNerney
Dem 15,385 62.2%
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 9,348 37.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 13 100.0% of 484 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Fortney Stark (I)
Dem 83,777 74.2%
George Bruno
GOP 29,127 25.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alpine - District 3 100.0% of 5 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Bill Durston
Dem 258 49.8%
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 243 46.9%
Douglas Tuma Lib 14 2.7%
Michael Roskey PFP 3 0.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Amador - District 3 100.0% of 59 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 8,408 62.6%
Bill Durston
Dem 4,633 34.5%
Douglas Tuma Lib 277 2.1%
Michael Roskey PFP 121 0.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Butte - District 2 100.0% of 139 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 23,958 56.0%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 17,053 39.9%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 1,743 4.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Butte - District 4 100.0% of 36 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 5,380 54.8%
Charlie Brown
Dem 3,830 39.0%
Dan Warren Lib 605 6.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Calaveras - District 3 100.0% of 30 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 9,092 60.4%
Bill Durston
Dem 5,332 35.4%
Douglas Tuma Lib 392 2.6%
Michael Roskey PFP 229 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Colusa - District 2 100.0% of 17 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 3,208 71.2%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 1,211 26.9%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 87 1.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Contra Costa - District 7 100.0% of 325 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Miller (I)
Dem 60,515 86.2%
Camden McConnell Lib 9,681 13.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Contra Costa - District 10 100.0% of 566 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Ellen Tauscher (I)
Dem 78,029 68.2%
Darcy Linn
GOP 36,436 31.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Contra Costa - District 11 100.0% of 141 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Jerry McNerney
Dem 22,853 54.0%
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 19,459 46.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Del Norte - District 1 90.0% of 20 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 3,439 57.1%
John Jones
GOP 2,398 39.8%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 106 1.8%
Timothy Stock PFP 85 1.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
El Dorado - District 4 100.0% of 150 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 25,650 50.5%
Charlie Brown
Dem 22,582 44.4%
Dan Warren Lib 2,590 5.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Fresno - District 18 100.0% of 5 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Kanno
GOP 317 56.7%
Dennis Cardoza (I)
Dem 242 43.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Fresno - District 19 100.0% of 220 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Radanovich (I)
GOP 28,106 58.7%
TJ Cox
Dem 19,783 41.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Fresno - District 21 100.0% of 265 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Devin Nunes (I)
GOP 37,210 65.8%
Steven Haze
Dem 17,353 30.7%
John Miller Grn 1,989 3.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Glenn - District 2 100.0% of 33 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 5,299 71.7%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 1,915 25.9%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 178 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Humboldt - District 1 100.0% of 152 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 26,617 65.8%
John Jones
GOP 11,910 29.4%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 1,327 3.3%
Timothy Stock PFP 611 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Imperial - District 51 100.0% of 146 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Bob Filner (I)
Dem 11,338 66.5%
Blake Miles
GOP 5,270 30.9%
Dan Litwin Lib 435 2.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Inyo - District 25 100.0% of 27 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Buck McKeon (I)
GOP 3,244 61.3%
Robert Rodriguez
Dem 1,821 34.4%
David Erickson Lib 225 4.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Kern - District 22 100.0% of 442 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Kevin McCarthy
GOP 81,725 74.4%
Sharon Beery
Dem 28,059 25.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Lake - District 1 100.0% of 52 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 9,546 62.8%
John Jones
GOP 4,959 32.6%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 362 2.4%
Timothy Stock PFP 335 2.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Lassen - District 4 100.0% of 35 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 4,546 60.1%
Charlie Brown
Dem 2,544 33.6%
Dan Warren Lib 479 6.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 22 100.0% of 42 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Kevin McCarthy
GOP 8,577 63.2%
Sharon Beery
Dem 5,001 36.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 25 100.0% of 299 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Buck McKeon (I)
GOP 61,696 61.5%
Robert Rodriguez
Dem 34,403 34.3%
David Erickson Lib 4,210 4.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 26 100.0% of 271 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
David Dreier (I)
GOP 59,108 57.0%
Cynthia Matthews
Dem 39,770 38.4%
Ted Brown Lib 3,098 3.0%
Elliott Graham AIP 1,646 1.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 27 100.0% of 348 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Brad Sherman (I)
Dem 82,571 69.0%
Peter Hankwitz
GOP 37,163 31.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 28 100.0% of 277 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Howard Berman (I)
Dem 70,560 74.0%
Stanley Kesselman
GOP 18,210 19.1%
Byron De Lear Grn 3,340 3.5%
Kelley Ross Lib 3,190 3.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 29 100.0% of 369 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Adam Schiff (I)
Dem 79,001 63.6%
William Bodell
GOP 34,184 27.5%
William Paparian Grn 6,821 5.5%
Lynda Llamas PFP 2,244 1.8%
Jim Keller Lib 1,933 1.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 30 100.0% of 504 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Henry Waxman (I)
Dem 130,787 71.4%
David Jones
GOP 48,614 26.5%
Adele Cannon PFP 3,895 2.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 32 100.0% of 277 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Hilda Solis (I)
Dem 67,453 83.0%
Leland Faegre Lib 13,824 17.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 34 100.0% of 222 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lucille Roybal-Allard (I)
Dem 50,961 76.9%
Wayne Miller
GOP 15,272 23.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 35 100.0% of 295 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Maxine Waters (I)
Dem 72,114 83.7%
Gordon Mego AIP 7,314 8.5%
Paul Ireland Lib 6,761 7.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 9 100.0% of 548 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Barbara Lee (I)
Dem 117,157 85.6%
John den Dulk
GOP 15,647 11.4%
James Eyer Lib 4,001 2.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 10 100.0% of 88 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Ellen Tauscher (I)
Dem 12,005 60.6%
Darcy Linn
GOP 7,792 39.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 11 100.0% of 99 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Jerry McNerney
Dem 15,385 62.2%
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 9,348 37.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alameda - District 13 100.0% of 484 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Fortney Stark (I)
Dem 83,777 74.2%
George Bruno
GOP 29,127 25.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Alpine - District 3 100.0% of 5 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Bill Durston
Dem 258 49.8%
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 243 46.9%
Douglas Tuma Lib 14 2.7%
Michael Roskey PFP 3 0.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Amador - District 3 100.0% of 59 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 8,408 62.6%
Bill Durston
Dem 4,633 34.5%
Douglas Tuma Lib 277 2.1%
Michael Roskey PFP 121 0.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Butte - District 2 100.0% of 139 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 23,958 56.0%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 17,053 39.9%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 1,743 4.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Butte - District 4 100.0% of 36 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 5,380 54.8%
Charlie Brown
Dem 3,830 39.0%
Dan Warren Lib 605 6.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Calaveras - District 3 100.0% of 30 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 9,092 60.4%
Bill Durston
Dem 5,332 35.4%
Douglas Tuma Lib 392 2.6%
Michael Roskey PFP 229 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Colusa - District 2 100.0% of 17 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 3,208 71.2%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 1,211 26.9%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 87 1.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Contra Costa - District 7 100.0% of 325 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Miller (I)
Dem 60,515 86.2%
Camden McConnell Lib 9,681 13.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Contra Costa - District 10 100.0% of 566 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Ellen Tauscher (I)
Dem 78,029 68.2%
Darcy Linn
GOP 36,436 31.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Contra Costa - District 11 100.0% of 141 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Jerry McNerney
Dem 22,853 54.0%
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 19,459 46.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Del Norte - District 1 90.0% of 20 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 3,439 57.1%
John Jones
GOP 2,398 39.8%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 106 1.8%
Timothy Stock PFP 85 1.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
El Dorado - District 4 100.0% of 150 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 25,650 50.5%
Charlie Brown
Dem 22,582 44.4%
Dan Warren Lib 2,590 5.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Fresno - District 18 100.0% of 5 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Kanno
GOP 317 56.7%
Dennis Cardoza (I)
Dem 242 43.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Fresno - District 19 100.0% of 220 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Radanovich (I)
GOP 28,106 58.7%
TJ Cox
Dem 19,783 41.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Fresno - District 21 100.0% of 265 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Devin Nunes (I)
GOP 37,210 65.8%
Steven Haze
Dem 17,353 30.7%
John Miller Grn 1,989 3.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Glenn - District 2 100.0% of 33 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 5,299 71.7%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 1,915 25.9%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 178 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Humboldt - District 1 100.0% of 152 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 26,617 65.8%
John Jones
GOP 11,910 29.4%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 1,327 3.3%
Timothy Stock PFP 611 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Imperial - District 51 100.0% of 146 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Bob Filner (I)
Dem 11,338 66.5%
Blake Miles
GOP 5,270 30.9%
Dan Litwin Lib 435 2.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Inyo - District 25 100.0% of 27 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Buck McKeon (I)
GOP 3,244 61.3%
Robert Rodriguez
Dem 1,821 34.4%
David Erickson Lib 225 4.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Kern - District 22 100.0% of 442 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Kevin McCarthy
GOP 81,725 74.4%
Sharon Beery
Dem 28,059 25.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Lake - District 1 100.0% of 52 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 9,546 62.8%
John Jones
GOP 4,959 32.6%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 362 2.4%
Timothy Stock PFP 335 2.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Lassen - District 4 100.0% of 35 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 4,546 60.1%
Charlie Brown
Dem 2,544 33.6%
Dan Warren Lib 479 6.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 22 100.0% of 42 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Kevin McCarthy
GOP 8,577 63.2%
Sharon Beery
Dem 5,001 36.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 25 100.0% of 299 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Buck McKeon (I)
GOP 61,696 61.5%
Robert Rodriguez
Dem 34,403 34.3%
David Erickson Lib 4,210 4.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 26 100.0% of 271 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
David Dreier (I)
GOP 59,108 57.0%
Cynthia Matthews
Dem 39,770 38.4%
Ted Brown Lib 3,098 3.0%
Elliott Graham AIP 1,646 1.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 27 100.0% of 348 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Brad Sherman (I)
Dem 82,571 69.0%
Peter Hankwitz
GOP 37,163 31.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 28 100.0% of 277 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Howard Berman (I)
Dem 70,560 74.0%
Stanley Kesselman
GOP 18,210 19.1%
Byron De Lear Grn 3,340 3.5%
Kelley Ross Lib 3,190 3.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 29 100.0% of 369 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Adam Schiff (I)
Dem 79,001 63.6%
William Bodell
GOP 34,184 27.5%
William Paparian Grn 6,821 5.5%
Lynda Llamas PFP 2,244 1.8%
Jim Keller Lib 1,933 1.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 30 100.0% of 504 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Henry Waxman (I)
Dem 130,787 71.4%
David Jones
GOP 48,614 26.5%
Adele Cannon PFP 3,895 2.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 32 100.0% of 277 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Hilda Solis (I)
Dem 67,453 83.0%
Leland Faegre Lib 13,824 17.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 34 100.0% of 222 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lucille Roybal-Allard (I)
Dem 50,961 76.9%
Wayne Miller
GOP 15,272 23.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Los Angeles - District 35 100.0% of 295 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Maxine Waters (I)
Dem 72,114 83.7%
Gordon Mego AIP 7,314 8.5%
Paul Ireland Lib 6,761 7.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
hair sin cara wrestler wallpaper. Sin Cara Unmasked: PWPIX.
hpandey
06-11 10:43 AM
In a weird way, I feel this is good news. An old saying in China says 'Things will turn to their opposite at their extremes'. The moment before dawn is the darkest hour of the day.
I agree with you buddy. At least USCIS has removed uncertainity from the visa bulletin which is in one way a good thing. Now at least no one would keep a thread open every month for next month's prediction.
I still have a hope that anything can happen . Being pessimistic never helped anyone. Look what happened at the end of the 80's when all the illegals were given GC and how visa recapture happened in 2000. You never know what the future holds.
I agree with you buddy. At least USCIS has removed uncertainity from the visa bulletin which is in one way a good thing. Now at least no one would keep a thread open every month for next month's prediction.
I still have a hope that anything can happen . Being pessimistic never helped anyone. Look what happened at the end of the 80's when all the illegals were given GC and how visa recapture happened in 2000. You never know what the future holds.
more...
paisa
07-06 03:25 PM
can someone tell me who is core? I hear core mentioned all the time here
hot sin cara wrestler wiki. sin
eb3_2004
03-11 10:07 AM
Hi Channj,
I am facing issues with re-financing with EAD thru Suntrust...Is there a way I can quote u to make the underwriter understand my EAD status....
I am facing issues with re-financing with EAD thru Suntrust...Is there a way I can quote u to make the underwriter understand my EAD status....
more...
house wwe sin cara wiki. Wrestling
chanduv23
07-11 12:22 PM
employer can withdraw the 140 any time before the approval of 485 - there is no time limit.
That is right. But one MUST NOT worry about it as long as they have a job in hand with same or similar duties. Things to watch out are
(1) AC21 letter
(2) G28 properly filed
(3) NOID
(4) Denial - happened in some cases and reopened through MTR
Now even if your old employer did not revoke 140 you may get an RFE.
That is right. But one MUST NOT worry about it as long as they have a job in hand with same or similar duties. Things to watch out are
(1) AC21 letter
(2) G28 properly filed
(3) NOID
(4) Denial - happened in some cases and reopened through MTR
Now even if your old employer did not revoke 140 you may get an RFE.
tattoo sin cara wrestler wiki.
Jaime
09-12 05:04 PM
Bump
more...
pictures sin cara wrestler wallpaper.
stucklabor
08-15 01:34 PM
All,
Some persuasive articles have been written.
However, we intend to submit these as Op-Eds. In general, Op-Eds are more effective and more likely to be accepted when they are written in the first person. There is really no need to go into the various minutiae of the legal immigration system. Also, please try not to use form names like I485, or other technical terms like priority date, retrogression etc. It is probably best to use a generic term like 'backlog'. The newspaper editors - and the normal reader - are looking for how the broken system affected you, gentle writer. The very first article in this whole thread was really the best one since it was written from the first person and brought a face, a personality to paper.
My 2c.
Some persuasive articles have been written.
However, we intend to submit these as Op-Eds. In general, Op-Eds are more effective and more likely to be accepted when they are written in the first person. There is really no need to go into the various minutiae of the legal immigration system. Also, please try not to use form names like I485, or other technical terms like priority date, retrogression etc. It is probably best to use a generic term like 'backlog'. The newspaper editors - and the normal reader - are looking for how the broken system affected you, gentle writer. The very first article in this whole thread was really the best one since it was written from the first person and brought a face, a personality to paper.
My 2c.
dresses sin cara wrestler wiki. wwe
ragz4u
03-15 08:32 AM
Did anyone else get through? I was trying www.capitolhearings.org Dirksen226!
more...
makeup sin cara wrestler wiki. sin
svr_76
09-14 06:20 PM
GCTest..you are right. I am with you.
Rather I would like to add more items to what u have listed-
1. Its wrong for EB2 filers to find/marry a us citizen. That will be unethical of them to do as they will be jumping lines. Because u would be unable to do if u would have married non-citizen..so based on GCTest's logic please dont marry us citizen or if u have marriued continue to only use you EB2 application for processing :-)
2. Also people who are now planning of using EB5 (assuming u have now saved/gather enough money). So EB2, EB3 or other people u have been saving money and are now thinking of risking ur money/career/life on EB5 filing..please dont do that...because that will be unethical.....u r doing it bcos u now have money. Per GCTest's logic u did not having money u filed ur EB2 or EB3 application so if u have money now...dont try to use it.
GCTest...can u think of other conditions ...do post them.
Oh yes corollary to #1. Also bachelors in EB2/EB3 category make sure u dont fall inlove and plan to marry any girl/boy from the countries which are current. Help GCTest's cause.
:-)
Rather I would like to add more items to what u have listed-
1. Its wrong for EB2 filers to find/marry a us citizen. That will be unethical of them to do as they will be jumping lines. Because u would be unable to do if u would have married non-citizen..so based on GCTest's logic please dont marry us citizen or if u have marriued continue to only use you EB2 application for processing :-)
2. Also people who are now planning of using EB5 (assuming u have now saved/gather enough money). So EB2, EB3 or other people u have been saving money and are now thinking of risking ur money/career/life on EB5 filing..please dont do that...because that will be unethical.....u r doing it bcos u now have money. Per GCTest's logic u did not having money u filed ur EB2 or EB3 application so if u have money now...dont try to use it.
GCTest...can u think of other conditions ...do post them.
Oh yes corollary to #1. Also bachelors in EB2/EB3 category make sure u dont fall inlove and plan to marry any girl/boy from the countries which are current. Help GCTest's cause.
:-)
girlfriend sin cara wrestler wiki. sin
fullerene
06-03 10:25 AM
Retrogress is against the principle of laws. Think about the reason that the government wants provide a path for these undocumented people is the government wants secure the border. Before the law take effective, they need find a way to take care of these people because new law can not have retrogress. Same should apply to the legal immigrants. When the new law is being discussed, it can not terminate or replace the current law. I don’t think people interpret the words correctly. I believe introduction means the period of time before the signed new law replaces the current one.
Law execution shall favor the executed person. I don’t know how to describe it in a professional matter. I give an example,
Person A is sentenced to death and will be executed on June 15th. However, new law takes effective on June 5, and according to new law Person A shall be sentenced 20 years in prison. So Person A can appeal to change the sentence.
On the other hand, Person A is sentenced to 10 years and will be executed on June 5th. But new law will take effective which gives 20 years in prison. So will the person get a severer penalty? I don’t think so.
In addition to that, when a new law is dramatically changed, compared to the current law, an introduction period is usually applied. During this period of time dual status may apply. People may choose either law which is favorable for them. Of course, because of the uncertainty, lawyers love this dual status to get more business.
Law execution shall favor the executed person. I don’t know how to describe it in a professional matter. I give an example,
Person A is sentenced to death and will be executed on June 15th. However, new law takes effective on June 5, and according to new law Person A shall be sentenced 20 years in prison. So Person A can appeal to change the sentence.
On the other hand, Person A is sentenced to 10 years and will be executed on June 5th. But new law will take effective which gives 20 years in prison. So will the person get a severer penalty? I don’t think so.
In addition to that, when a new law is dramatically changed, compared to the current law, an introduction period is usually applied. During this period of time dual status may apply. People may choose either law which is favorable for them. Of course, because of the uncertainty, lawyers love this dual status to get more business.
hairstyles sin cara unmasked and rey
ragz4u
03-08 02:02 PM
what`s happening....
Please be more specific when you ask a question
Please be more specific when you ask a question
gapala
09-09 10:15 AM
[quote] to add to the conversation on the price -> locals are also experiencing a glut of money due to the economic boom in the last 5 years or so. Small businesses have really taken off in a big way exporting to Europe/ US. Investors in the stock market have also hit the jackpot. And, once you have money, for most Indians the safest option to invest is in property or gold.
Also better salaries all around fueled by attrition of talent to the IT sector. [quote]
This may be correct to certain extent but only the elite class and creamy layer of 1.8% of total population. When we look at the bigger picture of the country, I could not connect the dots. GDP is just above $2500 and PPP is about $3300. How in the world will you justify $200,000 to $300,000. Plus the cost of financing the purchase.
In simple terms, median home price is 100 times the GDP and life expectancy in india is 70 years. average work life span is 40 years. Home Mortgages are 15, 20 or 25 years in India which will cover only 1/4th of the median price of a home based on even anticipated high GDP growth and considering moderate increase in cost of living. Given that the risk of default is huge and banks are running at very high risk. I believe buying a house is a big gamble in India and more to that for Banks, lending is also a big gamble.
Note that according to banks, investment in apartments capitalize only over 25 years in india. (Rent vs. Own) Is this correct? Average rentals in ONLY Big cities are Rs. 12000 ($275 / month $3300 a year) to 15000 ($340 / month $4000 a year) for the same 1000 sqft 2 bedroom apartments which itself is above the GDP :). What that tells me, even the rentals are also not affordable to majority of the population. Back to captalization part 4000 * 25 = 100,000. which is half of the investment... add the alternate investment value for 25 years, capitalization will be way below 50%.
That means it will take more than 50 years to capatilize the investment. This is more that Mod average work life span of 40 years. Note that Maintenance and Taxes for 25 years excluded in above calc. Are banks stupid?
I do not know what to tell ya man! To me its really scary
A small credit crunch (crisis is not required) might bring the entire economy to floor.
fine print: (Above analysis applies only for working taxpaying people like us who does not have unaccounted money.)
Also better salaries all around fueled by attrition of talent to the IT sector. [quote]
This may be correct to certain extent but only the elite class and creamy layer of 1.8% of total population. When we look at the bigger picture of the country, I could not connect the dots. GDP is just above $2500 and PPP is about $3300. How in the world will you justify $200,000 to $300,000. Plus the cost of financing the purchase.
In simple terms, median home price is 100 times the GDP and life expectancy in india is 70 years. average work life span is 40 years. Home Mortgages are 15, 20 or 25 years in India which will cover only 1/4th of the median price of a home based on even anticipated high GDP growth and considering moderate increase in cost of living. Given that the risk of default is huge and banks are running at very high risk. I believe buying a house is a big gamble in India and more to that for Banks, lending is also a big gamble.
Note that according to banks, investment in apartments capitalize only over 25 years in india. (Rent vs. Own) Is this correct? Average rentals in ONLY Big cities are Rs. 12000 ($275 / month $3300 a year) to 15000 ($340 / month $4000 a year) for the same 1000 sqft 2 bedroom apartments which itself is above the GDP :). What that tells me, even the rentals are also not affordable to majority of the population. Back to captalization part 4000 * 25 = 100,000. which is half of the investment... add the alternate investment value for 25 years, capitalization will be way below 50%.
That means it will take more than 50 years to capatilize the investment. This is more that Mod average work life span of 40 years. Note that Maintenance and Taxes for 25 years excluded in above calc. Are banks stupid?
I do not know what to tell ya man! To me its really scary
A small credit crunch (crisis is not required) might bring the entire economy to floor.
fine print: (Above analysis applies only for working taxpaying people like us who does not have unaccounted money.)
solraj
03-17 07:54 PM
Guys as it states both you and your spouse need to have an SSN not ITIN.
So if one has ssn other has ITIN you are not qualified.
So if one has ssn other has ITIN you are not qualified.
0 comments:
Post a Comment