toprasad
03-09 08:02 PM
Background - My wife's immigration timeline
H1-B 01/2000 to 8/2001
Moved to O-3 as dependent due to old 6 yr H1-B rule.
O-3 9/2001 to 5/2006
Stepped out of the US in May 2006
The intention was to get a full 6 yr H1-B (decoupling didn't exist)
Questions while applying for H1-B to reclaim reminder of 6 yrs in H1-B
1) Can she apply for H1-B while she is in India?
2) Can she enter the country as my dependant and work on approved H1-B?
H1-B 01/2000 to 8/2001
Moved to O-3 as dependent due to old 6 yr H1-B rule.
O-3 9/2001 to 5/2006
Stepped out of the US in May 2006
The intention was to get a full 6 yr H1-B (decoupling didn't exist)
Questions while applying for H1-B to reclaim reminder of 6 yrs in H1-B
1) Can she apply for H1-B while she is in India?
2) Can she enter the country as my dependant and work on approved H1-B?
wallpaper replace Buster Posey?
raviram1980
03-13 03:18 AM
Hi there,
Can someone please reply to my question?
Thanks,
Ravi
Can someone please reply to my question?
Thanks,
Ravi
munnu77
04-04 12:01 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html
may visa dtes r not out yet
may visa dtes r not out yet
2011 Who wants to the welcomed
anzerraja
07-19 08:03 PM
There is a funding drive in this other thread towards reimbursing Aman's and other core team member's expenses towards IV's administrative costs.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10708
Could you please pledge an amount ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10708
Could you please pledge an amount ?
more...
Bolt
03-27 08:41 PM
Hi,
I was an employee with company A till march 2008 and i kept a H1b transfer to
company B on march 24th 2008. I was working to company B for an year
on receipt number applied for h1b transfer at USCIS. I got an RFE with
company B in sept 2008 mean while my I-94 got expired on August 2008.
Company B answered the RFE and submitted to USCIS on October 2008.
After waiting for H1B transfer to get approved it got denied on march 10th
2009.
Now i wanted to change my status from H1b to F1(CPT). My questions are
1. If i apply for transfer from H1B to F1 will i be getting New I-94 from
USCIS?
2. Should i be going back to india for getting stamped after i change my
status to F1 ?
3. Can i be on a student status from the day i receive the receipt notice
from USCIS for change of status ?
I would really appreciate your help regarding this issue..
I was an employee with company A till march 2008 and i kept a H1b transfer to
company B on march 24th 2008. I was working to company B for an year
on receipt number applied for h1b transfer at USCIS. I got an RFE with
company B in sept 2008 mean while my I-94 got expired on August 2008.
Company B answered the RFE and submitted to USCIS on October 2008.
After waiting for H1B transfer to get approved it got denied on march 10th
2009.
Now i wanted to change my status from H1b to F1(CPT). My questions are
1. If i apply for transfer from H1B to F1 will i be getting New I-94 from
USCIS?
2. Should i be going back to india for getting stamped after i change my
status to F1 ?
3. Can i be on a student status from the day i receive the receipt notice
from USCIS for change of status ?
I would really appreciate your help regarding this issue..
rexjenn
07-19 08:23 PM
...
more...
pappu
12-07 02:55 PM
Can someone please provide live updates on what is happening on the floor now? I can't open video links from work and there are many more that can't open video links from work.
Thanks :confused:
pls focus on calling lawmakers at this time pls.
Thanks :confused:
pls focus on calling lawmakers at this time pls.
2010 About Buster Posey#39;s Ankle
luckydog
10-09 08:14 PM
Are you one of the �Faces of America (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.d753808ed0b23b5a64bc77ce843f6d1a/?vgnextoid=41a363074864d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=41a363074864d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD)�?
USCIS wants to hear your story!
Each of us has an immigration story to tell. Many Americans can relate a unique journey to citizenship made by ourselves or by our families before us. It is important for every American to recognize those who have made great sacrifices to become American citizens and how their unique contributions have greatly enriched our nation.
The Faces of America section of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services website allows you the opportunity to share your immigration story with the nation. Please fill out the information below and tell us your story.
Please click here to participate: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.d753808ed0b23b5a64bc77ce843f6d1a/?vgnextoid=41a363074864d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=41a363074864d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
USCIS wants to hear your story!
Each of us has an immigration story to tell. Many Americans can relate a unique journey to citizenship made by ourselves or by our families before us. It is important for every American to recognize those who have made great sacrifices to become American citizens and how their unique contributions have greatly enriched our nation.
The Faces of America section of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services website allows you the opportunity to share your immigration story with the nation. Please fill out the information below and tell us your story.
Please click here to participate: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.d753808ed0b23b5a64bc77ce843f6d1a/?vgnextoid=41a363074864d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=41a363074864d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
more...
ravi98
09-28 09:42 AM
Ten Economic Facts about Immigration - Brookings Institution (http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2010/09_immigration_greenstone_looney.aspx)
A major economic concern is how immigrants influence the wages and employment prospects of U.S. workers. The economic impacts of immigration vary tremendously, depending on whether immigrants are unskilled agricultural laborers, for example, or highly skilled PhD computer scientists. Although their consequences are often conflated, it is constructive to examine the impacts of low-skilled and high-skilled immigrants independently.
Is it possible for the administration to do a study on this matter through a commission - and take its recommendations to formulate the laws accordingly - and immediately? This takes away the usual BS that politicians from both side dish us?
A major economic concern is how immigrants influence the wages and employment prospects of U.S. workers. The economic impacts of immigration vary tremendously, depending on whether immigrants are unskilled agricultural laborers, for example, or highly skilled PhD computer scientists. Although their consequences are often conflated, it is constructive to examine the impacts of low-skilled and high-skilled immigrants independently.
Is it possible for the administration to do a study on this matter through a commission - and take its recommendations to formulate the laws accordingly - and immediately? This takes away the usual BS that politicians from both side dish us?
hair replace Buster Posey?
hemasar
06-21 10:31 AM
My VISA stamped expired long back. I have valid H1 extension and my I94 is valid till October 30 2007. I am in the process of 8 th year H1 extension. Do I need to revalidate my visa to apply I � 485?
I hope lots of us may sail in the same boat. Any answer guys?
My PD is 03-25-2005.
I hope lots of us may sail in the same boat. Any answer guys?
My PD is 03-25-2005.
more...
willIWill
04-06 03:00 PM
I came across this recently. Not sure if it was posted here earlier, it is important enough to be aware of, as it is directly from the Horse's mouth.
USCIS - Practical Immigration Consequences for Foreign Workers in a Slowing Economy (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=67cd9369e6367210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=2dd6dbbb86c3e110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD)
USCIS - Practical Immigration Consequences for Foreign Workers in a Slowing Economy (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=67cd9369e6367210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=2dd6dbbb86c3e110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD)
hot Team MVP: Buster Posey
martinvisalaw
03-18 03:57 PM
Yes. The petition will be like a regular change of employer H-1B petition. The lawyers will tell you what documents they need from you when filing the company's H-1B petition.
more...
house last year of uster posey,
Macaca
05-05 07:15 AM
Democrats' Momentum Is Stalling (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402262.html) Amid Iraq Debate, Priorities On Domestic Agenda Languish By Jonathan Weisman and Lyndsey Layton (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jonathan+weisman+and+lyndsey+layton/) Washington Post Staff Writers, Saturday, May 5, 2007
In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats' domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
But now that initial progress has foundered as Washington policymakers have been consumed with the debate over the Iraq war. Not a single priority on the Democrats' agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the "do nothing" tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them.
"We cannot be a one-trick pony," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who helped engineer his party's takeover of Congress as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "People voted for change, but Iraq, the economy and Washington, D.C., [corruption] all tied for first place. We need to do them all."
The "Six for '06" policy agenda on which Democrats campaigned last year was supposed to consist of low-hanging fruit, plucked and put in the basket to allow Congress to move on to tougher targets. House Democrats took just 10 days to pass a minimum-wage increase, a bill to implement most of the homeland security recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, a measure allowing federal funding for stem cell research, another to cut student-loan rates, a bill allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices under Medicare, and a rollback of tax breaks for oil and gas companies to finance alternative-energy research.
The Senate struck out on its own, with a broad overhaul of the rules on lobbying Congress.
Not one of those bills has been signed into law. President Bush signed 16 measures into law through April, six more than were signed by this time in the previous Congress. But beyond a huge domestic spending bill that wrapped up work left undone by Republicans last year, the list of achievements is modest: a beefed-up board to oversee congressional pages in the wake of the Mark Foley scandal, and the renaming of six post offices, including one for Gerald R. Ford in Vail, Colo., as well as two courthouses, including one for Rush Limbaugh Sr. in Cape Girardeau, Mo.
The minimum-wage bill got stalled in a fight with the Senate over tax breaks to go along with the wage increase. In frustration, Democratic leaders inserted a minimum-wage agreement into a bill to fund the Iraq war, only to see it vetoed.
Similar homeland security bills were passed by the House and the Senate, only to languish as attention shifted to the Iraq debate. Last week, family members of those killed on Sept. 11, 2001, gathered in Washington to demand action.
"We've waited five and a half years since 9/11," said Carie Lemack, whose mother died aboard one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York. "We waited three years since the 9/11 commission. We can't wait anymore."
House and Senate staff members have begun meeting, with the goal of reporting out a final bill by Memorial Day, but they concede that the deadline is likely to slip, in part because members of the homeland security committees of both chambers, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the two intelligence committees all want their say. The irony, Lemack said, is that such cumbersomeness is precisely why the Sept. 11 commission recommended the creation of powerful umbrella security committees with such broad jurisdiction that other panels could not muscle their way in. That was one recommendation Congress largely disregarded.
The Medicare drug-negotiations bill died in the Senate, after Republicans refused to let it come up for debate. House Democrats are threatening to attach the bill to must-pass government funding bills.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, has proposed his own student-loan legislation, but it is to be part of a huge higher-education bill that may not reach the committee until June.
The House's relatively simple energy bill faces a similar fate. The Senate has in mind a much larger bill that would ease bringing alternative fuels to market, regulate oil and gas futures trading, raise vehicle and appliance efficiency standards, and reform federal royalty payments to finance new energy technologies.
The voters seem to have noticed the stall. An ABC News-Washington Post poll last month found that 73 percent of Americans believe Congress has done "not too much" or "nothing at all." A memo from the Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps warned last month that the stalemate between Congress and Bush over the war spending bill has knocked down the favorable ratings of Congress and the Democrats by three percentage points and has taken a greater toll on the public's hope for a productive Congress.
"The primary message coming out of the November election was that the American people are sick and tired of the fighting and the gridlock, and they want both the president and Congress to start governing the country," warned Leon E. Panetta, a chief of staff in Bill Clinton's White House. "It just seems to me the Democrats, if they fail for whatever reason to get a domestic agenda enacted . . . will pay a price."
Republicans are already trying to extract that price. Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said Democrats are just "trying to score political points on the war. . . . Part of their party can't conceive of anything else to talk about but the war."
Norman J. Ornstein, a Congress watcher at the American Enterprise Institute, said a Congress's productivity is not measured solely on the number of bills signed into law. Bills and resolutions approved by either chamber totaled 165 during the first four months of this Congress, compared with 72 in 2005. And Congress recorded 415 roll-call votes, compared with 264 when Republicans were in charge and the House GOP leaders struggled to impose their agenda on a closely divided Senate.
Democratic leaders remain hopeful that a burst of activity will put the doubts about them to rest. They have promised to pass a war funding bill and a minimum-wage increase that Bush can sign, to complete a budget blueprint and to finish the homeland security bill by Memorial Day. The House wants to pass defense and intelligence bills, its own lobbying measure and the first gun-control legislation since 1994, which would tighten the national instant-check system for gun purchases. The Senate hopes to complete a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the House Democratic campaign committee, said his party needs to get some achievements under its belt, but not until voters begin to focus on the campaigns next year. "People understand the Democrats in Congress are doing everything in their power to move an agenda forward, doing everything possible to change direction in the war in Iraq, and the president is standing in the way," he said.
Kyl was not so sanguine. If accomplishments are not in the books by this fall, he said, the Democrats will find their achievements eclipsed by the 2008 presidential race. Panetta agreed.
"This leadership, these Democrats have shown that they can fight," he said. "Now they have to show they can govern."
In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats' domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
But now that initial progress has foundered as Washington policymakers have been consumed with the debate over the Iraq war. Not a single priority on the Democrats' agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the "do nothing" tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them.
"We cannot be a one-trick pony," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who helped engineer his party's takeover of Congress as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "People voted for change, but Iraq, the economy and Washington, D.C., [corruption] all tied for first place. We need to do them all."
The "Six for '06" policy agenda on which Democrats campaigned last year was supposed to consist of low-hanging fruit, plucked and put in the basket to allow Congress to move on to tougher targets. House Democrats took just 10 days to pass a minimum-wage increase, a bill to implement most of the homeland security recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, a measure allowing federal funding for stem cell research, another to cut student-loan rates, a bill allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices under Medicare, and a rollback of tax breaks for oil and gas companies to finance alternative-energy research.
The Senate struck out on its own, with a broad overhaul of the rules on lobbying Congress.
Not one of those bills has been signed into law. President Bush signed 16 measures into law through April, six more than were signed by this time in the previous Congress. But beyond a huge domestic spending bill that wrapped up work left undone by Republicans last year, the list of achievements is modest: a beefed-up board to oversee congressional pages in the wake of the Mark Foley scandal, and the renaming of six post offices, including one for Gerald R. Ford in Vail, Colo., as well as two courthouses, including one for Rush Limbaugh Sr. in Cape Girardeau, Mo.
The minimum-wage bill got stalled in a fight with the Senate over tax breaks to go along with the wage increase. In frustration, Democratic leaders inserted a minimum-wage agreement into a bill to fund the Iraq war, only to see it vetoed.
Similar homeland security bills were passed by the House and the Senate, only to languish as attention shifted to the Iraq debate. Last week, family members of those killed on Sept. 11, 2001, gathered in Washington to demand action.
"We've waited five and a half years since 9/11," said Carie Lemack, whose mother died aboard one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York. "We waited three years since the 9/11 commission. We can't wait anymore."
House and Senate staff members have begun meeting, with the goal of reporting out a final bill by Memorial Day, but they concede that the deadline is likely to slip, in part because members of the homeland security committees of both chambers, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the two intelligence committees all want their say. The irony, Lemack said, is that such cumbersomeness is precisely why the Sept. 11 commission recommended the creation of powerful umbrella security committees with such broad jurisdiction that other panels could not muscle their way in. That was one recommendation Congress largely disregarded.
The Medicare drug-negotiations bill died in the Senate, after Republicans refused to let it come up for debate. House Democrats are threatening to attach the bill to must-pass government funding bills.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, has proposed his own student-loan legislation, but it is to be part of a huge higher-education bill that may not reach the committee until June.
The House's relatively simple energy bill faces a similar fate. The Senate has in mind a much larger bill that would ease bringing alternative fuels to market, regulate oil and gas futures trading, raise vehicle and appliance efficiency standards, and reform federal royalty payments to finance new energy technologies.
The voters seem to have noticed the stall. An ABC News-Washington Post poll last month found that 73 percent of Americans believe Congress has done "not too much" or "nothing at all." A memo from the Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps warned last month that the stalemate between Congress and Bush over the war spending bill has knocked down the favorable ratings of Congress and the Democrats by three percentage points and has taken a greater toll on the public's hope for a productive Congress.
"The primary message coming out of the November election was that the American people are sick and tired of the fighting and the gridlock, and they want both the president and Congress to start governing the country," warned Leon E. Panetta, a chief of staff in Bill Clinton's White House. "It just seems to me the Democrats, if they fail for whatever reason to get a domestic agenda enacted . . . will pay a price."
Republicans are already trying to extract that price. Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said Democrats are just "trying to score political points on the war. . . . Part of their party can't conceive of anything else to talk about but the war."
Norman J. Ornstein, a Congress watcher at the American Enterprise Institute, said a Congress's productivity is not measured solely on the number of bills signed into law. Bills and resolutions approved by either chamber totaled 165 during the first four months of this Congress, compared with 72 in 2005. And Congress recorded 415 roll-call votes, compared with 264 when Republicans were in charge and the House GOP leaders struggled to impose their agenda on a closely divided Senate.
Democratic leaders remain hopeful that a burst of activity will put the doubts about them to rest. They have promised to pass a war funding bill and a minimum-wage increase that Bush can sign, to complete a budget blueprint and to finish the homeland security bill by Memorial Day. The House wants to pass defense and intelligence bills, its own lobbying measure and the first gun-control legislation since 1994, which would tighten the national instant-check system for gun purchases. The Senate hopes to complete a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the House Democratic campaign committee, said his party needs to get some achievements under its belt, but not until voters begin to focus on the campaigns next year. "People understand the Democrats in Congress are doing everything in their power to move an agenda forward, doing everything possible to change direction in the war in Iraq, and the president is standing in the way," he said.
Kyl was not so sanguine. If accomplishments are not in the books by this fall, he said, the Democrats will find their achievements eclipsed by the 2008 presidential race. Panetta agreed.
"This leadership, these Democrats have shown that they can fight," he said. "Now they have to show they can govern."
tattoo Buster Posey: quot;I Ain#39;t Havin#39;
Blog Feeds
07-22 04:20 PM
From the ACLU which is part of the coalition that is behind this suit: Implementation Of Arizona's Racial Profiling Law FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 22, 2010 PHOENIX � At a hearing today in a federal court in Phoenix, the American Civil Liberties Union and a coalition of civil rights groups argued that Arizona's discriminatory new law, known as SB 1070, should be blocked pending a final court ruling on its constitutionality. The law, scheduled to go into effect on July 29, requires police to demand "papers" from people they stop who they suspect are "unlawfully present" in the U.S. According...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/first-court-arguments-heard-over-arizona-law.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/first-court-arguments-heard-over-arizona-law.html)
more...
pictures JULY 11: Buster Posey #28
vikki76
05-22 06:09 PM
It would be risky.F-1 visa requires strong ties to homeland. Since your parents are already here, it would be difficult for you to prove that you will indeed go back to India on completion of your studies.
dresses Buster Posey wins the Rookie of the Year award - McCovey Chronicles
rahulms
02-22 11:05 AM
hi
My current employer 'C' is in the process of filing Labor certification. I have to fill out Form # 9089 and give it back to my employer with past employment specifics.
I left my past employer 'A' on 9/23/2005, though was paid till 9/30. For the next month or so I was at home looking for a job on my own. When I did get successful I approached a consultant 'B' who filed for my H1-B transfer and offered me a appointment letter. We together kept looking for a job till 11/29 when I actually started working. When I got experience letter from these employers they told me that it is from the start of project date that you were on payroll. I am also sure that my employer 'A' did not inform the INS immediately but took about 15-20 days to send a letter after I had left.
My question is what dates should I put on the form, the actual dates or the ones I have on appointment letter
My current employer 'C' is in the process of filing Labor certification. I have to fill out Form # 9089 and give it back to my employer with past employment specifics.
I left my past employer 'A' on 9/23/2005, though was paid till 9/30. For the next month or so I was at home looking for a job on my own. When I did get successful I approached a consultant 'B' who filed for my H1-B transfer and offered me a appointment letter. We together kept looking for a job till 11/29 when I actually started working. When I got experience letter from these employers they told me that it is from the start of project date that you were on payroll. I am also sure that my employer 'A' did not inform the INS immediately but took about 15-20 days to send a letter after I had left.
My question is what dates should I put on the form, the actual dates or the ones I have on appointment letter
more...
makeup If when Buster Posey returns
Scythe
03-17 04:18 PM
It's things you like.
girlfriend Cameo by Buster Posey
Macaca
06-05 07:40 PM
Discontent Over Iraq Increasing, Poll Finds (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/04/AR2007060401230.html) Americans Also Unhappy With Congress, By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/dan+balz+and+jon+cohen/), Washington Post Staff Writers, Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Growing frustration with the performance of the Democratic Congress, combined with widespread public pessimism over President Bush's temporary troop buildup in Iraq, has left satisfaction with the overall direction of the country at its lowest point in more than a decade, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Almost six in 10 Americans said they do not think the additional troops sent to Iraq since the beginning of the year will help restore civil order there, and 53 percent -- a new high in Post-ABC News polls -- said they do not believe that the war has contributed to the long-term security of the United States.
Disapproval of Bush's performance in office remains high, but the poll highlighted growing disapproval of the new Democratic majority in Congress. Just 39 percent said they approve of the job Congress is doing, down from 44 percent in April, when the new Congress was about 100 days into its term. More significant, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 10 percentage points over that same period, from 54 percent to 44 percent.
Much of that drop was fueled by lower approval ratings of the Democrats in Congress among strong opponents of the war, independents and liberal Democrats. While independents were evenly split on the Democrats in Congress in April (49 percent approved, 48 percent disapproved), now 37 percent said they approved and 54 percent disapproved. Among liberal Democrats, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 18 points.
Bush's overall job-approval rating stands at 35 percent, unchanged from April.
Many Democratic activists have complained that the 2006 midterm election results represented a call for a course change in Iraq and that so far the Democratic-controlled Congress has failed to deliver.
Deep public skepticism about Iraq, concerns about the Democrats and Bush, and near-record-high gasoline prices appear to have combined to sour the overall mood in the country. In the new poll, 73 percent of Americans said the country is pretty seriously on the wrong track, while 25 percent said things are going in the right direction.
That gap is marginally wider than it was at the beginning of the year and represents the most gloomy expression of public sentiment since January 1996, when a face-off between President Bill Clinton and a Republican-controlled Congress over the budget led to an extended shutdown of the federal government.
Among the nearly three-quarters of Americans expressing a pessimistic viewpoint, about one in five blamed the war for their negative outlook, and about the same ratio mentioned the economy, gas prices, jobs or debt as the main reason for their dissatisfaction with the country's direction. Eleven percent cited "problems with Bush," and another 11 percent said "everything" led them to their negative opinion.
The new poll showed that Americans have recalibrated their view of who is taking the lead in Washington. Earlier this year, majorities of Americans said they believed that the Democrats were taking the initiative in the capital, but now there is an even split, with 43 percent saying Bush is taking the stronger leadership role and 45 percent saying the Democrats are.
That shift occurred across the political spectrum. In April, 59 percent of independents said Democrats were taking a stronger role, but that figure has dropped 15 points, to 44 percent.
The political machinations over the Iraq war funding bill have been the dominant news event in Congress for much of the spring, and the Democrats' removal of the provision linking funding to a withdrawal deadline came shortly before the poll was taken.
In April, the public, by a 25-point margin, trusted the Democrats over Bush to handle the situation in Iraq. In this poll, Democrats maintained an advantage, but by 16 points. There has been an erosion of support for Democrats on this issue, but not a corresponding movement to Bush. Among independents, trust for the Democrats is down eight points, mostly because of a six-point bump in the percentage who said they trust "neither."
Congressional Democrats also are preferred over Bush -- whose own approval ratings remain near career lows -- on immigration (by 17 percentage points), the economy (by 18 points) and even, albeit narrowly, on handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism (by six points).
But it is the war in Iraq -- the most important issue in the 2006 campaign -- that has the most potential to reshape the political landscape.
Overall, 61 percent in this poll said the war was not worth fighting, and nearly two-thirds said the United States is not making significant progress restoring civil order in Iraq. However, there is no such general agreement about what to do.
In this poll, 55 percent -- a new high -- said the number of U.S. military forces in Iraq should be decreased, but only 15 percent advocated an immediate withdrawal of American troops. An additional 12 percent said U.S. forces should be out of Iraq sometime this year.
Since the Iraqi parliamentary elections in November 2005, consistent majorities of Americans have said U.S. troops should be drawn down; support for an immediate, complete withdrawal has also remained relatively stable, never exceeding two in 10. And there similarly has been little change across party lines: 25 percent of the Democrats surveyed wanted all American military forces out of Iraq now, compared with 13 percent of independents and 6 percent of Republicans, with all percentages about the same as in late 2005. Support for the immediate removal of U.S. forces peaked at 32 percent among African Americans.
Public attitudes about the size of U.S. military forces in Iraq and about the war more generally are closely related to views about the centrality of the situation in Iraq to the broader battle against terrorism, another flashpoint between Bush and congressional Democrats. (In this poll, nearly six in 10 agreed with the Democratic position that the two are separate issues.) Overall, more than seven in 10 of those who said Iraq is an essential component of the terrorism fight wanted U.S. troop levels in Iraq to be increased or kept the same, while more than seven in 10 of those seeing the issues as separate thought that some or all troops should be withdrawn. Among independents who said the United States can succeed against terrorism without winning in Iraq, 70 percent supported decreasing troop levels, compared with 23 percent of those who saw victory in Iraq as pivotal.
This Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone May 29 to June 1 among a random sample of 1,205 adults. Results from the full poll have a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Sampling error margins are higher for subgroups.
Washington Post-ABC News Poll (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_060307.html)
The Washington Post - ABC News Poll: Iraq War Apprehension (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/06/05/GR2007060500108.html)
Growing frustration with the performance of the Democratic Congress, combined with widespread public pessimism over President Bush's temporary troop buildup in Iraq, has left satisfaction with the overall direction of the country at its lowest point in more than a decade, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Almost six in 10 Americans said they do not think the additional troops sent to Iraq since the beginning of the year will help restore civil order there, and 53 percent -- a new high in Post-ABC News polls -- said they do not believe that the war has contributed to the long-term security of the United States.
Disapproval of Bush's performance in office remains high, but the poll highlighted growing disapproval of the new Democratic majority in Congress. Just 39 percent said they approve of the job Congress is doing, down from 44 percent in April, when the new Congress was about 100 days into its term. More significant, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 10 percentage points over that same period, from 54 percent to 44 percent.
Much of that drop was fueled by lower approval ratings of the Democrats in Congress among strong opponents of the war, independents and liberal Democrats. While independents were evenly split on the Democrats in Congress in April (49 percent approved, 48 percent disapproved), now 37 percent said they approved and 54 percent disapproved. Among liberal Democrats, approval of congressional Democrats dropped 18 points.
Bush's overall job-approval rating stands at 35 percent, unchanged from April.
Many Democratic activists have complained that the 2006 midterm election results represented a call for a course change in Iraq and that so far the Democratic-controlled Congress has failed to deliver.
Deep public skepticism about Iraq, concerns about the Democrats and Bush, and near-record-high gasoline prices appear to have combined to sour the overall mood in the country. In the new poll, 73 percent of Americans said the country is pretty seriously on the wrong track, while 25 percent said things are going in the right direction.
That gap is marginally wider than it was at the beginning of the year and represents the most gloomy expression of public sentiment since January 1996, when a face-off between President Bill Clinton and a Republican-controlled Congress over the budget led to an extended shutdown of the federal government.
Among the nearly three-quarters of Americans expressing a pessimistic viewpoint, about one in five blamed the war for their negative outlook, and about the same ratio mentioned the economy, gas prices, jobs or debt as the main reason for their dissatisfaction with the country's direction. Eleven percent cited "problems with Bush," and another 11 percent said "everything" led them to their negative opinion.
The new poll showed that Americans have recalibrated their view of who is taking the lead in Washington. Earlier this year, majorities of Americans said they believed that the Democrats were taking the initiative in the capital, but now there is an even split, with 43 percent saying Bush is taking the stronger leadership role and 45 percent saying the Democrats are.
That shift occurred across the political spectrum. In April, 59 percent of independents said Democrats were taking a stronger role, but that figure has dropped 15 points, to 44 percent.
The political machinations over the Iraq war funding bill have been the dominant news event in Congress for much of the spring, and the Democrats' removal of the provision linking funding to a withdrawal deadline came shortly before the poll was taken.
In April, the public, by a 25-point margin, trusted the Democrats over Bush to handle the situation in Iraq. In this poll, Democrats maintained an advantage, but by 16 points. There has been an erosion of support for Democrats on this issue, but not a corresponding movement to Bush. Among independents, trust for the Democrats is down eight points, mostly because of a six-point bump in the percentage who said they trust "neither."
Congressional Democrats also are preferred over Bush -- whose own approval ratings remain near career lows -- on immigration (by 17 percentage points), the economy (by 18 points) and even, albeit narrowly, on handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism (by six points).
But it is the war in Iraq -- the most important issue in the 2006 campaign -- that has the most potential to reshape the political landscape.
Overall, 61 percent in this poll said the war was not worth fighting, and nearly two-thirds said the United States is not making significant progress restoring civil order in Iraq. However, there is no such general agreement about what to do.
In this poll, 55 percent -- a new high -- said the number of U.S. military forces in Iraq should be decreased, but only 15 percent advocated an immediate withdrawal of American troops. An additional 12 percent said U.S. forces should be out of Iraq sometime this year.
Since the Iraqi parliamentary elections in November 2005, consistent majorities of Americans have said U.S. troops should be drawn down; support for an immediate, complete withdrawal has also remained relatively stable, never exceeding two in 10. And there similarly has been little change across party lines: 25 percent of the Democrats surveyed wanted all American military forces out of Iraq now, compared with 13 percent of independents and 6 percent of Republicans, with all percentages about the same as in late 2005. Support for the immediate removal of U.S. forces peaked at 32 percent among African Americans.
Public attitudes about the size of U.S. military forces in Iraq and about the war more generally are closely related to views about the centrality of the situation in Iraq to the broader battle against terrorism, another flashpoint between Bush and congressional Democrats. (In this poll, nearly six in 10 agreed with the Democratic position that the two are separate issues.) Overall, more than seven in 10 of those who said Iraq is an essential component of the terrorism fight wanted U.S. troop levels in Iraq to be increased or kept the same, while more than seven in 10 of those seeing the issues as separate thought that some or all troops should be withdrawn. Among independents who said the United States can succeed against terrorism without winning in Iraq, 70 percent supported decreasing troop levels, compared with 23 percent of those who saw victory in Iraq as pivotal.
This Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone May 29 to June 1 among a random sample of 1,205 adults. Results from the full poll have a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Sampling error margins are higher for subgroups.
Washington Post-ABC News Poll (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_060307.html)
The Washington Post - ABC News Poll: Iraq War Apprehension (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/06/05/GR2007060500108.html)
hairstyles Year catcher Buster Posey
_NEW.jpg "it#39;s Buster Posey) Posey?")
jkanakaraj
08-29 05:06 PM
http://www.kanakaraj.com/kanakaraj_stamp.gif
Blog Feeds
05-02 05:20 PM
The third of three immigrants on the the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology is Professor Ahmed Zewail, the winner of the 1999 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Dr. Zewail is a professor of Chemistry and Physics at Caltech and is the Director of Caltech's Physical Biology Center. Dr. Zewail describes his research as follows: [The Nobel Prize was awarded for] pioneering developments in femtoscience, which made it possible to observe atoms in motion, the transition states of molecular transformations. This work created the discipline of femtochemistry, which is concerned with molecular reactivity on the femtosecond (10�15 s) timescale....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/immigrant-of-the-day-ahmed-zewail-presidential-advisor.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/immigrant-of-the-day-ahmed-zewail-presidential-advisor.html)
greatzolin
08-24 03:37 PM
No...you can visit the forums to gestimate when people who filed around your date are getting RN,
...but by the way things are, who knows what USCIS will do next!!
...but by the way things are, who knows what USCIS will do next!!
No comments:
Post a Comment