Jitamitra
05-31 12:14 PM
Recently joined.
Contributed $200.
Contributed $200.
wallpaper Matt Czuchry - quot;The Good Wifequot;
kurtz_wolfgang
08-15 12:27 PM
Please Help Gurus....:confused::confused::confused:
rkat
12-13 03:46 PM
Swamy - (with due respect to IV who i totally support in every which way!) but what have u done other than joining a state chapter, contributing $$ to IV and holding signs at the DC rally.?? Is this what ur life has come to now..?? Only to motivate people to join IV..?? How long do u plan on conitnuing to do this.?? Wake up buddy..!! Yes we are stuck in this mess now having filed for AOS and the indefinite future wait for cases to be approved..!! There is no doubt about that.
But somebody like dyekek12 who seems to be new to the immigration world - whats the harm in sharing with him options that maybe more practical for him 3-5 years from now.! If somebody would have adviced me back in the hay days - i would have surely listened.! There are 3 SENIOR members who seem to agree to what i have said.! All of us cannot be socially challenged.! Sorry swamy - i disagree.! How would a college professor or a dept. head answer his Q....Myfriend - ..." there is the real world and then there is the immigration world........!!!! "
The immigration system here in the US is like fire - and if u try playing with fire there is no doubt in my mind that you will only get burnt.!! (again - i'm not a village bellie neither am i socially challeged - i am only being realistic.! thats all.! and i know it hurts!)
But somebody like dyekek12 who seems to be new to the immigration world - whats the harm in sharing with him options that maybe more practical for him 3-5 years from now.! If somebody would have adviced me back in the hay days - i would have surely listened.! There are 3 SENIOR members who seem to agree to what i have said.! All of us cannot be socially challenged.! Sorry swamy - i disagree.! How would a college professor or a dept. head answer his Q....Myfriend - ..." there is the real world and then there is the immigration world........!!!! "
The immigration system here in the US is like fire - and if u try playing with fire there is no doubt in my mind that you will only get burnt.!! (again - i'm not a village bellie neither am i socially challeged - i am only being realistic.! thats all.! and i know it hurts!)
2011 tattoo Matt Czuchry. Photo 4 of 16 matt czuchry good wife.
arunmohan
11-14 03:51 PM
Thank you roseball. What is H1 COE?
more...
green_card_curious
03-08 01:04 PM
Thanks Hopefulgc. What is AFAIK?
anilkumar0902
09-18 12:06 PM
EB-2 , PD: Oct 2005, Filed at Nebraska, I-485 Received Date: 07/31/07, Notice Date: 09/05/07. Section: Unknown for me and my wife.
Last week, called up USCIS and mentioned about my case. The person who took the call, said nothing can be done and that i need to wait for the application to be processed.
I called up today again and spoke with a different lady and she patiently listened to the details and placed a Service Request to USCIS about the details. She wanted me to call back in 45 days if nobody contacts me about the same.
But, looks like many folks who applied in NSC, are facing this issue of "Section: Unknown"...Not sure, if we need to be worried or not. But hope everything works out well at the end.
Last week, called up USCIS and mentioned about my case. The person who took the call, said nothing can be done and that i need to wait for the application to be processed.
I called up today again and spoke with a different lady and she patiently listened to the details and placed a Service Request to USCIS about the details. She wanted me to call back in 45 days if nobody contacts me about the same.
But, looks like many folks who applied in NSC, are facing this issue of "Section: Unknown"...Not sure, if we need to be worried or not. But hope everything works out well at the end.
more...
jayz
07-17 07:01 PM
While today's development is great news for folks in the 485/AOS cue, what happens with people in CP? With the opening of the floodgates, I am unsure when visas will be available to CP cases who were scheduled for interviews in Aug and beyond. I am a great supporter of today's victory, but I am unsure where CP cases stand now? Another 4 year wait?
2010 When The Good Wife panel ended
rjgleason
June 4th, 2004, 08:43 PM
Who remembers "The Prisoner"?
"Knowledge is not Wisdom!"
"Knowledge is not Wisdom!"
more...
![matt czuchry good wife. [Matt Czuchry] [the good wife]](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfjkd1ig731qag5yyo1_500.jpg "[Matt Czuchry] [the good wife]")
willigetagc
09-07 11:16 AM
This one was posted by one of the IV members, sreedhar in other section of the forum. Don't know how much truth to it...:rolleyes:
If anyone has seen this already, my apologies...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=285637#post285637
Hello All,
I am giving this information after my cousin complete the interview with USCIS on 09/03/2008. Please take a look at the detail conversation bellow.
IO: Immigration Officer
MC: My Cousin
MCL: My Cousin Lawyer
IO: We are not able to verify your finger prints. That�s the reason we called you for the personal interview.
MC: I am ready to give right away.
IO: No your finger print images not at all visible. There is no way we can check your Criminal background.
MC: Is there any other alternate solution for this �? If so please advice.
IO: Yes�You have to submit local county police clearance certificates from past 3 years with in 30 days.
MC: Can you increase the time�? 30 days might be not sufficient for me to collect all the information
IO: Sure�Make sure you submit with in 45 days. Thank you.
MC: Can I ask one question�?
IO: Sure�.
MC: I applied my GC in 2003. Almost 5 years completed�Now I have problems with my finger prints. What else I need to do for the getting the approval on GC
IO: Don�t worry�Submit the Police clearance certificates�We will approve your GC soon. With out verifying I can�t approve...If I approve� I will loose my Job�
MCL: Well �.My Client PD is Dec 2003 EB3-INDIA. Visa numbers are not available at this time why you are asking to submit police clearance certificates with 45 days�? And once we submit how you will approve my Client GC without VISA numbers available�?
IO: Good question�.All EB Visa Numbers will current in coming 2 months. That�s all I can say. There is some process going on to collect some unused visa numbers�.I don�t know what exactly going on�But I can say with in 2 months EB Visa numbers will current.
MCL: Oh that�s great�
IO: Yes it is�
MC & MCL: Ok thank you for your time and we will submit police clearance certificates with in 45 days.
IO: That�s good�You are all set to go now. Thank you.
Based on above conversations I am saying�Please do not abuse me if it�s not going to be happened in 2 months. I am just sharing my cousin Interview details. I am also EB3-I 2004. I wish and Pray to GOD to make IO comment come true. Thank you.
-Sree
Hi Sree, which country immigration are you talking about ? :o
:D
If anyone has seen this already, my apologies...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=285637#post285637
Hello All,
I am giving this information after my cousin complete the interview with USCIS on 09/03/2008. Please take a look at the detail conversation bellow.
IO: Immigration Officer
MC: My Cousin
MCL: My Cousin Lawyer
IO: We are not able to verify your finger prints. That�s the reason we called you for the personal interview.
MC: I am ready to give right away.
IO: No your finger print images not at all visible. There is no way we can check your Criminal background.
MC: Is there any other alternate solution for this �? If so please advice.
IO: Yes�You have to submit local county police clearance certificates from past 3 years with in 30 days.
MC: Can you increase the time�? 30 days might be not sufficient for me to collect all the information
IO: Sure�Make sure you submit with in 45 days. Thank you.
MC: Can I ask one question�?
IO: Sure�.
MC: I applied my GC in 2003. Almost 5 years completed�Now I have problems with my finger prints. What else I need to do for the getting the approval on GC
IO: Don�t worry�Submit the Police clearance certificates�We will approve your GC soon. With out verifying I can�t approve...If I approve� I will loose my Job�
MCL: Well �.My Client PD is Dec 2003 EB3-INDIA. Visa numbers are not available at this time why you are asking to submit police clearance certificates with 45 days�? And once we submit how you will approve my Client GC without VISA numbers available�?
IO: Good question�.All EB Visa Numbers will current in coming 2 months. That�s all I can say. There is some process going on to collect some unused visa numbers�.I don�t know what exactly going on�But I can say with in 2 months EB Visa numbers will current.
MCL: Oh that�s great�
IO: Yes it is�
MC & MCL: Ok thank you for your time and we will submit police clearance certificates with in 45 days.
IO: That�s good�You are all set to go now. Thank you.
Based on above conversations I am saying�Please do not abuse me if it�s not going to be happened in 2 months. I am just sharing my cousin Interview details. I am also EB3-I 2004. I wish and Pray to GOD to make IO comment come true. Thank you.
-Sree
Hi Sree, which country immigration are you talking about ? :o
:D
hair The Good Wife 1.22
thomachan72
03-31 03:29 PM
Congratulations!
You have a Oct 04 priority date. Your date was current for quite some time. What took them so long? Did you switch from Eb3 to Eb2?
Congrads. I have the same question. why so long? are there still people with 04 PD out there waiting? Why is it that we are seeing "card recieved" posts very rarely these days? Have they slowed issuing GC to those with PD current?
You have a Oct 04 priority date. Your date was current for quite some time. What took them so long? Did you switch from Eb3 to Eb2?
Congrads. I have the same question. why so long? are there still people with 04 PD out there waiting? Why is it that we are seeing "card recieved" posts very rarely these days? Have they slowed issuing GC to those with PD current?
more...
tnite
08-09 10:39 PM
bump
hot Get more on Matt Czuchry here!
sriswam
06-29 12:57 PM
Is there any quota on filing the I 140s? My friend requested his employer for upgrading his 140 and he says that the attorney mentioned that the quota for I 140 is already full. I don't think it is right. Any inromation please.
There is no quota. The employer can file for I-907 diectly without invoving the lawyer. The attorneys are not likely to help you now since they are swamped. I'd say ask the employer to file today. Else wait a month!
There is no quota. The employer can file for I-907 diectly without invoving the lawyer. The attorneys are not likely to help you now since they are swamped. I'd say ask the employer to file today. Else wait a month!
more...
house Still of Matt Czuchry in The
anilsal
07-30 06:36 AM
W2s to indicate annual salaries in the last 1-3 years such that they know that you made at least as much as the labor application said.
tattoo girlfriend Matt Czuchry is the good bad matt czuchry good wife. rolling is
skumar9
04-13 03:20 PM
In my Query it states as 30 days...
more...
pictures Matt Czuchry from The Good
perm2gc
07-08 10:00 PM
Wonderful support. Thank you. So far we have over 850 viewings and have been rated 76 times and 23 comments. That has managed to push us to #6 in the News and Politics stories of the day. This morning we overtook a Ron Paul story. If you have not had a chance to check the video out, please rate it by clicking on the stars or leave a comment as that will push our position even further.
Thank you once again. My son is beginning to get quite optimistic that CNN might just pick this one :-)
This video has either been removed or has a malformed URL
Thank you once again. My son is beginning to get quite optimistic that CNN might just pick this one :-)
This video has either been removed or has a malformed URL
dresses Pictures of Matt Czuchry,
immi2006
05-04 01:26 PM
Please go through the stuff for the last one year plus from immigration.com on PERM processing, need to look at each entry in the diferenet excel sheets, it is not consistent from the data perspective (we all have our regular work too :-) ) so cannot pull up URLs for you, the above site is the pointer, please do your homework too :-) - Since you are really interested in specifics, appreciate if you can get this directly, it will take you couple of hours at the very least to get this data.
I've been monitoring BEC&PERM for the past 30 days and delved deeper on all labor processing thread, but found none on denials of conversion, please point out some reference URLs for PERM conversion denials that would be helpful.
I've been monitoring BEC&PERM for the past 30 days and delved deeper on all labor processing thread, but found none on denials of conversion, please point out some reference URLs for PERM conversion denials that would be helpful.
more...
makeup [Matt Czuchry] [the good wife]
hotammo
08-04 08:15 AM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
I am a July 2nd Filer, not only waiting but have had no LUDs on 485 after 2 FP's (one for last year's EAD and one for EAD renewal this year.)
I do not know if name check is cleared.
I am a July 2nd Filer, not only waiting but have had no LUDs on 485 after 2 FP's (one for last year's EAD and one for EAD renewal this year.)
I do not know if name check is cleared.
girlfriend matt czuchry • the good
RayP
12-08 03:13 AM
Thanks for your response. Good to hear that I can file while I am outside the US.
Meanwhile, I was wondering if it expires due to (assume) my neglect... does that create issues or can I apply at a later date... this is just in case I forget !! Sorry !!
Meanwhile, I was wondering if it expires due to (assume) my neglect... does that create issues or can I apply at a later date... this is just in case I forget !! Sorry !!
hairstyles For Matt Czuchry (Logan
STAmisha
06-20 07:46 AM
Friends
Please update how long it takes for PBEC approval notice to come in mail.My online status still shows in process
Please update how long it takes for PBEC approval notice to come in mail.My online status still shows in process
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Madhuri
05-22 04:57 PM
In that case we ourselves can keep a counter how many IV members did file 485 in June 07. It might give us a rough idea.
New filings will not effect to move the dates either you file on 1st or 30th. The Visa(GC) numbers will be deducted only after the approval of I-485. Any of these new filings will not be touched(Approved) for 4-5 months. USCIS has to consume the balance visas(GCs) before October 1st 2007.
If The Number of Visas > The number of Approved + To be approved(Mostly filed at least 4-5 months before) in the coming months.....then you can expect further movement from the State Department..
Ask(Pray) the USCIS(God) not to approve any 485's till June 15th....
So...there will not be any change in the movement of dates even all of them file on the day 1....Keep watching the approvals till June 10th atleast...
Sree
New filings will not effect to move the dates either you file on 1st or 30th. The Visa(GC) numbers will be deducted only after the approval of I-485. Any of these new filings will not be touched(Approved) for 4-5 months. USCIS has to consume the balance visas(GCs) before October 1st 2007.
If The Number of Visas > The number of Approved + To be approved(Mostly filed at least 4-5 months before) in the coming months.....then you can expect further movement from the State Department..
Ask(Pray) the USCIS(God) not to approve any 485's till June 15th....
So...there will not be any change in the movement of dates even all of them file on the day 1....Keep watching the approvals till June 10th atleast...
Sree