Kamis, 30 Juni 2011

selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach

images justin bieber and selena gomez selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Pictures of Justin Bieber and
  • Pictures of Justin Bieber and



  • NKR
    04-08 03:07 PM
    Ha Ha ..I guess I have put some salt (unintentionally) on somebody's wounds. NKR ..when did you buy your house and where ?
    btw yes ..there have been cases reported where a worker working in Target wrote that her income was 80K ..and managed to get a loan for 400K. (needless to say that house is in foreclosure ..if people had read such stories before rushing to buy during the peak ,..)
    and no ..my intention is not to keep this thread alive but it was to make people like you fight more for admin fixes. my goal was to link GC to investing more in US. people say lets meet senators ..o.k..meet them and tell what ?? ..there is no word from Core on this ..and hence lets do brainstorming and come up with ideas.


    Why do you assume that everyone who wants to buy a home are earning 80k and is dumb enough to buy a 400k home?. Why do you assume that a person who wants to buy a house has not saved enough to put a significant chunk as down-payment?. Why do you assume that a person who wants to buy a house is single and has no double income?. Why do you assume that a person who wants to buy a house is buying in CA only?. Why do you assume that a person who wants to buy a house has not found a house in a very good location and for a very good price?. Why do you assume that people like me listen to people like you and fight more for admix fixes?. Why do you want to live in a shoe box like place all your life?.





    wallpaper Pictures of Justin Bieber and selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber Selena Gomez
  • Justin Bieber Selena Gomez



  • Macaca
    05-11 05:28 PM
    The 'Education' Mantra (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/10/the_education_mantra_109799.html) By Thomas Sowell | Investor's Business Daily

    One of the sad and dangerous signs of our times is how many people are enthralled by words, without bothering to look at the realities behind those words.

    One of those words that many people seldom look behind is "education." But education can cover anything from courses on nuclear physics to courses on baton twirling.

    Unfortunately, an increasing proportion of American education, whether in the schools or in the colleges and universities, is closer to the baton twirling end of the spectrum than toward the nuclear physics end. Even reputable colleges are increasingly teaching things that students should have learned in high school.

    We don't have a backlog of serious students trying to take serious courses. If you look at the fields in which American students specialize in colleges and universities, those fields are heavily weighted toward the soft end of the spectrum.

    When it comes to postgraduate study in tough fields like math and science, you often find foreign students at American universities receiving more of such degrees than do Americans.

    A recent headline in the Chronicle of Higher Education said: "Master's in English: Will Mow Lawns." It featured a man with that degree who has gone into the landscaping business because there is no great demand for people with Master's degrees in English.

    Too many of the people coming out of even our most prestigious academic institutions graduate with neither the skills to be economically productive nor the intellectual development to make them discerning citizens and voters.

    Students can graduate from some of the most prestigious institutions in the country, without ever learning anything about science, mathematics, economics or anything else that would make them either a productive contributor to the economy or an informed voter who can see through political rhetoric.

    On the contrary, people with such "education" are often more susceptible to demagoguery than the population at large. Nor is this a situation peculiar to America. In countries around the world, people with degrees in soft subjects have been sources of political unrest, instability and even mass violence.

    Nor is this a new phenomenon. A scholarly history of 19th century Prague referred to "the well-educated but underemployed" Czech young men who promoted ethnic polarization there-- a polarization that not only continued, but escalated, in the 20th century to produce bitter tragedies for both Czechs and Germans.

    In other central European countries, between the two World Wars a rising class of newly educated young people bitterly resented having to compete with better qualified Jews in the universities and with Jews already established in business and the professions. Anti-Semitic policies and violence were the result.

    It was much the same story in Asia, where successful minorities like the Chinese in Malaysia were resented by newly educated Malays without either the educational or business skills to compete with them. These Malaysians demanded-- and got-- heavily discriminatory laws and policies against the Chinese.

    Similar situations developed at various times in Nigeria, Romania, Sri Lanka, Hungary and India, among other places.

    Many Third World countries have turned out so many people with diplomas, but without meaningful skills, that "the educated unemployed" became a cliche among people who study such countries. This has not only become a personal problem for those individuals who have been educated, or half-educated, without acquiring any ability to fulfill their rising expectations, it has become a major economic and political problem for these countries.

    Such people have proven to be ideal targets for demagogues promoting polarization and strife. We in the United States are still in the early stages of that process. But you need only visit campuses where whole departments feature soft courses preaching a sense of victimhood and resentment, and see the consequences in racial and ethnic polarization on campus.

    There are too many other soft courses that allow students to spend years in college without becoming educated in any real sense.

    We don't need more government "investment" to produce more of such "education." Lofty words like "investment" should not blind us to the ugly reality of political porkbarrel spending.


    Tiger Mom: Here's how to reshape U.S. education (http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-05-10-Reshape-US-education_n.htm) By Amy Chua | USA Today
    The American Idea: An Open Letter To College Graduates (http://www.forbes.com/2011/05/09/american-idea-college-graduates.html) By Carl Schramm | Forbes
    The Myth of American Exceptionalism (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/10/taking_exceptionalism_109795.html) By Richard Cohen | Washington Post
    The Role of Economics in an Imperfect World (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/10/the-role-of-economics-in-an-imperfect-world/) By EDWARD L. GLAESER | New York Times
    Where the Jobs Were Lost (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/where-the-jobs-were-lost/) By CASEY B. MULLIGAN | New York Times
    No, We Are Not a Nation of Hamburger Flippers (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/05/09/nation-hamburger-flippers/) By Elizabeth MacDonald | Fox Business
    Multinationals Dump U.S. Workers for Foreign Labor (http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/05/09/Multinationals-Dump-US-Workers-for-Foreign-Labor.aspx) By JAMES C. COOPER | The Fiscal Times
    California Economy Gets a Jolt From Tech Hiring (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703864204576311373667322428.html) By JIM CARLTON | Wall Street Journal





    selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. house Selena Gomez and Justin
  • house Selena Gomez and Justin



  • Macaca
    06-20 02:11 PM
    Learning From Microsoft's Error, Google Builds a Lobbying Engine (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/19/AR2007061902058.html) By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jeffrey+h.+birnbaum/) Washington Post Staff Writer, June 20, 2007

    When it comes to lobbying, Google does not intend to repeat the mistake that its rival Microsoft made a decade ago.

    Microsoft was so disdainful of the federal government back then that it had almost no presence in Washington. Largely because of that neglect, the company was blindsided by a government antitrust lawsuit that cost it dearly.

    Mindful of that history, Google is rapidly building a substantial presence in Washington and using that firepower against Microsoft, among others.

    Google is reaching beyond Washington, as well. To publicize its policy positions and develop grass-roots support, the company introduced the Google Public Policy Blog (http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/) this week.

    "We're seeking to do public policy advocacy in a Googley way," said Andrew McLaughlin, Google's director of public policy and government affairs. "We want our users to be part of the effort."

    In its first major policy assault on a competitor, Google's Washington office helped write an antitrust complaint to the Justice Department and other government authorities asserting that Microsoft's new Vista operating system discriminates against Google software. Last night, under a compromise with federal and state regulators, Microsoft agreed to make changes to Vista's operations.

    Google credits Microsoft's missteps in the 1990s with helping it see the wisdom of setting up shop in Washington in a big way and using the many tools available in the capital, such as lobbying and lawyering, to get its way on major policy matters.

    "The entire tech industry has learned from Microsoft," said Alan B. Davidson, head of Google's Washington office. "Washington and its policy debates are important. We can't ignore them."

    Two years ago, Google was on the verge of making that Microsoft-like error. Davidson, then a 37-year-old former deputy director of the Center for Democracy & Technology, was the search-engine company's sole staff lobbyist in Washington. As recently as last year, Google co-founder Sergey Brin had trouble getting meetings with members of Congress.

    To change that, Google went on a hiring spree and now has 12 lobbyists and lobbying-related professionals on staff here -- more than double the size of the standard corporate lobbying office -- and is continuing to add people.

    Its in-house talent includes such veteran government insiders as communications director Robert Boorstin, a speechwriter and foreign policy adviser in the Clinton White House, and Jamie Brown, a White House lobbyist under President Bush.

    Google has also hired some heavyweight outside help to lobby, including the Podesta Group, led by Democrat Anthony T. Podesta, and the law firm King & Spalding, led by former Republican senators Daniel R. Coats (Ind.) and Connie Mack (Fla.). To help steer through regulatory approvals in its proposed acquisition of DoubleClick, an online advertising company, Google recently retained the law firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck.

    "We've had to grow quickly because our company has grown so fast and the issues that impact the Internet have come into greater focus in recent years," Davidson said.

    Google's path is not unlike the one eventually taken by Microsoft, which was essentially represented in Washington for a long time by a single lobbyist. For a couple of embarrassing years in the mid-1990s, Microsoft's primary lobbying presence was "Jack and his Jeep" -- Jack Krumholz, the software giant's lone in-house lobbyist, who drove a Jeep Grand Cherokee to lobbying visits.

    But after the Justice Department filed its antitrust lawsuit in 1998, Microsoft under Krumholz began what was then considered the largest government-affairs makeover in corporate history. The company now has one of the most dominating, multifaceted, and sophisticated influence machines around -- one that spends tens of millions a year. Microsoft has 23 people working out of its government affairs office in Washington; 16 are lobbyists.

    Google is not that big. But it is set to move from temporary space on Pennsylvania Avenue NW to new and larger digs on New York Avenue NW. The suite will include a large meeting area where the company plans to hold seminars about the Internet and high-tech issues.

    To make friends on Capitol Hill, Google plans to initiate Google 101, a series of tutorials for congressional aides that will teach them how to use Google's search engine better and faster. The aides will learn, for example, how to do simple math by writing numbers in the proper order on Google's search line.
    Google has gotten serious about Washington's money game. The company established a political action committee last year and raised $57,220. For the next election, the PAC already has nearly half that amount on hand and company executives expect its political donations to soar.

    Google is also attracting attention in the presidential campaign. It is co-sponsoring two candidate debates (one Democratic and one Republican) and has already hosted four presidential contenders at its California headquarters: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Gov. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.), former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

    Google executives are parading through Washington with some frequency and being well-received, thanks to the advance work of their capital-based staff. In just the past few weeks, Google executives testified to Congress on such issues as immigration (Google wants more highly educated immigrants to work in the United States) and the future of video (Google owns YouTube, the popular video Web site).

    The company has peppered the Federal Communications Commission with recommendations on how to handle a major upcoming auction of telecommunications spectrum. Google Washington's Richard S. Whitt, a former head of regulatory affairs at MCI, helped write those suggestions, which the company hopes will enhance people's ability to access the Internet -- and Google.

    As for the company's future in Washington, "I expect we will grow in all dimensions," Davidson said. "We're not finished yet."





    2011 Justin Bieber Selena Gomez selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
  • Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber



  • vivid_bharti
    06-23 04:04 PM
    Buying a house in India and living here on rent sounds like getting married and keeping your wife in India :) unless your wife is with you what is the point in getting married, I think people should think beyond the 'Investment' perspective of house.....in agreement.....there is definately pleasure in living in your own house....



    more...


    selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. house Justin Bieber amp;
  • house Justin Bieber amp;



  • NKR
    03-25 03:12 PM
    I have brought a house 4 years back after 2 years in this country. It is $500K house. Ss it really "Rent Apartment vs Buy House" ?
    How about renting a home to provide something good to your family?

    With the home values declining I think it makes way more sense to rent the same house (at least in the area I live). If your mortgage payment is only $500 above apartment rent I would say buy. But if you are looking at paying double as mortgage I think its really inflated.

    I would like to read more about buying foreclosed properties. I hear there are some good deals out there.

    It all depends on the situation, if a person who started this thread can afford to buy a house, wants to buy one, has found a good house in a good location, has got a good deal and if he thinks that not having a GC is the only hurdle, then my suggestion for him would be to buy the house.

    Of course every people�s situation is not the same. If I was in CA, probably I would be living in an apartment now. If you can rent a home and think that makes more sense then buying a house, that�s fine too. If someone can buy a house and give it on rent, that�s even better :o)





    selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber Selena Gomez
  • Justin Bieber Selena Gomez



  • Macaca
    12-28 08:03 AM
    House Members Spent $20.3M on Mailings (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122700903.html?hpid=sec-politics) By DENNIS CONRAD | Associated Press, Dec 28, 2007

    WASHINGTON -- U.S. House members spent $20.3 million in tax money last year to send constituents what's often the government equivalent of junk mail _ meeting announcements, tips on car care and job interviews, surveys on public policy and just plain bragging.

    They sent nearly 116 million pieces of mail in all, many of them glossy productions filled with flattering photos and lists of the latest roads and bridges the lawmaker has brought home to the district, an Associated Press review of public records shows.

    Some offered advice on topics one would more commonly expect to see in a consumer-advice column.

    "Keep your car properly maintained" to improve mileage, suggested Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pa., in a newsletter on how to deal with rising energy prices.

    Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif., offered tips on home improvements.

    And Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., who lost her primary race last year, sent out a taxpayer-funded newsletter a few months before the election that included this simple observation:

    "Convicted felons can vote," she said, if "your" prison sentence has been served, parole or probation completed and fines paid. While campaigning, McKinney, who is black, noted that blacks make up a disproportionately large share of the prison population, which she said dilutes their voting strength.

    A dozen House members spent more than $133,000 each to send 9.8 million pieces of mass mailings. Total cost? $1.8 million.

    Sometimes the lawmakers' taxpayer funded mailings topped what they paid for direct mail through their campaign funds.

    Of the 64 House members with at least $100,000 in taxpayer-funded mailing expenses _ and overwhelmingly for mass mailings _ 42 were Republicans and 22 were Democrats, the AP review found.

    In sharp contrast, 59 lawmakers in the 435-member House _ 35 Republicans and 24 Democrats _ spent nothing on mass mailings. They tended to be the more experienced House members, often with 14 or more years of service.

    Mass mailings cannot be blatantly political, but they still can have political benefits, said Pete Sepp, a spokesman for the National Taxpayers' Union, which has condemned mass mailings.

    "A taxpayer-financed mailing doesn't have to say 're-elect me' to have an impact on voters," Sepp said. "A glossy newsletter splashed with the incumbent's achievements in Congress can build useful credentials a lawmaker can take with him to the ballot box. The franking privilege is one of the main cogs in Congress' PR machine."

    Franking, practiced since the early days of the republic, lets members of Congress send mail with just a signature where the postage would normally be affixed. Although the mailings are regulated by a congressional commission to guard against overt political appeals and cannot go out within 90 days of an election, they still sometimes take a dig at the opposition.

    In a June 2006 newsletter, Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., noted that under the Republican majority, Congress had passed tax cuts that "benefit the wealthiest Americans at the expense of working families."

    Stark has been a regular among the biggest users of the congressional franking privilege. For 2006, his mass mailings alone cost $172,357, an amount large enough to rank him among the top congressional mailers. House documents reported his overall mailing costs to be about $37,000 less. The AP received no explanation for the apparent discrepancy from spokesmen for Stark, the House Administration Committee and House administration staff.

    Some lawmakers defend the newsletters as a vital way of communicating with constituents.

    "One of the biggest complaints my constituents had (with) my predecessor was that they never knew what was going on in Washington," said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla. "They never had the opportunity to do surveys, etc. I promised I would communicate with them regularly."

    Brown-Waite is one of the biggest users of bulk mail, with 657,951 pieces at a cost of $129,428 last year. That surpassed the approximately $110,000 her campaign spent on direct mailings and related costs.

    One taxpayer-funded mailing featured a picture of her and the headline: "Medicare Prescription Drug Update: The Time to Act is Now." Another, entitled "Constituent Service Guide for the 5th District," included a survey and information about how to obtain U.S. flags, assistance from federal agencies and an appointment to a military academy.

    The House Democratic Caucus encourages members to use the mailings to communicate with constituents, spokeswoman Sarah Feinberg said. She said it was a good way for congressmen to focus on an issue or, if survey questions are used, get a handle on what constituents are thinking.

    That argument doesn't persuade Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Ill., who said he has never used the mailings in 13 years in Congress. "It's a waste of taxpayers' money," he said. "I don't believe in this self-promotion."

    LaHood argues that franking should be used only to answer constituent mail. He has repeatedly introduced bills to ban mass mailings and just as often the legislation dies in committee.

    For the House and Senate combined, the cost of taxpayer-paid mailings, including mass mailings, letters to individuals and groups of up to 500 people, was $34.3 million for fiscal year 2006, according to a recent Congressional Research Service report. In 1988, before more restrictions were imposed on the use of mailings, the figure was more than three times larger, $113.3 million.

    The biggest senders in the AP analysis included freshmen in tight re-election fights and veterans who coasted to victory.

    Rep. Henry Brown, R-S.C., had the most pieces of mass mailings: 1,257,972. His mass mailings' cost of $171,286 was among the highest in the House, as was the overall cost of his franked mail, at $177,706.

    Murphy, who advised constituents to maintain cars, was one of the House leaders in sending out bulk mail, with 1,003,836 pieces. The price tag: $165,650.

    Among legislative leaders, the biggest spender was Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich., who last fall became chairman of the House GOP Conference. He spent $133,053 to mail 844,336 pieces.

    Other leaders in the last Congress and the current one were not big users.

    The cost of postage is not the only expense for taxpayers. Printing and reproduction can add tens of thousands of dollars to a mailing's cost. The printing cost for one mailing from McCotter was $30,259.

    There is a practical limit on how much can be spent on mailings.

    Funding comes from a congressman's office budget, which ranges from $1.2 million to $1.4 million for payroll and other expenses. The more spent on mass mailings, the less money is available for such needs as staff, salaries and district offices.

    Senators can also send franked mail, but the amount for each senator is specific and generally based on the number of addresses in a senator's state. At no point may it exceed $50,000 a year for mass mailings. For fiscal year 2004, overall mail allocations ranged from $31,746 to $298,850.

    Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., who mailed 906,788 pieces last year and won re-election with 60 percent of the vote, sees the mailings as helping him do his job.

    "Ours is a representative government, requiring an active dialogue between elected officials and those they serve," Stearns said in a statement.

    Mike Stokke, a political aide to recently resigned Rep. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., when he was House speaker, said he would advise congressmen to send out mailings when they've fulfilled an important promise, such as getting money for a bridge in the district.



    more...


    selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. makeup Selena Gomez and Justin
  • makeup Selena Gomez and Justin



  • rahulpaper
    03-24 06:29 PM
    We may be missing the issue by this infighting (which is not useful to anyone)

    I think any firm involved in unethical behavior (immigration / tax/ state laws/employment laws) perspective should get targeted by USCIS/ICE/DOL and mother of all DHS etc.

    In my understanding following are the type of employees....

    a) Full time employees of large and small Companies like Engineers/Pharmacist/Internal positions/...ex GE/Microsoft/Google/Wellpoint. These guys do not work for "Clients". Usually do not have bench. (there may be some exceptions but minimal unethical behavior is expected).

    b) Full time employees who work for large (Big5 and more) and small CONSULTING firms and consult to other organization... They work for specific project at a "client". Get paid at all times when on project and and on bench. (minimal unlawful activity)

    c) Full time employees of small mom and pop firms (small business/ grocery store/restaurants etc) Get paid a salary but a lot of perk (which are not on w2 in order to save taxes...and that is unethical behavior).

    d) Employee (may be not full time) focused on work at "Client". They are not full time because they do not get paid when they are not on project. Usually smaller "consulting" firms (i would prefer to call them "contracting" firms) do this. There may be many many layers of contracting firms. Each is involved in some sort of unlawful activity.

    I think USCIS should/will go after folks involved in unlawful activities like untaxed money paid...wrong skills listed etc etc etc......Lastly, Just because one was able to do this before does not mean it was legal...

    Stop the infighting......do not generalize...if you want to generalize...generalize only on 1 dimension...LAWFUL vs.UNLAWFUL

    My 2 cents...





    2010 house Selena Gomez and Justin selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. justin bieber and selena gomez
  • justin bieber and selena gomez



  • Macaca
    02-13 09:42 AM
    Lobbying and Legislation: Enacting Better Laws (http://www.policylink.org/AdvocatingForChange/Lobbying/Legislators.html) (courtesy krishna.ahd)

    After you lay the foundation for your legislative efforts and assess the political landscape, your goal is to convince legislators to accept your position. Some activities, such as proposing legislation or amendments, meeting with legislators and their staff, and testifying at hearings, occur inside the halls of the legislature; other actions, such as letter writing, public demonstrations, and working with the media, are initiated outside the legislature to build public pressure and urge legislators to come over to your side. Always coordinate your actions inside and outside of the legislature to make sure you are consistent and achieve maximum effect.

    Write letters, send faxes and e-mails, and phone legislators. Letters are definitely worth the time. Legislators know that each letter they receive represents several additional constituents who feel the same way but have not taken the time to write. That�s why, in addition to writing your own letter, you should get your partners and allies to write letters as well.

    Be clear and concise. Keep your letter to one page, at most two, and address only one issue per letter, if possible. Clearly identify the bill you are writing about and the position you are urging (vote yes or no). Make two or three of your strongest arguments for or against the proposed legislation. Remember: Legislators receive many letters on many different issues; your letter should be easy to read and understand if you want any chance of grabbing their attention.
    Identify yourself and your constituency. Say something about who you are and whom you represent; you want the legislator to understand that you are someone she or he should listen to. Give an example of a personal story�preferably from the legislator�s district�that shows how the bill affects real people and that the problem is not just an isolated incident. Legislators hear about what�s good and bad policy all the time; real-life experiences grab their attention.
    Avoid using form letters whenever possible. Avoid them altogether if you cannot deliver extraordinary volume. Personal individually signed letters are far more effective. When you are soliciting letters from partners and allies, provide a sample with a request that they use it as a guide to writing a letter in their own words.
    While letters tend to be most effective, you can also fax, phone, and e-mail your legislators. Usually, you use e-mails, faxes and phone calls right before a bill is coming up for a vote to remind legislators of the importance of their vote to you. If you are planning to organize a fax, phone, or e-mail chain, in which your partners and allies ask their constituents and supporters to take action, be sure to provide the contact information for the appropriate representative because the most effective contacts are those that come from legislators� own constituents. For more on e-mail advocacy see the Internet Advocacy section.

    Meet with legislators. Face-to-face contact with legislators is key to humanizing the problem, demonstrating a commitment to solving it, and developing relationships for the long haul.

    Organize a small, diverse group of participants, perhaps three to five people. Make sure at least some of them reside in the legislator�s district.
    Select your best spokespersons and message. Choose someone who will appeal to the legislators you are trying to persuade.
    Decide ahead of time how you will conduct the meeting. Who will introduce the participants? Lead the meeting? Close the meeting? What materials will you take to leave with the legislator at the end of the meeting?
    Get to know legislators� staff. Legislators often rely heavily on the advice of key staff members. It is important to establish a good relationship with these staff members, make sure they have adequate information about your legislation, and try to learn from them any concerns you may need to address to keep your legislation moving forward. The staff will be your main point of contact if a legislator is unavailable or inaccessible.
    For more tips on meeting with legislators, such as scheduling, preparing for, conducting, and following up after the meeting, see Tips on Meeting with Your Elected Officials (http://archive.aclu.org/action/lobby.html), and �Six Practical Tips on How to Lobby Your Legislator or Elected Official (http://www.democracyctr.org/resources/lobbying.html)� in Lobbying�the Basics.

    Testify at hearings. This is not one of those times when you can wing it! Always be prepared before you give testimony on pending legislation.

    Get a rough vote count of how legislators are likely to vote before you attend the hearing and try to find out about outstanding issues and concerns. Having this information will help you choose the best witnesses, know what points you need to emphasize in your testimony, and consider amendments you may need to offer or agree to.
    Choose witnesses who will be credible and effective. Put together a combination of people directly affected by the legislation, experts, and individuals and organizations that represent legislators� constituents.
    Write out your testimony in advance so that it is clear, concise, and persuasive. Include personal stories whenever possible to show how the issue affects real people. Prepare a summary of your testimony for distribution at the hearing to legislators, the media, and other attendees. Anticipate questions legislators might ask and plan how to respond.
    Pack the legislative chambers with supporters and call the media. Wear buttons, T-shirts, or other identifying items to show legislators and the media the strength and presence of your support in the hearing room.
    Have legislators who support your cause ask your opponents tough questions and make supportive statements on your behalf. You could offer to draft a list of questions or key points that you would like them to cover. Discuss in advance amendments that may be offered and the bottom line for any compromises.

    Staging public protests or other public events. Consider organizing an event that energizes and mobilizes large numbers of supporters and captures legislators��and media�attention.

    Public protests can sometimes turn up the heat on lawmakers to vote your way or at least think twice about siding with the opposition.
    Holding a Lobby Day is an opportunity to mobilize large numbers of people to meet with multiple legislators in one day to show your legislative power and gain media attention. The day usually begins with training in lobbying skills and a teach-in on your issues, followed perhaps by a rally and news interviews, a couple of hours of meetings with legislators, and an end-of-day debriefing session for supporters.

    Ignite Public Scrutiny. Elected officials care about their public image. They want to be portrayed favorably in the news. Develop a media strategy around your legislation that includes news conferences, letters to the editor, writing opinion editorials, or other media strategies that will put your issue in the public eye, maintain public scrutiny throughout the legislative process, provide a vehicle for keeping pressure on elected officials, turn up the heat on those who are against you, and applaud those who stick with you. For more tips on developing a media strategy see the Media Advocacy section.
    Be persistent. Lobbying campaigns rarely come to a definitive end.

    If your proposed legislation is defeated, there is frequently another opportunity to reintroduce it. Don�t be discouraged. Often it takes several tries to pass a measure, especially one that seeks to bring about an important change.
    If you win, do not get complacent. Monitor implementation and make sure your legislation is fully funded. Look out for opposition attempts to undo or diminish your victory by trying to repeal your legislation, filing litigation to overturn it, or seeking regulations to significantly weaken its implementation.



    more...


    selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
  • Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez



  • Raju
    05-24 03:40 PM
    Nothing new. Of course the US needs to bring the bright and the best. Yes, I agree with you the US apparently doesn't have the necessary number of people with advanced degrees in science right now. I never told you to shut down the H1B or decrease the numbers. I am just saying, can people respect the other side and suggest more sensible mechanisms ? Can one understand that an automatic increase of 20% per year can cause hardship to citizens caught in a future and unexpected recession ? That's all I am saying.

    Folks, this is what concerns me. We are all very educated people and we cannot have a decent conversation. Many in this thread gets angry at me. As Lou Dobbs says, that is shocking. :-)

    Have a good one.

    Communique

    Hey do you that if something like that happens then Congress will decrease the numbers automatically





    hair Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber Selena Gomez
  • Justin Bieber Selena Gomez



  • senthil1
    05-17 02:08 PM
    Anyhow there are more chances for increasing H1b numbers at this situation with some restrictions(Our Indian companies will easily find a loophole for any law).Banning of H1B for bodyshopping or consulting will be impossible. Wait and watch for how CIRcus unfolds for next few weeks.

    Of course I don't work for a consulting company. And if I did I wouldn't be here UNLESS I WAS EMPLOYED 100% FROM DAY ONE.

    What people look like doesn't matter in regards to the H-1B. You are implying that I am doing something wrong in encouraging people TO OBEY THE LAW. That says a lot more of you and your standards than anything else. People are not committing crimes by being consultants. SOME people are comitting crimes by being here illegally because they don't meet the requirements for the H-1B they hold, because they went through a body shop. You can defend it all you want, IT'S ILLEGAL.



    more...


    selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. 2010 Justin Bieber amp; Selena
  • 2010 Justin Bieber amp; Selena



  • Macaca
    01-15 08:35 PM
    Not as clear this year (http://thehill.com/editorials/not-as-clear-this-year-2008-01-15.html) The Hill Editorial, 01/15/08

    After Democrats won control of Congress in 2006, their agenda for 2007 was unmistakable. It would start with taking steps to try to end the war in Iraq as well as tackling the items on their �Six in �06� campaign pledge.

    But the plan for the second session of the 110th Congress is unclear. The economy is expected to play a leading role on Capitol Hill this year, while Iraq will take more of a back seat. Democrats are well aware that they do not have the votes to make significant changes to Iraq policy and believe they can attract enough support to enact some sort of an economic stimulus package.

    Yet there is much uncertainty in what will be in that bill, especially with a White House that will undoubtedly want something different.

    Democrats have made some progress on their Six in �06 agenda, enacting bills on lobbying reform, student loans and the minimum wage. However, stem cell and Medicare prescription drug negotiation legislation has been and will continue to be blocked by President Bush�s veto power. Those bills, Democrats predict, will be made law in 2009, when they hope to have control of the executive and legislative branches.

    There is no shortage of bills to address in coming months, some of which were not completed last year, such as the farm measure, patent reform and reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

    Democratic appropriators, meanwhile, are expected to have more time to focus on their spending bills earlier this year because they will not be burdened by the need to finish leftover budget measures from the previous Republican regime. Still, losing the spending showdown with Bush in December limits their leverage in 2008.

    In order to build on their majority, Democrats must combat GOP claims that this is a do-nothing Congress. They are expected to discuss that at an upcoming retreat, as well as fine-tune what their 2008 agenda will be.

    It is unlikely that the tensions between House and Senate Democrats, which have flared in recent months, will continue to mount. A cohesive message in 2008, as in all election years, is vital to winning in November.

    Republicans in Washington privately acknowledge that Democrats are likely to control both houses of Congress next year. But the dismally low approval ratings for Congress have gotten the attention of Democratic leaders, who know they must produce in 2008.

    If things go right for Democrats this year, they will be talking about bold ideas in 2009 with a Democrat in the White House and at least a handful of new Democratic senators. But there are many hurdles for them to clear to get to that point.





    hot house Justin Bieber amp; selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber amp; Selena
  • Justin Bieber amp; Selena



  • Berkeleybee
    05-17 12:59 PM
    Qualified_trash,

    We (IV Core) have no problem with dissent or discussion. Both gc03 and learning01 each expressed their opinions on reacting to Lou Dobbs.

    On the issue of what to do about Lou Dobbs:

    (1) Lou Dobbs is no friend of ours (immigrants) -- he absolutely doesn't make the list of people we should thank! A little googling will tell you more about Dobbs and his immigration politics. He is using this argument today to further his ends. Not just Dobbs but other anti-immigrants are on a divide and conquer path to kill this version of CIR.

    (2) IV as a group has plenty else to do, so there will be no IV-wide response to Lou Dobb's comment of the day.

    On the other hand, all of our members are individuals, and they are free to express their opinions by calling or writing, so long as they do not claim that these are the opinions of IV as a group.

    best,
    Berkeleybee



    more...


    house selena gomez bikini justin selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. tattoo Justin Bieber Selena
  • tattoo Justin Bieber Selena



  • 485Mbe4001
    09-26 06:17 PM
    Good discussion. I am not a fox fan, but i read NYT and Drudgereport, listen to Rachel Maddaw as well as Handel. In fact i read any political and economics related blog i can lay my hands on. I understand your points.

    My point is that people say he will do so many things, the problem is that the congress is not changing. The congress has to approve something so that he can sign it. Secondly no matter what you say companies will do whatever is right for the bottomline and share price. if he starts taxing companies they relocate, he has proposed increasing the social security taxes across all categories. Says he will not increase taxes for middle class americans but gives little indication of how he will finance the trillion dollar spending program. If his universal health program passes then you will see more deducted out of your paycheck. How will he create tons of jobs, how will he subsidize education. The fact of the matter is that he will be under exterme pressure if he is elected to office with such high expectations. He will be screwed if he increases taxes and screwed if he doesnt fund the programs he is promising all over the place.

    As for long term, the country has to increase interest rates to support the current account deficit. IF you increase interest rates the economy will further go in the tank. The country has to increase taxes to fund SS or Medicare. If not they need to overhaul the SS and MC system and any pandering politican will never be able to make that change.

    The fact of the matter is that both are career politicians and will do anyting to win. i just want to present an opposing view when one is painted as the saviour and the other a @$#@ in a total crapfest where no one is pure.


    Just Kidding - reading your post i was feeling like I'm reading a comment from Fox News. However i do respect your opinion and thanks for expressing it.

    My Point is more long term - in the shorter term no major change can happen to economy even if Barack wins but eventually Economy would be stronger under Barack's leadership. He also stressed that he would stop "JOBS BEING SHIPPED OVERSEAS" which means companies like TATA or INFY or some Chinese company taking my Job ( or any American's Job ) away from US to INDIA or CHINA. If you are planning a future in US - you would not want your US job taken away by your brother at INDIA or CHINA and Barack will make sure that doesn't happen.

    The Bottonline is he will create tons of Jobs at US , so unemployment will be very low , average peoples will be happy and however loud ANTI-IMMIGRANTS scream and shout no AMERICAN will pay attention. Our EB reforms will Pass much easily and we will be able to able to lead a much happier and content life with GREEN CARD.

    Once again my Point is definitely Long Term - in the shorter duration Barack has to first fix the Mortgage Mess and do something with Iran by taking help from EUROPE.





    tattoo Justin Bieber Selena Gomez selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Photos: Justin Bieber and
  • Photos: Justin Bieber and



  • ajm
    08-05 10:44 AM
    A random number generator is like sex:
    When its good, it's wonderful,
    And when its bad, it's still pretty good.



    more...


    pictures makeup Selena Gomez and Justin selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber Selena Gomez
  • Justin Bieber Selena Gomez



  • imvoice1234
    01-08 12:36 PM
    Muslims are cowerds. They never come out in open and attack. They take the means of Jihad etc....
    No matter how highly educated they are. Their basic nature remains the same. Every Muslim country u name it has a problem with either their neighbouts. They do not belive in harmony an co existance. surprisingly they also fight among themselves.
    Read the link below on how mean they are.
    http://www.rense.com/general29/FAHD.HTM

    Now this article states the Israel - Palestine conflict clearly.
    God bless Israel. God has always been with Israel.





    dresses Justin Bieber amp; Selena selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Beach Cuties Justin Bieber and
  • Beach Cuties Justin Bieber and



  • Refugee_New
    01-06 12:45 PM
    Discussion of non EB related issues should be stopped.
    This form should be used for employment related immigration issues, end of discussion.
    I have given you green for it.

    Why do you want to end this discussion? Are you scared of speaking the truth or you don't care the killing of innocent school kids?



    more...


    makeup Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. selena gomez bikini justin
  • selena gomez bikini justin



  • gchopes
    06-06 11:06 PM
    Buying a house at or around the same rent and availing the 8K credit doesn't seem like a bad deal to me. GC or no..most have EAD (at least Jul 07 filers)..so if we lose our job we would be in a similar situation as a GC holder..having a form of work permit so employer doesnt have to sponsor us.

    Uncle Sam is never going to give u 8K in the next 10 years that we will be waiting for getting our GC. So buy now before the rates get back to 7-8%.





    girlfriend Photos: Justin Bieber and selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. holiday. Justin Bieber and
  • holiday. Justin Bieber and



  • SunnySurya
    08-05 09:52 AM
    You right... But my question is why can't I contribute to IV as well as to his effort. After all the reason I want to contribute to IV is that I want some thing in return that will help me get my Green Card faster...
    I am worried that people who originally filled in Eb2 and have later PDs will be punished.
    I am worried that people will seek easy way out instead of concentrating on fixes like visa recapture.

    ... and dont forget that you drink from it too.

    Take the $500 or $1000 and contribute to IV so that we can get a solid resolution.

    No wonder illegals are so strong. United they stand. Pity 'highly educated' workers use their 'intelligence' for matters nefarious and counter-productive. No wonder we are in this situation to start with.

    If there were a collective voice with strong bargaining power, we would have not been in this situation.

    Law breakers are feared. Law abiding folks are derided.

    Go on, feed Loo Dogs for yet another sensational story on why ALL immigrants need to go back.

    Dont forget, for the average Joe anyone that does not 'look like them' can be a target for hate crime and resentment. PR about a case like this can only make the entire community weaker. If you happen to be Indian, what is to stop someone that is upset about immigrants not targeting you or your family? They wont know that YOU are their protector in chief, with the lawsuit stuck in your backpocket. You are but a symbol of the problem that you make out to be.

    Seriously. I have been involved in very key discussions with very senior public figures. Their number one pet peeve: You guys are so divided, even if we wanted to help, we are unable to.

    You just go on to prove their point.

    It is understandable that you are upset about what you see as being 'unfair'... just extrapolate that to the Ron Hiras of the world and NumberUSAs of the world ... you are feeding the larger cause of hatred towards highly skilled workers ... by creating a false impression that highly skilled workers abuse the system...

    Dont make your pillow peeves an issue that comes back to hurt ALL, including you. On many dimensions. This is serious stuff. Think about it.





    hairstyles 2010 Justin Bieber amp; Selena selena gomez justin bieber hawaii beach. Justin Bieber Photos - Justin
  • Justin Bieber Photos - Justin



  • amitjoey
    08-05 02:11 PM
    Good points, but let me put a counter argument. Two people , one is named SunnySurya and the other is named Mr XYZ. Both came to the USA at the same time in 1999. The difference was SunnySurya came here for his masters and the other guy came here through shady means.

    Mr XYZ was able to file his green card in 2002 in EB3 category based on his shady arrangements with his employer, whereas Mr SunnySurya continued to do right and socially acceptable things i.e. studied, got a job and then after several years this big company filled his green card in EB2 category in 2006.

    On the other hand after strugling for several years Mr. XYZ has collected enough years on his resume to be elligible for EB2. Now he want to port his PD

    SunnySurya's PD is 2006 and Mr. XYZ PD is 2002. Now if Mr. XYZ want to stand in EB2 line, I wonder what problems SunnySurya can have???:confused:



    GOOD POINT: IN my case Sunnysurya has EB3 even after waiting and doing the right things: ie: having a masters and all that. and MR. XYZ filed in EB2 with shady arrangements and got thru. so what does Sunnysurya do>?





    dontcareanymore
    08-07 05:21 PM
    Now worst thing is that Lion can not change his job profile till he gets the green card. He will be forced to act like a monkey so that it matches with his monkey job profile mentioned in his PERM application. All he can hope for is to invoke AC21 after couple of years to join a new zoo, that too on a similar job profile. :D:D Gurus what are the Lion's options at this point of time?? :D:D:

    Irony is that if our Lion stays in USA on monkey visa for couple of years, and finally goes back to India, his Lion skills will be obsolete, and Indian zoo's will not entertain a Lion acting like a monkey. Our poor Lion is totally doomed. :D:D

    Or better yet ; Go to a Desi Zoo in US and they will be happy to process Lion visa even for a Monkey :):)





    ItIsNotFunny
    12-17 03:11 PM
    Looks like his initial intentions were not bad but discussion went on wrong direction.

    Shanti! Shanti!

    Marphad,

    In the recent past, I have expressed my views about the same subject on this forum. I was very angry with what happened in Mumbai. The desire to fix the wrong has not gone away, but now that I look back, I regret some of the things I said at that time. My comments did not do any good and some of the coments offend few others on this forum. Those who felt offended by my comments are just as entitled to these forums as I am. I am not trying to be politically correct, just trying to say that it doesn't serves any purpose to dicsuss this issue on IV fourms.

    Branding all people from a specific faith doesn't help in anyways. For too long men have fought because of religion and each such time was avoidable.

    I do have a suggestion. To get some perspective, I suggest you watch the bollywood movie "New York", although I am not a big fan of bollywood movies.

    Peace.


    .



    Tidak ada komentar:

    Posting Komentar