pierced nipple videos

images girlfriend Pierced Nipple by pierced nipple videos. pierced vs nipple - PicArena Image Match - pierced pictures, nipple pictures
  • pierced vs nipple - PicArena Image Match - pierced pictures, nipple pictures



  • gapala
    06-08 09:42 AM
    It is very nice discussion.

    I am in process of buying forclosure home in SUWANEE ( Atlanata) area. I based on my survey and research feel that I am getting good deal(175 K price for 2800 sqft, 2004).by th


    Are you new to Atlanta area?





    wallpaper pierced vs nipple - PicArena Image Match - pierced pictures, nipple pictures pierced nipple videos. pink gets nipple pierced.
  • pink gets nipple pierced.



  • Pagal
    06-20 03:45 PM
    Hello Hiralal,

    Indeed! But if the individual 'affordability' is such that you can pay the monthly payments even after moving out of US due to job loss/485 denial, and if the purchase lowers your tax bill, then it may make more sense to buy the house...

    Personally, I've always had intentions of buying real estate in US, EU and India.... have it in India, considering it in US and exploring how to buy it in EU... :) Wish had much more 'cash'... :D





    pierced nipple videos. pictures has a pierced nipple
  • pictures has a pierced nipple



  • ss1026
    12-20 04:23 PM
    Every one I know (muslim or non muslim) is appaled by the Mumbai incident. A sensible person has to be. I do not know the sentiment in pakistan though I am sure there is a propaganda machine at work there. I have many pakistan collegues here and they were outraged. If this was an act, they are good it. This is similar to saying that most hindus were not appaled by what happened in gujarat/orissa.

    Silly as it sounds, there is no justification to kill innocent people. I read the mumbai attacked forum and was horrified what was said on both sides. Unfortunately, truth is usually the first casaulty in such incidents followed by been responsible and polite. I am sure words were exchanged from all sides.

    My hope or naivety is straigth forward. Lets stop the cycle of hatred and get the guilty to justice (tough justice if that is what is needed). India is destined for greatness and I believe it is time for a Justice system that functions without prejuidice or fear.





    2011 pink gets nipple pierced. pierced nipple videos. hair Yep, non pierced nipple
  • hair Yep, non pierced nipple



  • unitednations
    03-24 12:44 PM
    can you kindly enlighten me on what you exactly mean by "suspicious" original poster?

    Yeah..even I went to local office..without attorney..they didnt ask me to sign a statement..just sworn

    USCIS adjudicators follow a manual and very specific set of procedures as laid out by their headquarters. Sometimes in the gray areas or areas of interpretation they are given wide latitude in how to interpret those rules.

    However; document list and procedure for getting them is very prescribed. When person posts of their experience with USCIS and it is very different then what their policies, procedures are then it makes it very suspicious...

    Everything you have posted falls in line with department of labor audit and not local uscis office interviews or requests for information from local office interviews.

    If what you are saying is accurate then you and your company should have consulted with your attornies and specifically asked for this in a request for evidence and assessed the legality of this request and pulled the officer back and sent in only what was required by law.

    California service center back in 2004/2005 was denying 140's due to "temporary job" issue. Lawyer stupidly in replying to ability to pay part of rfe sent in contracts like you do in H-1b and put it in front of uscis that the contracts were temporary. USCIS had no choice but to deny the 140's and this was one of those issues (one of the people actually had their approved 140 reopened and denied for this issue). That particular company had 35 straight denials over this issue.



    more...


    pierced nipple videos. pierced nipple picture.
  • pierced nipple picture.



  • Sunx_2004
    07-11 12:23 PM
    I'll tell you how I did it:

    1) USCIS administrative appeals office decisions (can be found by navigating around USCIS.GOV

    2) USCIS memos/interpretations/policies (can also be found on uscis)

    3) Go to department of state web-site. Navigate around it and you will find links to their procedures and interpretations

    4) monitor the forums and see postings

    5) immigration portal used to have links or summaries to AILA liaision minutes with service centers

    6) people used to send me their rfe's, denials and what they lawyers did to get them into the mess. Basically learning how people got into a mess and what uscis did to catch them or to deny their cases

    7) go to dol.gov and look for foreign labor certification; there are FAQ's on perm labors and h-1b


    8) go to uscis.gov and read the INA and CFR's

    --------------------------------------------------------------

    If a person is used to reading laws and understanding the hierarchy and then intertwining uscis procedure along with the various service center procedure then you will start to get a clearer understanding.

    All of the information is public. Don't rely on what your friend told you as they usually only know what someone else told them.

    I had a non compete agreement when I left my employer and couldn't work for one year. During that year; I had nothing to do other then watch tv and watch the portal. No matter how small a question was asked/posted I researched it through all the sources I mentioned above.

    Finally; don't do what you think is right or "gut feeling"...


    Research it; research it and research it some more. Sometimes what you read at first glance; you make a conclusion to your own benefit without understanding all the other laws/policies/procedures that override it.

    Thanks





    pierced nipple videos. Stainless steel pierced nipple
  • Stainless steel pierced nipple



  • PD_Dec2002
    07-07 10:01 PM
    Hi,
    Thank you for all your support.They asked for my husband`s paystubs ,all employment history all W2`s when he filed for AOS as primary.Later we withdrew his petition and only kept petition filed through me as the primary.That officer is extremely detailed oriented ,he/she asked and questioned every minute detail pertaining to our case.
    New update on EAD is that local offices are no longer authorized to issue interim EAD`S.We went to local office in greer, south carolina(we live in charlotte,nc) and the answer we got was that they can only email uscis why there is a delay.and if we wanted to find an answer we should come back in 2 weeks and that they won`t disclose any thing by phone because of privacy act.

    So you got called for an interview?

    Thanks,
    Jayant



    more...


    pierced nipple videos. videos. pierced nipple
  • videos. pierced nipple



  • gcisadawg
    12-27 02:21 PM
    Found this somewhere in the internet , this is meant for those Indian muslims who want to cause havoc in India.

    Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.
    'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language.
    -----
    Maybe if we circulate this , Indian citizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths against islamic radicals infesting the country.

    Interesting. In Australia, the Muslims that want to live under Sharia law are immigrants but In India they are part and parcel of Indian fabric for several centuries. So, John Howard's 'Memo' may not work in India! One pill doesn't cure all ills! As Howard said, try making one language as THE language and see what happens. We have gone thru that path and let us not fool ourselves.


    Coming to Sharia law in the context of Indian Muslims, If Sharia Criminal law is implemented for Indian Muslims, what would happen? While non-muslims who commit small crimes in India serves few months or few years in Jail, Indian Muslims who commit the same crime would loose a hand or a two and a leg, maybe. This would see equal application of Sharia Law, both personal and Civil.

    Sharia law is OK as long as it is personal and when things are resolved among Muslims. But when one of the community member isn't satisfied and come to a secular court, then the secular law of the land should apply. For instance, when Shah Bano came to court, Secular law should have been applied.

    Amend Existing personal and criminal law to remove any references to religion, either Hindu , Muslim, Christian or any. (I believe Criminal code never had any reference to religion)

    Pass a super law that states "With respect to PERSONAL laws only, India respects Hindu law, Sharia law and whatever new law any new religion comes up with when it is used solely among that community. But when a member of any community approaches any judicial wing of the country, then the secular law of the land would prevail"... For ex, if a muslim who marries two wives is drawn to court by one of his wives, the first question should be "which wife do you want to keep since secular law recognizes only one"...For the divorced wife, everything that should be done based on secular law should be done including alimony, child custody etc..

    Indian Muslim community is not one big mass instead it is fragmented. There is no national leader of repute that can unite them and lead them. They may not vote for BJP due to obvious reasons but their vote is spread across all other parties. For instance, they have to go either with DMK or ADMK where congress has no scope of occupying CM post! So much is made out of Antulay and the vote bank. Maybe Antulay would be able to win his constituency. But can he get the all the Muslim votes of Maharashtra? I doubt it..Forget about national level. Many people are hearing his name for the first time because of his statement.

    Where does it leave Indian Muslims who are caught between Vote bank politics and their self-inflicted as well as forced stagnation?

    Peace,
    G





    2010 pictures has a pierced nipple pierced nipple videos. girlfriend Pierced Nipple by
  • girlfriend Pierced Nipple by



  • GCScrewed
    07-13 09:27 PM
    I hope you get your GC soon. As for me its 'wait until dark'. It'll come some day.

    And NO I am not an IT EB2. I am a non-STEM MBA in Finance who does not pratice engineering anymore.

    Between an MBA and Pharmacist, of course the pharmacist is more valuable. So is a nurse.



    more...


    pierced nipple videos. pierced nipple picture.
  • pierced nipple picture.



  • alterego
    09-27 09:04 PM
    The Nov. bulletin will very much depend on whether the USCIS has completed their inventory evaluation process or not. If not then it will be a reprint of the Oct. Bulletin, if they have then I anticipate good EB2 I movement and fair EB3 I movement. EB3 ROW should see more gradual movement.





    hair hair Yep, non pierced nipple pierced nipple videos. pierced-nipple-09162009-01
  • pierced-nipple-09162009-01



  • NKR
    08-05 04:21 PM
    I am not taking sides here, but it is not a question of "smarter". I have a simple question. Do years spent doing MS/PhD have no value? They count for nothing in PD. On the other hand a person with a BS accumulates 5 years in the same time and ports. Now he/she is a full 5 years ahead of the one that pursued the education route. Fair?

    I don't think that porting is all fair. Just MHO that the 5 year experience rule negates all efforts in getting a masters degree/PhD and puts those people at a huge disadvantage. The system tried to make up for that by creating preference categories. Not that they work perfectly of course as many of you have pointed out.


    I think it is all subjective. You ask �Do years spent doing MS/Phd have no value?�. A person who has 5+ years experience will ask �Do years spent working have no value?�.

    Just think of a scenario where a person who right after finishing a degree gets into masters because he had money and another decides to work for whatever reason (he could not afford could be one reason), The former finishes his MS and applies GC right away, how can the latter person who waits for an extra three years and apply get ahead of the former?.

    Now you might say � No dude, I did not have money, I worked for 2 years and then got into MS�, like I said it is all subjective. You pick a case that augurs well for your argument and I chose a scenario to counter yours.

    I think it is fair to equate 5 years of work experience (remember, to qualify for EB2 you need to have PROGRESSIVE work experience, you need to show some progress/advancement in that 5 years) with 2+ years of MS. I had more than 5 years of experience and I applied in EB2 and now I am doing my masters. Will I withdraw my GC application and wait to apply after I do my masters?. Hell no.



    more...


    pierced nipple videos. Pierced Nipple Clogs
  • Pierced Nipple Clogs



  • titanicman
    12-18 11:05 PM
    thank you marphad for starting this topic, a creative discussion should go on.
    we have lot of threads for immigration, this topic shows various opinions from differnt people. once agian congarts marphad for this thread.





    hot pierced nipple picture. pierced nipple videos. piercings videos. hot nipple
  • piercings videos. hot nipple



  • paskal
    07-14 04:45 PM
    The reason for this was not because of EB3ROW getting preference, it was because USCIS illegally used up entire year's quota before the congress actually authorized them to. Stop making false claims about EB3ROW getting preference over Eb2-I

    but you are not correct about this. please look it up. The vertical spillover was going to EB3 ROW, had that not been so, EB2 I would not have become U, even though (you are right about that) USCIS was actually allocating a little too fast.

    The bottom line is this: before the "system changed" the spillover went to EB3 ROW (country quota more important that category preference)
    Now with revised interpretation spillover goes first to EB2 retrogressed countries (preference category precedent over country quota- use of soft quota provison from AC21). Either way Eb3 I was last on the totem pole.
    There would have been no spillover to EB3 I in either situation. I'm not saying this to either to justify it or to argue for it's fairness. Just trying to make a point about the root issues.
    Therefore, the "change" leaves EB3 I exactly where it was before- which of course is an insane place to be. Frankly, in your place, I would be freaking going out of my mind. But if your only reason for this action is that "change", you have to sit back a moment and understand what the change has doen (or in this case not done) to you.
    The ONLY way to solve the EB3I problem is increased GC numbers. That is why recapture has been the first and foremost thing we have always pursued. Last time there was a recapture, GC numbers went to every single category. Anyway you look at it, if with a recapture, EB2 became current, every bit of spillover in every quarter would go to EB3. Eventually, there will be more long lasting reform. For now we desperately need the extra numbers in any form or shape.

    Just my 2c. not trying to trying to "stop your voice from being heard". One piece of friendly and well meaning advice. Target letters and measures at those that have the power to make the changes you want. Otherwise the effort is pointless from the start.



    more...


    house dresses pierced nipples video. pierced nipple videos. pierced nipples and all!
  • pierced nipples and all!



  • Macaca
    05-01 06:05 PM
    A New Immigration Consensus
    A bipartisan coalition of business leaders and mayors have joined together to make the case that visa reform is an economic imperative. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703387904576279293334248326.html)
    By MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG | Wall Street Journal

    Last month, President Obama convened a diverse group of business executives, mayors, law enforcement leaders, ministers and advocates at the White House to discuss a problem that threatens America's economic future�our broken immigration system.

    We've tried before to fix it. President George W. Bush made comprehensive immigration reform a major legislative priority during his second term. Congressional leaders from both parties, including Sens. Ted Kennedy and John McCain, worked tirelessly to pass legislation. But the bill could not garner the required votes. Nor could a much narrower bill, the Dream Act, which would have granted legal status to the children of immigrants who enroll in college or the military.

    These defeats have led to a conventional wisdom in Washington that bipartisan immigration reform is impossible. But a new consensus on immigration reform has emerged in the business community that could break the logjam and provide a much-needed jolt to our economy. The idea is simple: Reform the way we attract and keep talented and hard-working people from abroad to better promote economic growth.

    In the global economy, the countries that attract the world's best, brightest and hardest-working will grow and succeed. Those that refuse them entry will not. America has long understood this. We would not have become a global superpower without opening our doors to immigrants�and we cannot long remain one without continuing that practice. Smart, self-motivated immigrants spur the innovations and create the jobs our economy needs to thrive. Between 1995 and 2005, for example, 25% of high-tech startups in the U.S. had at least one immigrant as a key founder. Those companies alone have created 450,000 jobs�with the vast majority of them going to Americans.

    Our global competitors understand how crucial immigrants are to economic growth. They roll out the red carpet for entrepreneurs; we have no entrepreneur visa. They heavily recruit our advanced-degree students; we educate them and send them home. They woo the engineers, scientists and other skilled professionals who invent new products, launch product lines, and develop the technology of tomorrow; we erect arbitrary, senseless and bureaucratic barriers to recruitment. And we do all this even as our unemployment rate hovers around 9%.

    Although each party claims to have the solution to our country's economic woes, neither has embraced a job-creation strategy based on immigration reform, which would not add a penny to the national debt. To spur them into action, a bipartisan coalition of business leaders and mayors has joined together to make the case that visa reform is an economic imperative. In nine months the Partnership for a New American Economy has grown to more than 200 members, including companies that together employ more than 3.5 million people.

    We believe in the need to secure our borders, make it possible to hold businesses accountable for verifying the status of workers, address the reality that 11 million people are here illegally and cannot be deported en masse�and increase lawful opportunities for those who want to come to this country and contribute to our prosperity. Nevertheless, our nation cannot afford to wait for Washington to get its act together and pass comprehensive immigration reform. There is too much at stake. Our economy demands that we take immediate action on the most urgent�and politically attainable�reform: making it easier for job creators to come and stay here.

    Creating a visa for entrepreneurs who already have funding to start their businesses will lead directly and immediately to American jobs. Visa reforms to improve temporary and permanent pathways for companies to fill the current shortages of engineers, scientists and other specialists�whose annual visa caps are often exhausted within days of becoming available�will spur growth at existing U.S. companies.

    Providing visas to the brightest foreign graduates of our universities will allow our economy to reap the rewards of their work. At the same time, allowing immigrants who succeed in college, or serve in our military, the chance to pursue a career and build their lives here legally will strengthen the long-term health of the American economy.

    Finally, developing a reliable way for employers to hire guest workers�who grow the nation's food, support our $1.3 trillion tourism industry, and fill seasonal gaps across industries�will help support U.S. businesses and create additional, better-paying American jobs.

    Those who focus on where the parties differ on immigration, rather than where they both agree, have paralyzed the debate in Washington for far too long. Despite this deadlock, there is an opportunity for both parties to seize upon the economics of immigration reform and focus on what all Americans agree we need: more jobs. Leaders of both parties talk about creating jobs, but they are ignoring the voices of business leaders who can actually create them�if only Congress would give them the tools.

    Mr. Bloomberg, an independent, is mayor of New York City

    In Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio shrugs off a rough April (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arpaio-trouble-20110501,0,3084923.story) By Nicholas Riccardi | Los Angeles Times
    Obama renews call for immigration action in Miami speech (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-renews-call-for-immigration-action-in-miami-speech/2011/04/29/AFbdHUHF_story.html) By Perry Bacon Jr. | The Washington Post





    tattoo Stainless steel pierced nipple pierced nipple videos. pierced nipple photos.
  • pierced nipple photos.



  • Macaca
    12-30 04:18 PM
    THE MAJORITY LEADER (http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2007/dec/30/566688348.html) Reflecting on a rough year By Lisa Mascaro [(202) 662-7436 or lisa.mascaro@lasvegassun.com] | Las Vegas Sun, Dec 30 2007

    Sen. Harry Reid settles into the chair by the fire in his majority leader's office that is so stately and grand it looks like something Las Vegas would create if ever a faux Washington were added to the Strip.

    The first snow of the season has fallen outside his second-floor window, the Washington Monument framed by the sill. He sits close to the fireplace because his neck is stiff from doing his morning push-ups too quickly. Reid still does 120 push-ups and 200 sit-ups each day, but he has condensed his yoga into fewer sessions because there just isn't time. Now, a few days after his 68th birthday, the wear of the job has settled into normalcy.

    It's been a long year of long days and nights here, the first time Democrats have been in charge of Congress in 12 years.

    On this day alone he hosted a breakfast for a Henderson Democrat running for Congress, met with the White House over the budget stalemate, welcomed a group of Nevada real estate officials concerned about the mortgage crisis - and ran the floor of the U.S. Senate.

    Moving to the majority leader's job this year, after all those years as a leader of the minority, has been "the difference between playing first base for the Yankees and playing it for Basic High School."

    Democrats are ending this year downtrodden after the high of sweeping into power following the 2006 election. Congressional approval ratings are at historic lows - lower than those of the unpopular president. Though many of their campaign promises became law, much more of the Democratic agenda remains unfulfilled.

    Reid repeatedly says he feels good about the work he's done this year. Running the Senate, he says, is not as enjoyable as watching the grandkids play ball, but "it's been a tremendously fascinating, interesting year for me."

    Days after the interview in his office, however, he would concede that "I share the frustration" of having Democratic priorities blocked.

    Nevada's first majority leader was barely that, with the Senate thinly divided 51-49. Democrats may have come to Washington believing they had a voter mandate for a new direction, but Republicans had a different opinion. With such a slight majority, Reid's chamber became the place where so much of the Democratic agenda came to die.

    The leader on the House side, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, began 2007 with a bold 100-hours agenda, crafted without Reid's knowledge or input. Democrats should have known that nothing passes that quickly in the slower-moving Senate. Any momentum gained by the legislative flurry would soon be lost.

    Indeed, the bills arrived in the Senate with a thud.

    Senate Republicans soon gave Reid a taste of the partisanship he had dished out in the past and blocked every move. Grand plans for a new energy policy, for example, became skeletons of their original intent. More filibusters were conducted this year than ever in Senate history.

    President Bush, whose own ratings reached all-time lows, asserted himself in a way unexpected for an executive with so little clout and whose party was out of power. His willingness to wield the veto pen for the first time in his presidency created an incentive and a safety net for Republicans to obstruct the Democratic agenda.

    Reid calls Bush the "most stubborn" official he has ever known.

    In this environment, the year became one when politics, not policy, seemed to matter most.

    Both sides appeared to abandon any attempt at forming consensus and concentrated on laying a foundation for the 2008 elections. Democrats will say they need to win more Senate seats to accomplish their goals; Republicans will say voters should be wary of Democrats running Washington.

    Could a leader other than Reid have achieved a better outcome? Why was he unable or unwilling to get Republicans on board? When he couldn't break through the partisan gridlock, should he have tried to be nicer - or meaner?

    Thomas E. Mann, a constitutional scholar at the Brookings Institution, was among those reluctant to grade Reid on this year alone. Wait and see how Reid performs in coming years, especially with a new president, Mann said.

    "I would say incomplete," he said of this year's performance. "The test of Harry Reid's leadership lies ahead."

    What he brings to the job

    Late one night in the Senate this fall, Reid is about to announce that an agreement has been reached to move forward on the Farm Bill after weeks of legislative gridlock. Into the chamber walks a farm state Democrat, Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. He pulls her aside. The two stand face to face. One of his hands is on her left shoulder, the other is on her right. She nods, telling him thank you.

    That kind of personal interaction with every member of his caucus is what Democratic senators love most about Reid.

    He is clearly not the most charismatic public face for the party. His first impression on many voters came election night, when the diminutive Reid rambled a soft-spoken speech onstage at the Democrats' victory party.

    Rush Limbaugh dismisses him as "Dingy Harry." When Reid's whispery voice breaks through, it's often spitting an arrow that gets him into trouble - calling Bush a "loser" and a "liar," saying the Iraq war "is lost," deriding Republican senators as "puppets" of the White House.

    As majority leader, future president Lyndon Johnson towered over his colleagues, physically and emotionally, finding their vulnerable buttons and pushing hard, historians tell us. But as majority leader Reid more resembles Mike Mansfield or Bob Dole, a senator among senators - even if, as Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer wrote in his book, the former boxer will kneecap anyone who crosses him.

    Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy explained that at the regular Tuesday policy luncheons, when Reid lays out the week's goals for Democratic senators, "people fall in line and support them, because he has done a lot of work prior to that time in listening and giving people an opportunity to be heard."

    Kennedy says Reid builds consensus better "than any leader that I can remember in my time."

    But even this party unity was no match for the Republicans in the Senate who held together just as tightly, refusing to cave to the Democratic agenda.

    Republican Sen. Mel Martinez, the former Republican National Committee chairman who crossed the aisle to try to broker an immigration deal this year, said Reid simply doesn't have enough votes to steamroll the minority.

    "We have 49 - if we were a minority of 39 you could do that," Martinez said. "At some point it's going to have to dawn on him that Americans are going to want to see things getting done."

    Martinez says Reid is more intent on protecting his members from difficult votes than giving Republicans a chance to shape legislation that could pass.

    Only in the final weeks of the session did the backlog of bills pass, as Democrats faced the prospect of ending their first year in legislative gridlock. Everything that arrived on the president's desk was a compromise - energy policy, domestic spending, funding for the Iraq war.

    "The way you accomplish things in the Senate is in the middle," said the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. McConnell said his strategy was standard business for the Senate: "Either to shape things that we thought were headed in the right direction and there was a possibility of meeting in the middle, or if we thought it was completely inappropriate for the country, to stop it altogether."

    Like all strategies, the one Democrats have chosen is a gamble. Voters tell pollsters they are more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans next year. But will voters stand by Reid if 2008 is branded as a do-nothing year?

    When Republicans called Democrats the do-nothing Congress this year, Democrats spat back that Republicans were the Grand Obstruction Party.

    Schumer, who heads Senate Democrats' reelection efforts, likes to say Republicans are filibustering themselves out of office.

    Democratic senators will fan out to their states in 2008 and say that Democrats stood together for initiatives popular with Americans - ending the war, providing health care for kids, curbing global warming.

    "People know what we believe in, what we stand for, they know the Republicans are blocking us and that's OK," Reid said.

    He believes his party will pick up at least four seats next year. If so, he would be in striking range of the 60 votes needed to pass legislation.



    more...


    pictures videos. pierced nipple pierced nipple videos. spears pierced nipple
  • spears pierced nipple



  • Macaca
    12-21 10:53 AM
    Bush boxed in his congressional foes (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-congress21dec21,1,2311328.story) Democrats took the Hill but were stymied by a steadfast president By Janet Hook | LA Times, Dec 21, 2007

    WASHINGTON � Just over a year ago, a chastened President Bush acknowledged that his party had taken a "thumping" in the congressional elections, and he greeted the new Democratic majority at the weakest point of his presidency.

    But since then, Democrats in Congress have taken a thumping of their own as Bush has curbed their budget demands, blocked a cherished children's health initiative, stalled the drive to withdraw troops from Iraq and stymied all efforts to raise taxes.

    Rather than turn tail for his last two years in the White House, Bush has used every remaining weapon in his depleted arsenal -- the veto, executive orders, the loyalty of Republicans in Congress -- to keep Democrats from getting their way.He has struck a combative pose, dashing hopes that he would be more accommodating in the wake of his party's drubbing in the 2006 midterm voting.

    Bush's own second-term domestic agenda is a shambles: His ambitions to overhaul Social Security and immigration law are dead; plans to update his signature education program have foundered; few other initiatives are waiting in the wings.

    But on a host of foreign and domestic policy issues, backed by a remarkably disciplined Republican Party in the House and Senate, Bush has been able to confound Democrats. It has been a source of great frustration to the party that came to power with sky-high expectations and the belief it had a mandate for change. And it is a vivid reminder of how much clout even a weakened president can have -- especially one as single-minded as Bush.

    "We have custody of Congress, but we don't have control," said Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village). "Bush has shown, time and again, that he's a very stubborn guy. November 2006 didn't change that."

    Many Republicans have been surprised and impressed with Bush's continuing power -- even when he has used it to ends they disagreed with.

    "At the beginning of the year, most of us viewed the president as having less control over the process than ever," said Rep. Michael N. Castle (R-Del.), a moderate who voted against Bush on healthcare, the budget and other issues. "But this year, he realized more goals than in a lot of the years when he had Republicans controlling Congress."

    At a news conference Thursday after Congress adjourned for the year, Bush had kind words for much of Congress' work and did not gloat over his success in keeping Democrats' ambitions in check.

    "What ended up happening was good for the country," he said.

    Democrats blamed this year's congressional gridlock on Bush, but his inflexibility on key issues was just one factor.

    Republican lawmakers showed scant interest in compromise. Democrats were riven by internal divisions. And Bush did little to unite rather than divide the factions on Capitol Hill. He did not much resemble the kind of politician he was as governor of Texas, when he forged a strong relationship with the Democratic lieutenant governor.

    Immediately after the 2006 election, it looked as if Bush might offer Democrats an olive branch and set a more bipartisan tone. He let go controversial Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. He called incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) at home on Christmas. After years of ignoring congressional Democrats, he began inviting them by the dozen to the White House to hear them out.

    But the honeymoon did not last long. Democrats were furious when, after an election they believed was a mandate to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, Bush in January announced a buildup. A few weeks later, he went around Congress and issued an executive order giving the White House greater control over the rules and policies issued by regulatory agencies. White House meetings with Democrats turned partisan -- and then petered out. Bush repeatedly reached for the bluntest of presidential tools -- the veto.

    His first veto this year nixed a war spending bill that included a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq. Democrats' promise to press the issue all year lost steam after testimony in September from the top commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, instilled confidence in Republicans whose commitment to the war had grown shaky. Without more GOP defections, Democrats in the Senate were powerless to undercut Bush's war policy.

    Bush also wielded his veto power to great effect on domestic issues.

    He blocked Democratic efforts to expand stem cell research, a popular bill that had broad bipartisan support. The failed effort to override that veto provided a window onto a dynamic that was key to Bush's source of strength throughout the year: Many moderate Republicans parted ways with the president on the stem cell override vote -- as they later did on his veto of the children's health bill -- but there were enough conservatives who agreed with him to sustain his vetoes.

    Bush issued a barrage of veto threats to curb Democrats' domestic spending plans -- an effort that helped him regain some favor among fiscal conservatives who had lambasted him for allowing the Republican-controlled Congress to jack up spending to record levels.

    "Fiscal conservatives can see the president getting stronger on spending this year than in the previous six years," said Brian Riedl, a budget expert at the Heritage Foundation.

    Democrats had wanted to add $22 billion to Bush's funding request. But he drew a line in the sand and guarded it for months. He vetoed a bill packed with spending for education, health and other popular programs. The final budget approved this week adhered to his overall spending limit -- and dropped riders on abortion and other issues he objected to. And it included the money for the Iraq war with no strings attached.

    Bush also held the line against Democrats' efforts to raise taxes, which they proposed to offset the costs of new health spending, energy programs and a middle-class tax break. Faced with Bush's veto, Democrats could not enact taxes on such inviting targets as cigarettes, wealthy hedge-fund managers and big oil companies.

    Bush's Republican allies were almost giddy with their unexpected success.

    "Who would have thought a year ago that Democrats would have come down to the president's budget number, that we would be ending the year by funding the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that we could complete the year without raising taxes on the American people?" said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "And all despite having a Democrat majority in Congress."

    Heading into the 2008 elections, Democrats will have to keep their supporters from becoming demoralized over not being able to deliver more with their majority.

    "It's hard for them to understand, and it's even harder for us to live with," said Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.).

    But Democrats are trying to turn their tribulations into a campaign issue by telling voters that the party will not really have a working majority until they expand their Senate caucus from the current 51 to 60 -- the number they need to block GOP filibusters and other stalling tactics.

    The tag line on a fundraising pitch by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: "51 seats is not enough. Help us turn our country around."

    Acknowledging that GOP victories this year consisted simply of blocking Democrats, some Republicans say they will have to develop a more positive agenda to build a successful political brand. Said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), "The product we're selling is negative."





    dresses piercings videos. hot nipple pierced nipple videos. spears pierced nipple pic.
  • spears pierced nipple pic.



  • pete
    04-09 01:01 PM
    EVERYBODY wants those doing Ms and PhD in certain disciplines to stay. They do no harm AT ALL and actually are an asset.

    Consultants need to be curtailed.



    I think the universities are out of control and need to be fixed too. All these people with MS and PHd's enroll in their courses with the full intention of staying on after completing their courses.

    We should ask that the DOS start randomly denying F1 applications based on a ratio that is calculated by reviewing immigrant applications for the past 5 years.



    more...


    makeup pierced nipple picture. pierced nipple videos. dresses pierced nipples video.
  • dresses pierced nipples video.



  • GC_US_64
    12-26 04:29 PM
    Kudlow and company are airing a debate on Lou Dobbs Goofy economics and skewed numbers at 5pm eastern time.





    girlfriend pierced nipple photos. pierced nipple videos. 2010 RED WRAP PIERCED NIPPLES
  • 2010 RED WRAP PIERCED NIPPLES



  • anandrajesh
    03-23 11:11 PM
    ok...this is something..

    apparently they called my employer also and has asked them to provide all details.

    All I-9s
    All performance appraisals
    my works schedule
    my vacation requests this year
    current salary
    supervisor details


    :)

    Whoa... This is nasty. Asking for documents is one thing, but this is downright scary. The more the documents they ask for more are the chances they can find something wrong.

    Hire a good attorney and respond thru Attorney. Good luck with everything and keep us updated. I am really interested in the outcome. Hopefully they will give you what you want.





    hairstyles Pierced Nipple Clogs pierced nipple videos. pierced nipple. tattoos and
  • pierced nipple. tattoos and



  • new_horizon
    12-17 05:06 PM
    the mumbai incident was a terrible one. the guilty must be punished to the fullest extent, be it people from any background doing it in the name of religion.

    In the same way the people in this forum should have been angry/troubled over the killings in orissa where innocent christians were beaten, raped, killed, burned alive, home destroyed and chased from the homes to the jungles just because of their faith. this sort of crimes against christians is taking place throughout many parts of India. I am sure this will not go unpunished on the people who did/do these terrible things. the punishment may be delayed, but I am 100% sure it's going to be devastating on the people. mark my words. 'Coz I believe there is a God above, who watches and at the appointed time the punishment will come.

    But the bible also says that God is forgiving. The Bible says the following:
    "If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (1 John; chap 1 verse 9)

    Also it says in the book of John (chapter 3 verse 16):
    "For God so loved the world (mankind) that he gave his son Jesus Christ to die as a sacrifice (for the sins of mankind), that whoever believes in Him (and repent), shall not perish but have eternal life".





    jung.lee
    04-05 06:07 PM
    The analysis is interesting, but this much amount has already been written off considering 100% of option ARM, and alt-ARM will fail.

    I think you missed my point. I was not trying to connect the ARM reset schedule with write-offs at wall street firms. Instead, I was trying to point out that there will be increased number of foreclosures as those ARMs reset over the next 36 months.

    The next phase of the logic is: increased foreclosures will lead to increased inventory, which leads to lower prices, which leads to still more foreclosures and "walk aways" (people -citizens- who just dont want to pay the high mortgages any more since it is way cheaper to rent). This leads to still lower prices. Prices will likely stabilize when it is cheaper to buy vs. rent. Right now that calculus is inverted. In many bubble areas (both coasts, at a minimum) you would pay significantly more to buy than to rent (2X or more per month with a conventional mortgage in some good areas).

    On the whole, I will debate only on financial and rational points. I am not going to question someone's emotional position on "homeownership." It is too complicated to extract someone out of their strongly held beliefs about how it is better to pay your own mortgage than someone elses, etc. All that is hubris that is ingrained from 5+ years of abnormally strong rising prices.

    Let us say that you have two kids, age 2 and 5. The 5 year old is entering kindergarten next fall. You decide to buy in a good school district this year. Since your main decision was based on school choice, let us say that your investment horizon is 16 years (the year your 2 year old will finish high school at age 18).

    Let us further assume that you will buy a house at the price of $600,000 in Bergen County, with 20% down ($120,000) this summer. The terms of the loan are 30 year fixed, 5.75% APR. This loan payment alone is $2800 per month. On top of that you will be paying at least 1.5% of value in property taxes, around $9,000 per year, or around $750 per month. Insurance will cost you around $1500 - $2000 per year, or another $150 or so per month. So your total committed payments will be around $3,700 per month.

    You will pay for yard work (unless you are a do-it-yourself-er), and maintenance, and through the nose for utilities because a big house costs big to heat and cool. (Summers are OK, but desis want their houses warm enough in the winter for a lungi or veshti:))

    Let us assume further that in Bergen county, you can rent something bigger and more comfortable than your 1200 sq ft apartment from a private party for around $2000. So your rental cost to house payment ratio is around 1.8X (3700/2000).

    Let us say further that the market drops 30% conservatively (will likely be more), from today through bottom in 4 years. Your $600k house will be worth 30% less, i.e. $420,000. Your loan will still be worth around $450k. If you needed to sell at this point in time, with 6% selling cost, you will need to bring cash to closing as a seller i.e., you are screwed. At escrow, you will need to pay off the loan of $450k, and pay 6% closing costs, which means you need to bring $450k+$25k-$420k = $55,000 to closing.

    So you stand to lose:

    1. Your down payment of $120k
    2. Your cash at closing if you sell in 4 years: $55k
    3. Rental differential: 48 months X (3700 - 2000) = $81k

    Total potential loss: $250,000!!!

    This is not a "nightmare scenario" but a very real one. It is happenning right now in many parts of the country, and is just now hitting the more populated areas of the two coasts. There is still more to come.

    My 2 cents for you guys, desi bhais, please do what you need to do, but keep your eyes open. This time the downturn is very different from the business-investment related downturn that followed the dot com bust earlier this decade.





    waitnwatch
    08-05 03:18 PM
    If someone is eligible to port to a higher category they will rightfully do so. Your post seems to imply all PD porting is through shady means. Grow up buddy!

    You've got me wrong - if folks think they are entitled to EB2 for a particular "FUTURE" job what stops them from getting a "FUTURE" job description to fit EB-1. After all it's all in the "FUTURE"..............