stormylook64
11-26 07:08 PM
AP not yet received. But EADs have been received for me and my husband (primary applicant). However, my daughter is yet to receive her EAD. Anybody with a similar case? I tried calling IO in USCIS but they say that it may come any time within 90 days of the notice date (not the receipt date!):mad:
wallpaper Remember the Motorola ATRIX
Blog Feeds
06-25 01:30 PM
One of the options the President has had on the table - one every President has - is using an administrative option to provide temporary legal status and work authorization to those in the country illegally. Rumors have been spreading within the community of antis around the country and they've gotten a handful of hardcore anti-immigrant members of Congress to send a letter warning the President to drop the idea (if indeed it was really being considered. How could President Obama do what the paralyzed Congress can't? Two options come to mind. He could look at a blanket policy using...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/republicans-fear-obama-considering-parole-option.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/republicans-fear-obama-considering-parole-option.html)
Bytes4Lunch
03-14 05:17 PM
I am on my 8th year of H1(on the 3 year extension). Recently I travelled to India and came back on the Advanced Parole. I am continuing to work on the H1 extension for the same employer inspite of being admitted on "Parolee" or "AOS" status as per my Attorney and several others who quote an INS memo called the Cronin memo.
My question is:
Now if I want to join another company, can I get a new H1B I94 stamp from the H1 transfer without leaving the US ?
Can someone please shed any light on this, anyone with experience of such a conversion from Parolee to H1.
My question is:
Now if I want to join another company, can I get a new H1B I94 stamp from the H1 transfer without leaving the US ?
Can someone please shed any light on this, anyone with experience of such a conversion from Parolee to H1.
2011 By itself the Lapdock is just
paulinasmith
04-25 10:16 PM
Hi,
What is the best way to save one from going out of status on E-3 visa?Can a E-3 Visa holder or E-3D visa holder may apply and successfully get EB-3 or EB-2 green card?Can E-3 visa holder may work for two employers (already USCIS approved extension petition from both) simultaneously (without filling any new I-129 or extension request)?
The place of birth for E-3 Visa holder is Pakistan.
Please suggest and advise?
Thanks,
Paulina
What is the best way to save one from going out of status on E-3 visa?Can a E-3 Visa holder or E-3D visa holder may apply and successfully get EB-3 or EB-2 green card?Can E-3 visa holder may work for two employers (already USCIS approved extension petition from both) simultaneously (without filling any new I-129 or extension request)?
The place of birth for E-3 Visa holder is Pakistan.
Please suggest and advise?
Thanks,
Paulina
more...
gc_kaavaali
09-20 03:19 PM
It should be okay. I sent to my attorney as well as my HR. I do not see any issues as long as it is just GC copy.
My attorney asked me to send a copy of my GC to make sure the info is correctly printed. Is it ok send it to them?
My attorney asked me to send a copy of my GC to make sure the info is correctly printed. Is it ok send it to them?
dr.happie
03-25 03:27 AM
Hello
I'm A medical student who has come to do a 1 month internship(Clinical Elective) at a University on a F-1 visa valid till mid may 2009 .My internship here ends at the end of march. I have also 2 internships(cliinical electives) scheduled for the month of May and June as well at ANother University . The main problem is that the other univ require me to be on a B-1 and not on a F-1 . My present school has called them and requested them but they rejected the plea. They want me on B-1 . Now my question is that "Can I change my status from a F-1 to a B-1 while in US" - I have a valid visa which is not yet expired .
It would be appreciated if u can tell me about the forms that I shall need to fill in for the same ? Do I need to hire an attorney for it ?
Please rply
Thanks a million
Dr. Happie
man.yo28@yahoo.com
I'm A medical student who has come to do a 1 month internship(Clinical Elective) at a University on a F-1 visa valid till mid may 2009 .My internship here ends at the end of march. I have also 2 internships(cliinical electives) scheduled for the month of May and June as well at ANother University . The main problem is that the other univ require me to be on a B-1 and not on a F-1 . My present school has called them and requested them but they rejected the plea. They want me on B-1 . Now my question is that "Can I change my status from a F-1 to a B-1 while in US" - I have a valid visa which is not yet expired .
It would be appreciated if u can tell me about the forms that I shall need to fill in for the same ? Do I need to hire an attorney for it ?
Please rply
Thanks a million
Dr. Happie
man.yo28@yahoo.com
more...
woowjj2004
07-23 02:42 PM
Hello All,
I need some advice here. Actually I have filed two labors.
Company -A - EB3 - PD of March 2003
Company -B - EB2 - PD of March 2006 (PERM)
I got my Labor, I -140 from company B, and applied for 485 recently (July-2nd).
Recently (Last week) I got the labor approved from Company A (as it went to Backlog).
I was thinking that If I get I-140 from Company A then, My layer wants to use that Priority date in already filed 485 case.
But to get the I-140 from the Company B, I may have to spend around 3k, so just thinking if it is worth doing or not.
Any suggestions?
--
Deep
I need some advice here. Actually I have filed two labors.
Company -A - EB3 - PD of March 2003
Company -B - EB2 - PD of March 2006 (PERM)
I got my Labor, I -140 from company B, and applied for 485 recently (July-2nd).
Recently (Last week) I got the labor approved from Company A (as it went to Backlog).
I was thinking that If I get I-140 from Company A then, My layer wants to use that Priority date in already filed 485 case.
But to get the I-140 from the Company B, I may have to spend around 3k, so just thinking if it is worth doing or not.
Any suggestions?
--
Deep
2010 Motorola Atrix Lapdock Hands
rasheedk
05-05 08:46 PM
Hi,
my F-1 Visa expired about a month ago, and I am in my grace period while waiting for my OPT to come through. Yesterday I got the notification that I won the diversity lottery..
My question is as follows:
If I file to change status in the USA, but for some reason I do not get my OPT and get deported, do I lose my chances with the green card? or am I never out of status since I have a pending application? Please help!
my F-1 Visa expired about a month ago, and I am in my grace period while waiting for my OPT to come through. Yesterday I got the notification that I won the diversity lottery..
My question is as follows:
If I file to change status in the USA, but for some reason I do not get my OPT and get deported, do I lose my chances with the green card? or am I never out of status since I have a pending application? Please help!
more...
shreekhand
09-24 02:20 PM
No more interim EAD at Infopass since Sept 2006.
If it's an emergency like loss of job offer etc. you can take a cover letter with your receipt notice to Infopass and they can fax it to the Service Center for expedited service. Alternatively you can fax it yourself.
The decision whether to expedite your case rests with the Service Center.
Also I would say hang on for a few days if possible. I got my EAD approval e-mail after 101 days since RD from NSC.
If it's an emergency like loss of job offer etc. you can take a cover letter with your receipt notice to Infopass and they can fax it to the Service Center for expedited service. Alternatively you can fax it yourself.
The decision whether to expedite your case rests with the Service Center.
Also I would say hang on for a few days if possible. I got my EAD approval e-mail after 101 days since RD from NSC.
hair Motorola Atrix: the ecosystem
aphotica
03-01 02:47 AM
i just want some experience working for a person who would like me to make them various medias from websites to graphics.
i have standard knowledge in;
Photoshop
3dsmax
html
i have standard knowledge in;
Photoshop
3dsmax
html
more...
Blog Feeds
11-08 03:30 PM
Immigration Lawyers Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have...
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have pending applications for adjustment of status, applicants with pending applications for relief under NACARA 203, applicants with pending asylum applications, or applicants with pending applications for legalization.
More... (http://www.immigrationlawyersblog.com/2009/11/apply_early_for_advance_parole.html)
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have...
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have pending applications for adjustment of status, applicants with pending applications for relief under NACARA 203, applicants with pending asylum applications, or applicants with pending applications for legalization.
More... (http://www.immigrationlawyersblog.com/2009/11/apply_early_for_advance_parole.html)
hot While the Motorola Atrix was
JeffDG
03-30 11:41 AM
I initially voted in favour of this, but on further reflection, I think this is bad policy and urge others to not support this.
Giving I-485 benefits to people without current PDs is a bad idea. It creates a class of immigrants who are neither non-immigrant visa holders (h1b) nor are they lawful permanent residents (i-551) with a set of rights that falls into neither category. The AoS pending status is intended as a short-duration temporary "gap" coverage for people who are a matter of months from having actual I-551 rights.
Essentially, this proposal aims to make every month into the July 2007 fiasco. In addition, and this is the truly horrible part of it, relieves US employers of the pressure and costs they feel now, extending H1Bs every 3 years. That means that the only allies that legal EB immigrants have (US Employers who require their services) are detached from the immigrants themselves...they no longer have a dog in the hunt, and will stop whatever pressure they are bringing to bear now upon Congresscritters and Senators to increase the number of EB visas available.
Disconnecting the interests of foreign-national employees from their US employers will weaken the political position of the foreign-national employees. We cannot vote or contribute to campaigns, our employers however, can do both. If employees are shifted to EADs and APs, with no further involvement of employers in their immigration status needed, then those employers become disconnected from the process, and the one and only ally the legal immigrant has is no longer interested. That's a horrible thing for the immigrant to advocate.
I strongly urge IV to back away from this proposal, as it is not in the long-term interests of the EB Immigrant community. I urge IV to instead focus their resources on items that will help immigrants long term, like increasing the number of EB visas available through initiatives like eliminating the DV program and allocating the visas to EB applicants.
Giving I-485 benefits to people without current PDs is a bad idea. It creates a class of immigrants who are neither non-immigrant visa holders (h1b) nor are they lawful permanent residents (i-551) with a set of rights that falls into neither category. The AoS pending status is intended as a short-duration temporary "gap" coverage for people who are a matter of months from having actual I-551 rights.
Essentially, this proposal aims to make every month into the July 2007 fiasco. In addition, and this is the truly horrible part of it, relieves US employers of the pressure and costs they feel now, extending H1Bs every 3 years. That means that the only allies that legal EB immigrants have (US Employers who require their services) are detached from the immigrants themselves...they no longer have a dog in the hunt, and will stop whatever pressure they are bringing to bear now upon Congresscritters and Senators to increase the number of EB visas available.
Disconnecting the interests of foreign-national employees from their US employers will weaken the political position of the foreign-national employees. We cannot vote or contribute to campaigns, our employers however, can do both. If employees are shifted to EADs and APs, with no further involvement of employers in their immigration status needed, then those employers become disconnected from the process, and the one and only ally the legal immigrant has is no longer interested. That's a horrible thing for the immigrant to advocate.
I strongly urge IV to back away from this proposal, as it is not in the long-term interests of the EB Immigrant community. I urge IV to instead focus their resources on items that will help immigrants long term, like increasing the number of EB visas available through initiatives like eliminating the DV program and allocating the visas to EB applicants.
more...
house Motorola Atrix on LapDock
ashres11
07-17 05:29 PM
To - Congress (Capitol Hill, DC)
Purpose - To address EB3 visa issue.
Purpose - To address EB3 visa issue.
tattoo Motorola Atrix Lapdock Laptop
Macaca
11-01 05:36 PM
Democrats Again Look to Change GOP Motions; After Defeats, Leaders Studying Ways to Neuter Republicans' Motions to Recommit (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_52/news/20763-1.html) By Jennifer Yachnin | ROLL CALL STAFF, October 31, 2007
Exasperated over Republicans' continued efforts - and occasional success - in thwarting the House floor schedule, Democratic leaders acknowledged Tuesday they are reviewing the chamber's rules to determine how to curb the minority's ability to put up roadblocks at critical moments in the legislative process.
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D) said the committee's Democrats have begun meeting with both current and former Parliamentarians to discuss the chamber's rules and potential changes.
The New York lawmaker said those discussions have focused in part on the motion to recommit - one of the few procedural items in the minority party's toolbox that allows them to offer legislative alternatives when a bill hits the floor, and that Republicans have used to force difficult votes on Democrats or prompted legislation to be pulled from the floor - as well as other procedures, which she declined to detail.
Slaughter said no timeline exists for the review or potential alterations, however. "Nothing is imminent. We want to take our time and do it right," she said.
But one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the majority is considering neutering the motion-to-recommit process and converting it to little more than a last-chance amendment for the minority party.
Under current House rules, the minority's motion can effectively shelve legislation through minor alterations to the language of their motion - specifically designating for a bill to be returned to its committee "promptly," rather than the usual "forthwith."
Republican leaders have used that strategy to force Democrats to either vote against measures they would otherwise support or vote to kill their own bill. Earlier this month, the GOP used that procedure to target a bill governing federal wiretapping and surveillance programs, prompting Democrats to scrub an expected vote.
Another Democratic lawmaker, who also is familiar with discussions and asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of those conversations, said that is only one option under consideration.
"We don't want to limit the minority's ability to have legitimate motions to recommit," the Democrat said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) railed against Republicans' use of that particular tactic at his weekly press conference Tuesday, echoing complaints Democrats have raised off-and-on since March.
"The Republicans continue to use the motion to recommit for political purposes, not substantive purposes. Substantive purposes would be trying to change policy. For the most part, what they do with their motions to recommit are not change policy, but try to construct difficult political votes for Members," Hoyer said. "We understand that. To some degree, we did that as well. So it is not surprising."
While Hoyer acknowledged that Democrats had at times employed the same approach in the past, he criticized Republicans for using the method 22 times thus far in the 110th Congress, asserting that Democrats used the tactic only four times between 1995 and 1998.
"This is a game. It is a relatively cynical game," Hoyer added. "That doesn't mean it is not an effective game and causes questions. So we are trying to deal with that."
Democrats earlier had sought to alter the House rules on motions to recommit in May - an unusual step, given that the chamber's rules are rarely reopened mid-session - but Republicans rebelled on the House floor, and Democratic leaders agreed to forgo the changes, at least temporarily.
Democratic leaders suggested in August that they planned to offer legislation on the House floor aimed at dissuading Republicans from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to such hot-button issues as immigration. At the same time, Democrats hoped to provide insulation to their own Members with a separate vote on those topics, but have yet to produce any such resolutions.
Republicans have succeeded in winning 21 motions to recommit - the majority of which would not shelve the legislation they amend - in the past 10 months, a point that President Bush praised in a Tuesday meeting at the White House with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), according to a GOP aide.
"Republicans and Democrats alike have lived under the very same germaneness rules since 1822, and changing them won't solve the majority's inherent inability to govern," Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said. "This isn't a question of rules, it's one of competence."
Exasperated over Republicans' continued efforts - and occasional success - in thwarting the House floor schedule, Democratic leaders acknowledged Tuesday they are reviewing the chamber's rules to determine how to curb the minority's ability to put up roadblocks at critical moments in the legislative process.
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D) said the committee's Democrats have begun meeting with both current and former Parliamentarians to discuss the chamber's rules and potential changes.
The New York lawmaker said those discussions have focused in part on the motion to recommit - one of the few procedural items in the minority party's toolbox that allows them to offer legislative alternatives when a bill hits the floor, and that Republicans have used to force difficult votes on Democrats or prompted legislation to be pulled from the floor - as well as other procedures, which she declined to detail.
Slaughter said no timeline exists for the review or potential alterations, however. "Nothing is imminent. We want to take our time and do it right," she said.
But one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the majority is considering neutering the motion-to-recommit process and converting it to little more than a last-chance amendment for the minority party.
Under current House rules, the minority's motion can effectively shelve legislation through minor alterations to the language of their motion - specifically designating for a bill to be returned to its committee "promptly," rather than the usual "forthwith."
Republican leaders have used that strategy to force Democrats to either vote against measures they would otherwise support or vote to kill their own bill. Earlier this month, the GOP used that procedure to target a bill governing federal wiretapping and surveillance programs, prompting Democrats to scrub an expected vote.
Another Democratic lawmaker, who also is familiar with discussions and asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of those conversations, said that is only one option under consideration.
"We don't want to limit the minority's ability to have legitimate motions to recommit," the Democrat said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) railed against Republicans' use of that particular tactic at his weekly press conference Tuesday, echoing complaints Democrats have raised off-and-on since March.
"The Republicans continue to use the motion to recommit for political purposes, not substantive purposes. Substantive purposes would be trying to change policy. For the most part, what they do with their motions to recommit are not change policy, but try to construct difficult political votes for Members," Hoyer said. "We understand that. To some degree, we did that as well. So it is not surprising."
While Hoyer acknowledged that Democrats had at times employed the same approach in the past, he criticized Republicans for using the method 22 times thus far in the 110th Congress, asserting that Democrats used the tactic only four times between 1995 and 1998.
"This is a game. It is a relatively cynical game," Hoyer added. "That doesn't mean it is not an effective game and causes questions. So we are trying to deal with that."
Democrats earlier had sought to alter the House rules on motions to recommit in May - an unusual step, given that the chamber's rules are rarely reopened mid-session - but Republicans rebelled on the House floor, and Democratic leaders agreed to forgo the changes, at least temporarily.
Democratic leaders suggested in August that they planned to offer legislation on the House floor aimed at dissuading Republicans from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to such hot-button issues as immigration. At the same time, Democrats hoped to provide insulation to their own Members with a separate vote on those topics, but have yet to produce any such resolutions.
Republicans have succeeded in winning 21 motions to recommit - the majority of which would not shelve the legislation they amend - in the past 10 months, a point that President Bush praised in a Tuesday meeting at the White House with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), according to a GOP aide.
"Republicans and Democrats alike have lived under the very same germaneness rules since 1822, and changing them won't solve the majority's inherent inability to govern," Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said. "This isn't a question of rules, it's one of competence."
more...
pictures Motorola Plans Atrix-Like
vinabath
07-02 03:55 PM
I do not have anything to say. But I hope your consulate has some saved/extra numbers that it can give it you. Good Luck Captain!!
dresses Motorola Atrix specs:
manand24
07-20 09:08 AM
Dear All:
My wife who is on currently in the US on H4 has recently received her H1B approval. Her H1B is valid from 01-Oct-2007 to 23-Sept-2010.
When we applied for the AOS in July 2007, we mentioned that my wife's current status was H4 (which I am thinking is still true as her H1B starts only on October 2007). My question is will this create an issue when USCIS is adjudicating our AOS applications.
Any information on this issue would be appreciated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB2/PD Apr2006
AOS applications received by USCIS on 02JUL2007, receipt numbers not yet received
My wife who is on currently in the US on H4 has recently received her H1B approval. Her H1B is valid from 01-Oct-2007 to 23-Sept-2010.
When we applied for the AOS in July 2007, we mentioned that my wife's current status was H4 (which I am thinking is still true as her H1B starts only on October 2007). My question is will this create an issue when USCIS is adjudicating our AOS applications.
Any information on this issue would be appreciated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB2/PD Apr2006
AOS applications received by USCIS on 02JUL2007, receipt numbers not yet received
more...
makeup The Motorola Atrix is
sparky_jones
08-11 03:07 PM
This USCIS page has the information you are looking for. If you wish to submit AC21 documentation, there's no time frame mandated.
USCIS - Petition Filing and Processing Procedures for Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=cfe8745543256210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
USCIS - Petition Filing and Processing Procedures for Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=cfe8745543256210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
girlfriend Motorola x Atrix x Lapdock
sheela
01-01 08:39 AM
Wishing you all a Very-Very Happy & Prosperous New Year.
hairstyles Lapdock – Motorola Atrix 4G
regacct
04-15 09:46 AM
Thank you. I will do the comparison.
Macaca
12-11 08:23 PM
Bush Adviser Is Seen as Force in Spending Impasse (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/washington/11gillespie.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG | NY Times, Dec 11, 2007
WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 � Ed Gillespie made a name for himself in 1994 as a sharp-tongued pitchman for the Contract With America, the conservative Republican manifesto that catapulted his boss, Dick Armey, to power. But when Republicans shut down the government in a spending clash with President Bill Clinton, Mr. Gillespie warned it was the wrong battle to pick.
�He understands the limits of what you can expect people to buy,� Mr. Armey explained.
Now, after a stint as Republican National Committee chairman and a lobbying career that made him a multimillionaire, Mr. Gillespie is back in government as a street fighter and salesman for conservative ideas and the politician behind them � in this case, President Bush. Once again, he is in the thick of a budget fight between the White House and Congress.
But this time, he is driving the confrontation.
As the clock ticks toward a Congressional recess, with Democrats struggling to wrap 11 major spending bills into one and Mr. Bush threatening to veto the huge package, Republicans see the hand of Mr. Gillespie at work. As counselor to the president, a job he took in July, Mr. Gillespie is trying to write a new narrative for Mr. Bush, one that casts him in the role of fiscal conservative, sharpening the contrast between him and Democrats while repairing his tattered image with the Republican base.
On Mr. Gillespie�s watch, the president�s speeches have grown shorter, his language punchier. When Mr. Bush threatens to veto a �three-bill pileup� or likens Congress to �a teenager with a new credit card,� Gillespie-watchers all over Washington say they can hear the new counselor�s voice.
�Ed believes that one of the reasons the Republicans lost is because we had lost our way on spending,� said Pete Wehner, a former policy analyst for Mr. Bush who left the White House this spring. �He worked for Dick Armey; I think he�s a small government conservative, and I think he believes Democrats and their spending habits are a target-rich environment.�
And Democrats have provided targets, by waiting until two months into the new fiscal year to finish their appropriations work. Mr. Bush has already vetoed Democratic measures on children�s health and Iraq war spending, and a water resources bill � all the while complaining lawmakers are wasting taxpayers� money, and scolding them like errant schoolchildren who forgot to turn in their homework.
�Listening to this, it has Ed Gillespie�s fingerprints on it,� said John Feehery, a Republican strategist. �It�s shaping the message to pick the right fights � with a smile.�
After two decades in Washington building up contacts on both sides of the aisle, Mr. Gillespie knows well the importance of the smile.
He also knows when he has to take the high road, and when he does not. In 2004, as party chairman, Mr. Gillespie was nicknamed Mr. Bush�s �pit bull� for his relentless attacks on Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.
Mr. Gillespie rarely gives on-the-record interviews � he declined to talk for this article � and he is almost never seen on television. And careful listeners to Mr. Bush will note that the president paints �Congress,� and not �Democrats� as the villain � another Gillespie hallmark.
�He�s a smart, shrewd operator,� said Representative Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the House Democratic caucus, who was a senior adviser to Mr. Clinton during the 1995 budget fight. But while Mr. Emanuel said he has �nothing but respect for Ed,� he argued that, after seven years of runaway Republican spending, even a master strategist like Mr. Gillespie will have trouble remaking Mr. Bush�s image.
�He�s $4 trillion too late,� Mr. Emanuel said.
At 46, Mr. Gillespie is part of a core of newcomers who are seeing Mr. Bush through the end of his presidency as his Texas inner circle breaks up. Unlike his predecessor, Dan Bartlett, who spent his entire adult life working for Mr. Bush, Mr. Gillespie not a presidential intimate, but neither is he a stranger.
In 2000, he was a member of the Gang of Six, a group of strategists for the Bush-Cheney campaign. That same year, he joined with Jack Quinn, a former White House counsel to Mr. Clinton, to found Quinn Gillespie & Associates, his lobbying firm. He earned a reported $4.75 million when he sold his share of the firm to join the White House, but he could easily pass through Washington�s revolving door yet again, earning even more after Mr. Bush leaves office.
Mr. Gillespie�s critics say he traded on his contacts to get rich. �He�s so entwined with the Bush money machine,� said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, a watchdog group.
But his admirers say he has not forgotten his roots. His father, an Irish immigrant, ran a mom-and-pop grocery store and later a bar in their hometown, Browns Mills, N.J. Mr. Gillespie spent his college years serving drinks and sweeping floors � experiences that, friends say, shape his work in the White House.
Mr. Gillespie has been deeply involved in Mr. Bush�s so-called �kitchen table agenda,� of issues like consumer safety and rising mortgage rates.
�Ed�s got a pulse on what average Americans think about,� said David Hobbs, a Republican lobbyist and a Gillespie friend.
The week before Mr. Gillespie officially took over as counselor, Mr. Bush�s immigration bill collapsed on Capitol Hill � and with it, any real hope of bipartisan cooperation. One senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Mr. Gillespie wasted little time.
�It went down in defeat, and he was moving on to the next thing,� this official said. �The next thing was Iraq and the budget.�
On Iraq, Mr. Gillespie took advantage of the Congressional recess in August to schedule a series of presidential speeches. At the time, Republicans like Senators Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana were expressing deep misgivings about the war, so much so that even some White House officials thought they would lose Republican support in September. But in the end, Republicans stuck with Mr. Bush.
On the budget, Mr. Gillespie looked back to the Republican defeat of 1995. �We saw how Clinton did it, using the power of the presidency,�� Mr. Hobbs said.
Mr. Armey said Mr. Gillespie had argued that his party would lose because the public believed Republicans were antigovernment, �so therefore it is credible to argue Republicans shut government down.�
He said Mr. Gillespie�s strategy was to �understand the public�s already conceived disposition,� and create a story line around it.
That strategy was on full display in the Rose Garden last week, as Mr. Bush tapped into another preconceived notion, that lawmakers are lazy. The president opened his remarks by tweaking Democrats on the 30-second pro forma sessions they held to prevent him from making recess appointments over the Thanksgiving Day holiday.
�If 30 seconds is a full day,� Mr. Bush said, �no wonder Congress has got a lot of work to do.�
It was positively Gillespie-esque.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 � Ed Gillespie made a name for himself in 1994 as a sharp-tongued pitchman for the Contract With America, the conservative Republican manifesto that catapulted his boss, Dick Armey, to power. But when Republicans shut down the government in a spending clash with President Bill Clinton, Mr. Gillespie warned it was the wrong battle to pick.
�He understands the limits of what you can expect people to buy,� Mr. Armey explained.
Now, after a stint as Republican National Committee chairman and a lobbying career that made him a multimillionaire, Mr. Gillespie is back in government as a street fighter and salesman for conservative ideas and the politician behind them � in this case, President Bush. Once again, he is in the thick of a budget fight between the White House and Congress.
But this time, he is driving the confrontation.
As the clock ticks toward a Congressional recess, with Democrats struggling to wrap 11 major spending bills into one and Mr. Bush threatening to veto the huge package, Republicans see the hand of Mr. Gillespie at work. As counselor to the president, a job he took in July, Mr. Gillespie is trying to write a new narrative for Mr. Bush, one that casts him in the role of fiscal conservative, sharpening the contrast between him and Democrats while repairing his tattered image with the Republican base.
On Mr. Gillespie�s watch, the president�s speeches have grown shorter, his language punchier. When Mr. Bush threatens to veto a �three-bill pileup� or likens Congress to �a teenager with a new credit card,� Gillespie-watchers all over Washington say they can hear the new counselor�s voice.
�Ed believes that one of the reasons the Republicans lost is because we had lost our way on spending,� said Pete Wehner, a former policy analyst for Mr. Bush who left the White House this spring. �He worked for Dick Armey; I think he�s a small government conservative, and I think he believes Democrats and their spending habits are a target-rich environment.�
And Democrats have provided targets, by waiting until two months into the new fiscal year to finish their appropriations work. Mr. Bush has already vetoed Democratic measures on children�s health and Iraq war spending, and a water resources bill � all the while complaining lawmakers are wasting taxpayers� money, and scolding them like errant schoolchildren who forgot to turn in their homework.
�Listening to this, it has Ed Gillespie�s fingerprints on it,� said John Feehery, a Republican strategist. �It�s shaping the message to pick the right fights � with a smile.�
After two decades in Washington building up contacts on both sides of the aisle, Mr. Gillespie knows well the importance of the smile.
He also knows when he has to take the high road, and when he does not. In 2004, as party chairman, Mr. Gillespie was nicknamed Mr. Bush�s �pit bull� for his relentless attacks on Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.
Mr. Gillespie rarely gives on-the-record interviews � he declined to talk for this article � and he is almost never seen on television. And careful listeners to Mr. Bush will note that the president paints �Congress,� and not �Democrats� as the villain � another Gillespie hallmark.
�He�s a smart, shrewd operator,� said Representative Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the House Democratic caucus, who was a senior adviser to Mr. Clinton during the 1995 budget fight. But while Mr. Emanuel said he has �nothing but respect for Ed,� he argued that, after seven years of runaway Republican spending, even a master strategist like Mr. Gillespie will have trouble remaking Mr. Bush�s image.
�He�s $4 trillion too late,� Mr. Emanuel said.
At 46, Mr. Gillespie is part of a core of newcomers who are seeing Mr. Bush through the end of his presidency as his Texas inner circle breaks up. Unlike his predecessor, Dan Bartlett, who spent his entire adult life working for Mr. Bush, Mr. Gillespie not a presidential intimate, but neither is he a stranger.
In 2000, he was a member of the Gang of Six, a group of strategists for the Bush-Cheney campaign. That same year, he joined with Jack Quinn, a former White House counsel to Mr. Clinton, to found Quinn Gillespie & Associates, his lobbying firm. He earned a reported $4.75 million when he sold his share of the firm to join the White House, but he could easily pass through Washington�s revolving door yet again, earning even more after Mr. Bush leaves office.
Mr. Gillespie�s critics say he traded on his contacts to get rich. �He�s so entwined with the Bush money machine,� said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, a watchdog group.
But his admirers say he has not forgotten his roots. His father, an Irish immigrant, ran a mom-and-pop grocery store and later a bar in their hometown, Browns Mills, N.J. Mr. Gillespie spent his college years serving drinks and sweeping floors � experiences that, friends say, shape his work in the White House.
Mr. Gillespie has been deeply involved in Mr. Bush�s so-called �kitchen table agenda,� of issues like consumer safety and rising mortgage rates.
�Ed�s got a pulse on what average Americans think about,� said David Hobbs, a Republican lobbyist and a Gillespie friend.
The week before Mr. Gillespie officially took over as counselor, Mr. Bush�s immigration bill collapsed on Capitol Hill � and with it, any real hope of bipartisan cooperation. One senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Mr. Gillespie wasted little time.
�It went down in defeat, and he was moving on to the next thing,� this official said. �The next thing was Iraq and the budget.�
On Iraq, Mr. Gillespie took advantage of the Congressional recess in August to schedule a series of presidential speeches. At the time, Republicans like Senators Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana were expressing deep misgivings about the war, so much so that even some White House officials thought they would lose Republican support in September. But in the end, Republicans stuck with Mr. Bush.
On the budget, Mr. Gillespie looked back to the Republican defeat of 1995. �We saw how Clinton did it, using the power of the presidency,�� Mr. Hobbs said.
Mr. Armey said Mr. Gillespie had argued that his party would lose because the public believed Republicans were antigovernment, �so therefore it is credible to argue Republicans shut government down.�
He said Mr. Gillespie�s strategy was to �understand the public�s already conceived disposition,� and create a story line around it.
That strategy was on full display in the Rose Garden last week, as Mr. Bush tapped into another preconceived notion, that lawmakers are lazy. The president opened his remarks by tweaking Democrats on the 30-second pro forma sessions they held to prevent him from making recess appointments over the Thanksgiving Day holiday.
�If 30 seconds is a full day,� Mr. Bush said, �no wonder Congress has got a lot of work to do.�
It was positively Gillespie-esque.
EJC
07-02 03:53 PM
I just registered but I have been reading the forums a long time.
This is bad news about July visa bulletin being changed. I'm sorry for everybody who had bad news.
I think maybe it is bad news for me too.
I was waiting for interview letter, my PD is March 2006 but I am going thru consular processing. I have I140 approved since February 2006.
I have 'case complete' and was waiting for packet 4.
I don't know what this all means for me now.
This is bad news about July visa bulletin being changed. I'm sorry for everybody who had bad news.
I think maybe it is bad news for me too.
I was waiting for interview letter, my PD is March 2006 but I am going thru consular processing. I have I140 approved since February 2006.
I have 'case complete' and was waiting for packet 4.
I don't know what this all means for me now.
No comments:
Post a Comment