Politics Discussion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

This is true.

It's amazing how some immigrants believe the world revolves around them. Obama picked healthcare as first priority when the dems had the super majority. But apparently having universal healthcare for 330 mil citizens of a country is not as important as legal backlog of 1M. That makes perfect sense. Ironically he was crucified for healthcare anyways with the fight to Supreme court continuing 10 years after the law passed -- why you may ask? because the other side terms it as "Socialism". No one should be forced to pay for healthcare because well we are "free" folks in this country. But we are willing to keep paying for uninsured folks because hey that means we are protecting "freedoms" (I always wondered why that doesn't apply to car and house and other insurances where there is no "freedom" to choose, or retroactively to social security for that matter). But that digressing. Obama faced unprecedented obstructionism (mostly for the color of his skin imo even though he's half-white, but that's a separate matter) especially after the first two years, when the house was lost. The house refused to simply pass anything of note, including immigration, which the Senate had passed. His last few years essentially turned into lame duck for that reason with only the executive orders going through which is where some of reforms were made for legal immigration.

---

Excellent overview. I will just add that to his credit GW Bush tried to push immigration reform - but his own party wouldn't help him and it died.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

This is true.

It's amazing how some immigrants believe the world revolves around them. Obama picked healthcare as first priority when the dems had the super majority. But apparently having universal healthcare for 330 mil citizens of a country is not as important as legal backlog of 1M. That makes perfect sense. Ironically he was crucified for healthcare anyways with the fight to Supreme court continuing 10 years after the law passed -- why you may ask? because the other side terms it as "Socialism". No one should be forced to pay for healthcare because well we are "free" folks in this country. But we are willing to keep paying for uninsured folks because hey that means we are protecting "freedoms" (I always wondered why that doesn't apply to car and house and other insurances where there is no "freedom" to choose, or retroactively to social security for that matter). But that digressing. Obama faced unprecedented obstructionism (mostly for the color of his skin imo even though he's half-white, but that's a separate matter) especially after the first two years, when the house was lost. The house refused to simply pass anything of note, including immigration, which the Senate had passed. His last few years essentially turned into lame duck for that reason with only the executive orders going through which is where some of reforms were made for legal immigration.

---

Now if you want to be a Dem apologist there is nothing to be said anymore. So you mean to say Healthcare was the only policy that Obama could focus on for two years with super majority? Ok, even if I grant you that healthcare was the only thing he could do, did Obama pass the public option? No, instead even with super majority he compromised for a plan that would enrich Pharma and healthcare industries. No negotiation of prescription drug prices either. I am not hailing Rs here. Just because I am speaking against Dem's does not mean I am automatically siding with R's. I have every right to hate the politics of both parties. That's my whole point. There are no good faith actors here. So why did Dems not include immigration provisions with budget reconciliation with the slim majority now instead of trying to run the clock? I have already pointed that they are using senate parliamentarian as an excuse. If you say Dems have bigger fish to fry and can't be othered with lowly immigrants I am fine with that too. Answer me this then where is the Build back better now? Why did they let popular pieces of legislation like child tax credit sunset? Where are the tax hikes on billionaires? Where is the health care reform (negotiation of prescription drug pricing etc.) now? They have not passed any key legislations when it comes to kitchen table issues and instead they seem to focus on Jan 6th commissions. Finally, I am aware of the obstruction Obama faced, but Obama was a brilliant campaigner when it came to his elections. I wonder why he could not translate the very same genius to twist arms and get legislations passed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Excellent overview. I will just add that to his credit GW Bush tried to push immigration reform - but his own party wouldn't help him and it died.

---

excellent point Q! Yes I agree. Republicans where not this anti immigrant historically. DT wanted immigrants to be the bogeyman and had some success with it and now the entire party has fallen in line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

This is true.

It's amazing how some immigrants believe the world revolves around them. Obama picked healthcare as first priority when the dems had the super majority. But apparently having universal healthcare for 330 mil citizens of a country is not as important as legal backlog of 1M. That makes perfect sense. Ironically he was crucified for healthcare anyways with the fight to Supreme court continuing 10 years after the law passed -- why you may ask? because the other side terms it as "Socialism". No one should be forced to pay for healthcare because well we are "free" folks in this country. But we are willing to keep paying for uninsured folks because hey that means we are protecting "freedoms" (I always wondered why that doesn't apply to car and house and other insurances where there is no "freedom" to choose, or retroactively to social security for that matter). But that digressing. Obama faced unprecedented obstructionism (mostly for the color of his skin imo even though he's half-white, but that's a separate matter) especially after the first two years, when the house was lost. The house refused to simply pass anything of note, including immigration, which the Senate had passed. His last few years essentially turned into lame duck for that reason with only the executive orders going through which is where some of reforms were made for legal immigration.

---

I think you missed the important point about Obama care. It passed without a single Republican vote. So while Obama care won, the legacy chaser Obama destroyed the tenets of House/Senate support which made 6 years of his Presidency lame duck. It was under him maximum number of blacks where killed by cops.

From immigration point, he added all the restriction to H1 with Employee-employer nonsense and the most ineffective implementation of filing date. 2020 downgrades and the delays proved how worthless it was implemented in 2015.

America voted for a melomaniac like Trump, just because of Obama policies. You can use his skin color as a standard excuse, but in reality he was a lame duck President for 75% of his term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Excellent overview. I will just add that to his credit GW Bush tried to push immigration reform - but his own party wouldn't help him and it died.

---

Obama added poison pills to the bill, Bernie Sanders voted against the bill. The blame was not one sided.

Blaming Obama for republican failure and hatred is same as blaming women for rape. The person who does it is guilty. Not the woman. Not Obama or Dems.

Obamacare is so mainstream that even republican governors embraced it. The problem with senate republicans is that THEY are more driven by special interests than Dems. That's why not a single vote even for something as useful as Obamacare. Same goes with trump's rise. To blame obama for trump's rise is in the same category.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

I think you missed the important point about Obama care. It passed without a single Republican vote. So while Obama care won, the legacy chaser Obama destroyed the tenets of House/Senate support which made 6 years of his Presidency lame duck. It was under him maximum number of blacks where killed by cops.

From immigration point, he added all the restriction to H1 with Employee-employer nonsense and the most ineffective implementation of filing date. 2020 downgrades and the delays proved how worthless it was implemented in 2015.

America voted for a melomaniac like Trump, just because of Obama policies. You can use his skin color as a standard excuse, but in reality he was a lame duck President for 75% of his term.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

Obama added poison pills to the bill, Bernie Sanders voted against the bill. The blame was not one sided.

---

A president sets the vision, the congress drafts and passes laws based on needs and demands and blackmail (!) by members of congress.

Reps don't need poison pills to oppose something. They can oppose their own bills e.g. Sen Lee's bill. or John McCains immigration bill that had huge support and yet republicans did not support it in 2005-2006 time period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Blaming Obama for republican failure and hatred is same as blaming women for rape. The person who does it is guilty. Not the woman. Not Obama or Dems.

---

Rape is a violent violation of a person's physique and spirit without consent. I would not use it nonchalantly like you have used to compare for a bill failure which he played a big part.

Dems and left leaning news outlets have the tendency to dramatize situations to the extreme. Do not forget the role of new channels and Dems who gave Trump free publicity and prominence over 15 other eligible Republican candidates, who wanted free ride for HRC. Trump used the same playbook used by Obama in 2008 to beat Clinton in 2016. Trump put America first, asked Europeans to pay their fair share towards NATO. Did not start any new war in 4 years. American economy was on a high.
He got an absolute moron to run the immigration, introduced every possible blockade to delay the issuance of the GC in the form of biometrics, made USCIS an enforcement agency, instead of services one. Extreme interpretation of the rules.

As a Republican supporter I believe if Trump was the President, Russia would have never dared to attack Ukraine. I do not expect every one else to agree with me on this. For that matter, even when there is an embargo on Russian imports, India getting oil from Russia against America's reservations. Recall the time when Trump wanted Remdesivir, India gave it to US in 2020 and Indian politicians were upset with that.

Last but not the least, Dems are so much moved to the left, that they could not get any sensible leader with national vision, and had to rely on a retired Joe Biden to lead their flag. And with the Ukraine baggage for his son, US president cannot thwart Russian aggression in Ukraine even after 2 months.

Quote:

---

Obamacare is so mainstream that even republican governors embraced it. The problem with senate republicans is that THEY are more driven by special interests than Dems. That's why not a single vote even for something as useful as Obamacare. Same goes with trump's rise. To blame obama for trump's rise is in the same category.

A president sets the vision, the congress drafts and passes laws based on needs and demands and blackmail (!) by members of congress.

---

Obama care is the law of the land. Once it is the law, you cannot find fault Republican Governors embraced it. It is just like in work, company introduced new working directives, you can express your reservations, protests against it for a while and then you got to follow the rules and implement them, even if you did not like them.

Quote:

---

Reps don't need poison pills to oppose something. They can oppose their own bills e.g. Sen Lee's bill. or John McCains immigration bill that had huge support and yet republicans did not support it in 2005-2006 time period.

---

The house/senate politicians are just that. We had Kevin Yoder a Republican Congressman from Kansas who had put great effort for fairness bill. His support of the fairness bill was used by opponents against him in the 2018 elections and he lost.
We have a senior Senator Durbin who torpedoed the bill he sponsored a decade back. He also introduced a bill in 2020 to block spill over for 3 years, which thankfully for backlogged people failed.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 was the final version to initial John McCain - Ted Kennedy bill from 2005 (S-1033) is what you are referring to. 2 great leaders from both parties.

You can read the actions by Obama in 2007 here https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/polit...ack/index.html

This one line from the article sums up what Obama is. Still, those involved credit Obama with working hard to make immigration reform happen in 2006, but playing a decidedly different role in 2007. A very efficient man, who played amazing politics.

Ace - your response is argumentative and not rational. So I am going to list my arguments and if you can argue without making personal comments that will great and I will be happy to rethink.
Although I disagree with your assessment of Obama's overall performance, perhaps it is better that we keep that out of discussion and simply focus on immigration.

1. Argument one - Republicans blocking every single immigration proposal is their fault not Obama's. Rape was just an analogy. Even in 21st century there are plenty people who think women should dress certain way or talk certain way or do things certain way - otherwise she "invited" rape. Speaking of republicans, if they elect a megalomanic then it is their fault. If they do engage in anti-immigrant behavior then it is their fault. I am not going blame it on Obama.

2. Trump - i like his anti-war stance. Yes he has big cajones :) But he is racist and anti brown immigration. His people simply followed his lead in implementing anti immigration measures.

3. Trump Remdesivir - Russia - Ukraine - India should act in self interest. No shame there. Russia is acting in self-interest too. Geopolitics is about self interest.

4. Obamacare - is not popular because it is the law of the land. It is the law and survived because it is popular.

5. Durbin - did not torpedoe anything. He has a position and has been acting in the larger interest of all. Eventually he supported Lee's bill. Scott from florida objected and the bill died. Durbin is just a distraction created by republicans and India right wing supporters who got played.

6. Obama - Kennedy story - figment of imagination of Sen. Graham. The article itself says there is nothing to corroborate that. The article also says Obama did support that bill but the bill was filibustered. Republican demanded more restrictions on immigration. Dems asked less. Reps included poison pills in the bill that basically removed all family immigration except immediate family. So who is to blame?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

Rape is a violent violation of a person's physique and spirit without consent. I would not use it nonchalantly like you have used to compare for a bill failure which he played a big part.

Dems and left leaning news outlets have the tendency to dramatize situations to the extreme. Do not forget the role of new channels and Dems who gave Trump free publicity and prominence over 15 other eligible Republican candidates, who wanted free ride for HRC. Trump used the same playbook used by Obama in 2008 to beat Clinton in 2016. Trump put America first, asked Europeans to pay their fair share towards NATO. Did not start any new war in 4 years. American economy was on a high.
He got an absolute moron to run the immigration, introduced every possible blockade to delay the issuance of the GC in the form of biometrics, made USCIS an enforcement agency, instead of services one. Extreme interpretation of the rules.

As a Republican supporter I believe if Trump was the President, Russia would have never dared to attack Ukraine. I do not expect every one else to agree with me on this. For that matter, even when there is an embargo on Russian imports, India getting oil from Russia against America's reservations. Recall the time when Trump wanted Remdesivir, India gave it to US in 2020 and Indian politicians were upset with that.

Last but not the least, Dems are so much moved to the left, that they could not get any sensible leader with national vision, and had to rely on a retired Joe Biden to lead their flag. And with the Ukraine baggage for his son, US president cannot thwart Russian aggression in Ukraine even after 2 months.



Obama care is the law of the land. Once it is the law, you cannot find fault Republican Governors embraced it. It is just like in work, company introduced new working directives, you can express your reservations, protests against it for a while and then you got to follow the rules and implement them, even if you did not like them.



The house/senate politicians are just that. We had Kevin Yoder a Republican Congressman from Kansas who had put great effort for fairness bill. His support of the fairness bill was used by opponents against him in the 2018 elections and he lost.
We have a senior Senator Durbin who torpedoed the bill he sponsored a decade back. He also introduced a bill in 2020 to block spill over for 3 years, which thankfully for backlogged people failed.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 was the final version to initial John McCain - Ted Kennedy bill from 2005 (S-1033) is what you are referring to. 2 great leaders from both parties.

You can read the actions by Obama in 2007 here https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/polit...ack/index.html

This one line from the article sums up what Obama is. Still, those involved credit Obama with working hard to make immigration reform happen in 2006, but playing a decidedly different role in 2007. A very efficient man, who played amazing politics.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vsivarama

Now if you want to be a Dem apologist there is nothing to be said anymore. So you mean to say Healthcare was the only policy that Obama could focus on for two years with super majority? Ok, even if I grant you that healthcare was the only thing he could do, did Obama pass the public option? No, instead even with super majority he compromised for a plan that would enrich Pharma and healthcare industries. No negotiation of prescription drug prices either. I am not hailing Rs here. Just because I am speaking against Dem's does not mean I am automatically siding with R's. I have every right to hate the politics of both parties. That's my whole point. There are no good faith actors here. So why did Dems not include immigration provisions with budget reconciliation with the slim majority now instead of trying to run the clock? I have already pointed that they are using senate parliamentarian as an excuse. If you say Dems have bigger fish to fry and can't be othered with lowly immigrants I am fine with that too. Answer me this then where is the Build back better now? Why did they let popular pieces of legislation like child tax credit sunset? Where are the tax hikes on billionaires? Where is the health care reform (negotiation of prescription drug pricing etc.) now? They have not passed any key legislations when it comes to kitchen table issues and instead they seem to focus on Jan 6th commissions. Finally, I am aware of the obstruction Obama faced, but Obama was a brilliant campaigner when it came to his elections. I wonder why he could not translate the very same genius to twist arms and get legislations passed.

---

I'm not apologizing for anyone, just relaying fact vs fiction that the other side propagates and wants to believe as evident by the several posts above.

That is being all over the place, amalgamating Obama years with the current administration and political environment. Just because the same party in in the White House doesn't make everything else the same. It's now a 50-50 senate with two right leaning senators and a minimal majority house. I would, at a minimum, google why BBB failed including the sticky subject of child credits, and you should find the answers right away rather than posting rhetorical questions here that actually do the opposite of supporting your argument. The senate parliamentarian is not an excuse, it's part of the process of how law is passed in this country throughout history, with very few exceptions as you may have pointed out earlier. It's very easy to say overrule the parliamentarian or get rid of the filibuster or other measures for your own benefit, without considering the future repercussions when the other side comes to power (which it will shortly) and how then it will be misused. Decisions like that are not made to benefit one piece of legislation without taking into account it's future implementation and implications.

And I am not saying either Obama was perfect or the ACA was perfect. Ofcourse not. It would be impossible to get the ACA perfect the first time, it was a starting point for a comprehensive health care for the country and meant to evolve (also I would google why the public option was removed from ACA initially). Obama was a brilliant new senator that rose to power quickly and didn't have much experience in the political setup like most candidates do (barring the last administration) and probably lacked the nous to deal with the other side. However, again, the opposition he faced from day 1 was unprecedented (at least I haven't seen anything like it in my 20 years or so in this country. I remember a member of congress shouting at him and calling him a liar during a speech in congress -- that certainly is unprecedented, no matter whether one agrees or not with policy no one does that) and I don't think anyone else in his position with that sort of opposition from the other side could have done anything different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vsivarama

excellent point Q! Yes I agree. Republicans where not this anti immigrant historically. DT wanted immigrants to be the bogeyman and had some success with it and now the entire party has fallen in line.

---

sivarama - yes indeed. Politics makes strange bedfellows. American politics had a certain decorum and it is now almost vanished. It's a sad tale.

America is world's most immigrant friendly country. One in 3 americans are either immigrants themselves or are married to or are closely related to one. So US can never be anti immigrant country as a whole. But the politics and economics is strange and has created strange alignments. I arrived in midwest in 2000 and the place was absolutely democratic and flourishing. But the people today are destitute and it breaks my heart when I visit michigan and ohio and those areas. No wonder they fell for Trump. I do think Dems really neglected white voters to their own disadvantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

I think you missed the important point about Obama care. It passed without a single Republican vote. So while Obama care won, the legacy chaser Obama destroyed the tenets of House/Senate support which made 6 years of his Presidency lame duck. It was under him maximum number of blacks where killed by cops.

From immigration point, he added all the restriction to H1 with Employee-employer nonsense and the most ineffective implementation of filing date. 2020 downgrades and the delays proved how worthless it was implemented in 2015.


America voted for a melomaniac like Trump, just because of Obama policies. You can use his skin color as a standard excuse, but in reality he was a lame duck President for 75% of his term.

---

umm, I think you may have missed the point instead? No republican vote = unprecedented opposition. See what I meant?

"maximum blacks were killed", unfortunately sounds like FOx news talking point which I will not even want to discuss.

" most ineffective implementation of FD". I suppose you can twist anything to a negative to suit your worldview. And of course there is no argument to be made about tightening h1b rules and trying to stop the rampant h1b fraud that was happening with the third party "body shops" in the 2000's because I 'm sure according to you it was all nonsense, everyone was kosher and finding jobs the right way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vsivarama

Now if you want to be a Dem apologist there is nothing to be said anymore. So you mean to say Healthcare was the only policy that Obama could focus on for two years with super majority?

---

In this whole page, no one has mentioned Gr8 Recession. Even before Obama officially became Prez, he and his team was involved in drafting TARP bailout (unheard 800Billion bill at that time). He came in when economy was in shambles so he spent time on Economic recovery as well as Healthcare reform in first 2 yrs of his presidency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

I'm not apologizing for anyone, just relaying fact vs fiction that the other side propagates and wants to believe as evident by the several posts above.

That is being all over the place, amalgamating Obama years with the current administration and political environment. Just because the same party in in the White House doesn't make everything else the same. It's now a 50-50 senate with two right leaning senators and a minimal majority house. I would, at a minimum, google why BBB failed including the sticky subject of child credits, and you should find the answers right away rather than posting rhetorical questions here that actually do the opposite of supporting your argument.

---

That's what I urge you not to rely a 100% on. Yes you google to find more information but you need to do your own analysis on the facts to eliminate bias from the authors. I know why BBB failed (there will be 100s of takes on this on google search) but the underlying factor was the lack of will from the current Party in power. That is simply the point of my whole argument. I don't see how bringing this up is negatively impacting my argument?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

The senate parliamentarian is not an excuse, it's part of the process of how law is passed in this country throughout history, with very few exceptions as you may have pointed out earlier. It's very easy to say overrule the parliamentarian or get rid of the filibuster or other measures for your own benefit, without considering the future repercussions when the other side comes to power (which it will shortly) and how then it will be misused. Decisions like that are not made to benefit one piece of legislation without taking into account it's future implementation and implications.

---

I am not talking about filibuster/expanding the SC etc. I am saying there are ways to navigate around arcane rules if there is a will. And yes, these are arcane rules and guess what it was already broken by a party once and it is not going to stop them from breaking it again just because Dems have showed more restraint. So context definitely matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

And I am not saying either Obama was perfect or the ACA was perfect. Ofcourse not. It would be impossible to get the ACA perfect the first time, it was a starting point for a comprehensive health care for the country and meant to evolve (also I would google why the public option was removed from ACA initially). Obama was a brilliant new senator that rose to power quickly and didn't have much experience in the political setup like most candidates do (barring the last administration) and probably lacked the nous to deal with the other side. However, again, the opposition he faced from day 1 was unprecedented (at least I haven't seen anything like it in my 20 years or so in this country. I remember a member of congress shouting at him and calling him a liar during a speech in congress -- that certainly is unprecedented, no matter whether one agrees or not with policy no one does that) and I don't think anyone else in his position with that sort of opposition from the other side could have done anything different.

---

For context ACA was Mitt Romney's Healthcare plan. Rs turned against it when Dems adopted it. So I need not tell you how pious the Rs are in this situation (That's sarcasm). Yes, there will always be opposition but where there is a will there is a way. Let me give you an example. Do you think Dems cannot negotiate the prescription drug pricing if they had the steadfast will to do it? Sure they can. Now you can say, well they will not have 60 votes so it cannot pass. True, why don't we have the damn vote in the first place. Let the Rs actually give the middle finger to their constituents by voting against it. But instead the vote won't be held and the news media will report it out as the big bad Rs would not let poor Dems pass any legislations (that's what your standard google search will say). But this is when you start analyzing the reports. I say Dem's will not bring this to vote as they do not have 50 votes to begin with and hence do not want to throw their own team members under the bus. If a party had the resolve it will twist arms to make sure their party falls in line and then let the opposition hang itself. But that's the hard part especially when it's super easy to blame it on the opposition and do nothing. Both parties play this game and try and garner sympathy.

P.S. There is no other side. The "other side" is not your enemy. Anyone (Neighbors/family/friends) not sharing your political leanings are not your enemies. Everyone is on the same side. These politicians from both sides and media rile folks to hating each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Ace - your response is argumentative and not rational. So I am going to list my arguments and if you can argue without making personal comments that will great and I will be happy to rethink.
Although I disagree with your assessment of Obama's overall performance, perhaps it is better that we keep that out of discussion and simply focus on immigration.

1. Argument one - Republicans blocking every single immigration proposal is their fault not Obama's. Rape was just an analogy. Even in 21st century there are plenty people who think women should dress certain way or talk certain way or do things certain way - otherwise she "invited" rape. Speaking of republicans, if they elect a megalomanic then it is their fault. If they do engage in anti-immigrant behavior then it is their fault. I am not going blame it on Obama.

2. Trump - i like his anti-war stance. Yes he has big cajones :) But he is racist and anti brown immigration. His people simply followed his lead in implementing anti immigration measures.

3. Trump Remdesivir - Russia - Ukraine - India should act in self interest. No shame there. Russia is acting in self-interest too. Geopolitics is about self interest.

4. Obamacare - is not popular because it is the law of the land. It is the law and survived because it is popular.

5. Durbin - did not torpedoe anything. He has a position and has been acting in the larger interest of all. Eventually he supported Lee's bill. Scott from florida objected and the bill died. Durbin is just a distraction created by republicans and India right wing supporters who got played.

6. Obama - Kennedy story - figment of imagination of Sen. Graham. The article itself says there is nothing to corroborate that. The article also says Obama did support that bill but the bill was filibustered. Republican demanded more restrictions on immigration. Dems asked less. Reps included poison pills in the bill that basically removed all family immigration except immediate family. So who is to blame?

---

Q, I did not make any personal comment. As you said, let me state my immigration points as concise as possible.

1. Republicans passed 1986 comprehensive immigration.
2. Trump racist remark is just a lie.
3. Agree
4. Agree on the law.
5. Disagree. The actions by Iranian students on his meet up was repulsive and he was just another politician who was chasing non workable perfection. His follow up bill to hold the spillovers from FB to EB showed where his interest was aligned.
6. I interpreted the article differently. But that is just my opinion. It is 15 years since that is done and dusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gammaray

" most ineffective implementation of FD". I suppose you can twist anything to a negative to suit your worldview. And of course there is no argument to be made about tightening h1b rules and trying to stop the rampant h1b fraud that was happening with the third party "body shops" in the 2000's because I 'm sure according to you it was all nonsense, everyone was kosher and finding jobs the right way.

---

As Q mentioned earlier, I would respond only to immigration/H1/American concerns.

1. I can only present my opinions on points I have my views on. Let us look the numbers before and after the implementation of FD.
For 5 years till FY2016, before the implementation of FD, EB2 I was getting about 15-20 K visas each year. From 2016 to 2021, after the implementation of FD, EB2 got 3500 visa average a year.
Due to botched implementation of FD, where FD was only accepted for one month a year on average for 5 years from FY 2016-21. It has to be only my view right? The statistics, the data Spec/Red shares here does not matter.

2. Rampant H1B fraud? The so called sweat shops got the talent to US, if you did not know. If the candidate did not have the caliber or ability or tenacity or luck, they had to go back. System was good enough. In 90s/2000's all the candidates with 90% marks were with Infy, TCS, Wipro, Satyam etc and they got the jobs also. 2001 recession pushed some candidates out, before industry bounced back in 2003 through to 2008. Almost every one from this time was Halal and found the jobs without any difficulty.

3. 2008-2010 recession came. Obama admin tightened the H1 policy and from 2010-2012 H1 quota of 85 K was not even getting full due to the whimsical EVC requirement. DHS/USCIS quietly withdrew the requirement in 2013 and then the demand started going up again. 36 months OPT ensured that ROW candidates can get a better chance to apply for GC even if they miss the H1. That caused another blow to the backlogged people adding more delay. Any question of fairness from this point of time became heavily political.

4. Trump followed it by even tougher interpretation of re-evaluating the H1 application at the time of renewal, H1 interviews, H4EAD biometric. While he was a total anti-immigrant, his action of stopping people entering the country in March 2020, helped many applicants like me to get the GC within a year. So yes, while prior to Trump I was only leaning Republican, Trump is the reason why I am unapologetically Republican. Trump galvanizes the Republican crowd, while it triggers opposite reaction to people on the other side.

5. It was Trumps actions which resulted in vaccinations coming out quickly. Had Pfizer announced the vaccinations efficacy a week earlier, the results would have been different. But he got the benefit from Comey's announcement about Clinton in 2016, so these things evened out. In any case, we have Biden, a career politician like Narasimha Rao as the current US President. Still waiting to see US response in important world affairs. We can still continue to blame Bush, Obama, Trump to drive home our respective points or we can look forward to see if America's standing in the world is really going down due to petty politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

As Q mentioned earlier, I would respond only to immigration/H1/American concerns.

Rampant H1B fraud? The so called sweat shops got the talent to US, if you did not know. If the candidate did not have the caliber or ability or tenacity or luck, they had to go back. System was good enough. In 90s/2000's all the candidates with 90% marks were with Infy, TCS, Wipro, Satyam etc and they got the jobs also. 2001 recession pushed some candidates out, before industry bounced back in 2003 through to 2008. Almost every one from this time was Halal and found the jobs without any difficulty.

---

Ace, I just wanted to put in some of my points across as well. I agree with your sentiment here. I had worked for a so called "body shop" company for close to 15 years. This is the only forum where I could speak my mind without retaliation. Usually no matter what I have to say because I came in through a body shop company people usually dismiss me right of the bat as illegitimate and fraud. But Q has provided this fantastic forum where the conversations are rationale and polite. As you pointed out it is very accurate to say that the people who did survive the consultant system over the long period of time are legitimate. In some ways they may actually be more well versed not because they are smarter but because they get to work in so many disparate environments that they are usually more up to date with the newer technologies. Whenever I worked at a specific location for more than 3 years, I felt like my progress was stalled. I would try explaining to people that underestimate these body shop folks at your own expense. But I gave up as I noticed that people are very opiniated about this and usually have a feeling that anyone not choosing the path of GC through FTE with a direct company are fraudulent (BTW, I am not saying or know anyone well enough in this forum to suggest that they have this bias). I did feel the hate from the path I chose but I also greatly benefitted. Today, I am not afraid of switching jobs nor am I worried of finding a new one. The last 12-15 interviews that I gave, I was selected in each and everyone of them not because I was smarter than everyone but because I had great practical knowledge having worked in a lot of unique environment's/situations. I am taking this opportunity to give a shout out to fellow body shoppers!! Be proud of who you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

3. 2008-2010 recession came. Obama admin tightened the H1 policy and from 2010-2012 H1 quota of 85 K was not even getting full due to the whimsical EVC requirement. DHS/USCIS quietly withdrew the requirement in 2013 and then the demand started going up again. 36 months OPT ensured that ROW candidates can get a better chance to apply for GC even if they miss the H1. That caused another blow to the backlogged people adding more delay. Any question of fairness from this point of time became heavily political.

---

100% agree

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

4. Trump followed it by even tougher interpretation of re-evaluating the H1 application at the time of renewal, H1 interviews, H4EAD biometric. While he was a total anti-immigrant, his action of stopping people entering the country in March 2020, helped many applicants like me to get the GC within a year. So yes, while prior to Trump I was only leaning Republican, Trump is the reason why I am unapologetically Republican. Trump galvanizes the Republican crowd, while it triggers opposite reaction to people on the other side.

---

I have a slightly different opinion. Yes, it's because of Trump's policies that there was this massive spillover but I think if he had been reelected then Miller would have come up with ways to waste even more GCs than Biden admin did. Plus, I know for a fact that Biden admin would have taken the same steps as Trump aka stopping people from entering the country. Biden may have Op-Eds calling Trump's policies xenophobic but during the delta wave guess what, they put a travel ban on India and several other countries..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

5. It was Trumps actions which resulted in vaccinations coming out quickly. Had Pfizer announced the vaccinations efficacy a week earlier, the results would have been different. But he got the benefit from Comey's announcement about Clinton in 2016, so these things evened out. In any case, we have Biden, a career politician like Narasimha Rao as the current US President. Still waiting to see US response in important world affairs. We can still continue to blame Bush, Obama, Trump to drive home our respective points or we can look forward to see if America's standing in the world is really going down due to petty politics.

---

I give 100% credit to Trump admin on fast tracking vaccines but I am not sure if the rollout would have been as smooth. His admin was not actually known for planning two steps ahead. But It's my personal opinion so I guess I do not have leg to stand on here. I will give Biden the credit for two things both where he was panned universally across the corrupt cable news networks. Him pulling the troops out of Afghanistan and not buying into the no fly zone nonsense the media likes to push fully knowing that no-fly zone = full fledged direct conflict with a nuclear armed power.

Siva, Looking forward to hearing your greened confirmation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

1. Republicans passed 1986 comprehensive immigration.
2. Trump racist remark is just a lie.
3. Agree
4. Agree on the law.
5. Disagree. The actions by Iranian students on his meet up was repulsive and he was just another politician who was chasing non workable perfection. His follow up bill to hold the spillovers from FB to EB showed where his interest was aligned.
6. I interpreted the article differently. But that is just my opinion. It is 15 years since that is done and dusted.

---

Ace - This is great ! Here are my thoughts:
1. Yes indeed pre-2000 USA was very immigrant friendly. The character has changed post 911 and GOP has become quite xenophobic particularly brown-phobic.
2. Here is probably a better non-partisan view of what happened. Multiple GOP senators seem to agree that the president indeed said something racist.
https://www.npr.org/2018/01/12/57759...-a-vulgar-slur
5. Durbin support for FB is not a crime nor he ever opposed country caps. Instead of trying to make Durbin 100% in compliance with an ideal bill that is totally EB centric, if GOP only had 2-3 senators who supported their own bill that Sen Lee sponsored then CIR would be part of BBB. Almost all Dems would have voted and even if all republicans except 2-3 voted against the bill would still be a law. But funny that people put blame on one Dem person and give a pass to 50 GOP members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

Siva, Looking forward to hearing your greened confirmation.

---

Thanks! Hopefully someday soon. My case just got transferred to NBC last Friday. At least I know that someone cleaned the dust of my file. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Ace - This is great ! Here are my thoughts:
2. Here is probably a better non-partisan view of what happened. Multiple GOP senators seem to agree that the president indeed said something racist.
https://www.npr.org/2018/01/12/57759...-a-vulgar-slur
5. Durbin support for FB is not a crime nor he ever opposed country caps. Instead of trying to make Durbin 100% in compliance with an ideal bill that is totally EB centric, if GOP only had 2-3 senators who supported their own bill that Sen Lee sponsored then CIR would be part of BBB. Almost all Dems would have voted and even if all republicans except 2-3 voted against the bill would still be a law. But funny that people put blame on one Dem person and give a pass to 50 GOP members.

---

2. It is more like he said , he did not in a private conversation. In all probability he would have said it. People born in 1940s got away with lot of nonsense activities. Nobody complains about Bill Clinton making WH unsafe work place for women during his time as President.
5. If you are Republican/Democrat leaning you with find fault in the other party people rather than your own. Kevin Yoder, the biggest proponent of fairness bill was a Republican, and he lost a reasonably safe Republican seat, because of the targeted ads about his support to fairness bill. Lot of those Ads were promoted by PACs/groups supported by Democrats. Can it be inferred that Democrats against fairness bill? But that is politics, you need to do what you need to win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

2. It is more like he said , he did not in a private conversation. In all probability he would have said it. People born in 1940s got away with lot of nonsense activities. Nobody complains about Bill Clinton making WH unsafe work place for women during his time as President.
5. If you are Republican/Democrat leaning you with find fault in the other party people rather than your own. Kevin Yoder, the biggest proponent of fairness bill was a Republican, and he lost a reasonably safe Republican seat, because of the targeted ads about his support to fairness bill. Lot of those Ads were promoted by PACs/groups supported by Democrats. Can it be inferred that Democrats against fairness bill? But that is politics, you need to do what you need to win.

---

#2 this is not 1940. So it is not ok to say it now. Bill clinton got impeached and besides is not relevant.
#5 Kevin yoder lost because his own party did not support him because significant part of the base itself has become racist. Nothing to do with dem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

#2 this is not 1940. So it is not ok to say it now. Bill clinton got impeached and besides is not relevant.
#5 Kevin yoder lost because his own party did not support him because significant part of the base itself has become racist. Nothing to do with dem.

---

2. It is 2022 and 15 months already since Trump left the building and the seems to be no action against him. US voted him out in 2020 and he still has a grip in the party, let us see if he is contesting again in 2024.
5.The significant part which "became" racist voted for the democrat candidate, and they are now no more racists. But that would be just politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

2. It is 2022 and 15 months already since Trump left the building and the seems to be no action against him. US voted him out in 2020 and he still has a grip in the party, let us see if he is contesting again in 2024.
5.The significant part which "became" racist voted for the democrat candidate, and they are now no more racists. But that would be just politics.

---

2. Making trump pay for his actions is in progress. But as you say he has huge grip over GOP so the law enforcement will work in that context. They have to make sure that majority of country wants to act against a former president. I think it only shows how mature American way of government is.
5. I just looked it up. That district has turned blue since 1999. It is urban and hardly a republican stronghold. So if Yoder loses his base on immigration, it only means that even urban GOP base is not exactly immigration friendly !! Right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

2. Making trump pay for his actions is in progress. But as you say he has huge grip over GOP so the law enforcement will work in that context. They have to make sure that majority of country wants to act against a former president. I think it only shows how mature American way of government is.
5. I just looked it up. That district has turned blue since 1999. It is urban and hardly a republican stronghold. So if Yoder loses his base on immigration, it only means that even urban GOP base is not exactly immigration friendly !! Right?

---

2. It is more like a Dem wish list which I don't see happening.
5. It also means Dem supports do not think beyond the party lines irrespective of what the candidates position on subject which should be important to them. Conservatives believes in small government with less interference from Government and less regulations and business friendly, they were never immigrant friendly back in 1940s.1960s, 1980s, 2000s or 2020s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

2. It is more like a Dem wish list which I don't see happening.
5. It also means Dem supports do not think beyond the party lines irrespective of what the candidates position on subject which should be important to them. Conservatives believes in small government with less interference from Government and less regulations and business friendly, they were never immigrant friendly back in 1940s.1960s, 1980s, 2000s or 2020s.

---

2. What happened on Jan 6th was an assault on American democracy. If Dems want the perpetrators to be brought to justice there is nothing to be ashamed of. If they want to do it in a manner whereby the country doesn't get divided again on that specific issue then that is the right thing to do.
5. Why should dems be obliged to vote for Rep candidate over their own? Logic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

2. What happened on Jan 6th was an assault on American democracy. If Dems want the perpetrators to be brought to justice there is nothing to be ashamed of. If they want to do it in a manner whereby the country doesn't get divided again on that specific issue then that is the right thing to do.
5. Why should dems be obliged to vote for Rep candidate over their own? Logic?

---

2. It just means white people will get away with any kind of seeming assault on American democracy.
5. Lot of democrats voted for a racist in Penn, Wisconsin and Michigan in 2016. The logic is simple, every single human being has some racist element inside them. All it needs is a trigger, like what has happened already in India over last 8 years. All the news channels in US was celebrating nonsense by Trump. And he showed how to win with BS. Poor Yoder just a collateral damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

2. It just means white people will get away with any kind of seeming assault on American democracy.
5. Lot of democrats voted for a racist in Penn, Wisconsin and Michigan in 2016. The logic is simple, every single human being has some racist element inside them. All it needs is a trigger, like what has happened already in India over last 8 years. All the news channels in US was celebrating nonsense by Trump. And he showed how to win with BS. Poor Yoder just a collateral damage.

---

Agree with both. US is not perfect but I like that they are open to discuss and admit mistakes. That's why we see white Americans firmly calling out KKK. India is 180 degree opposite. I will leave it at that.

Yoder either tried to do the right thing or just misjudged or both - but the end result is driven by macro environment which is quite anti-immigrant specifically anti-brown. Not all people who voted for trump were racist. Far from it. I have already said that Dems totally ignored white working class voters in mid-west. I have lived there and they (people in mid-west) are some of the finest people. Mid-west is known for its politeness. There is no way they all are racist. Trump simply appealed to their grievances and they fell for it. Unfortunately even as America is indeed seeing a resurgence of manufacturing - those jobs are not necessarily going to mid-west.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

Agree with both. US is not perfect but I like that they are open to discuss and admit mistakes. That's why we see white Americans firmly calling out KKK. India is 180 degree opposite. I will leave it at that.

Yoder either tried to do the right thing or just misjudged or both - but the end result is driven by macro environment which is quite anti-immigrant specifically anti-brown. Not all people who voted for trump were racist. Far from it. I have already said that Dems totally ignored white working class voters in mid-west. I have lived there and they (people in mid-west) are some of the finest people. Mid-west is known for its politeness. There is no way they all are racist. Trump simply appealed to their grievances and they fell for it. Unfortunately even as America is indeed seeing a resurgence of manufacturing - those jobs are not necessarily going to mid-west.

---

Having been to many small towns across US, people have always been nice to me and my family.

We are now Non Required Indians and our kids are just American Born Confused Desi's. I was shocked by the news where a domestic help of 10 years killed the owners https://www.oneindia.com/india/elder...e-3405682.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AceMan

Having been to many small towns across US, people have always been nice to me and my family.

We are now Non Required Indians and our kids are just American Born Confused Desi's. I was shocked by the news where a domestic help of 10 years killed the owners https://www.oneindia.com/india/elder...e-3405682.html

---

Just don't get carried away Ace. People are people. Pretty much the same world over - fundamentally. Mostly good some bad.

As time goes by relationships wither. Jealousy of NRIs is a real thing. They want NRI money but they don't like NRI opinion on the corrupt system that keeps India backwards.

The crime you mentioned is unfortunate but result of systemic and deep abuse and inequality in our society. I am from Pune and almost 30-35 years back a similar case happened in a marwadi family by the name of Rathi. I do think crime is crime and must be punished but at the same time the underlying justice and lack of opportunity for majority of people must be addressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

As time goes by relationships wither. Jealousy of NRIs is a real thing. They want NRI money but they don't like NRI opinion on the corrupt system that keeps India backwards.

---

Agree, and the standard comment is you benefited out of the so called imperfect system where the society paid for your education in India. Now it is your responsibility to pay back and not to ask any questions.

Quote:

---

The crime you mentioned is unfortunate but result of systemic and deep abuse and inequality in our society. I am from Pune and almost 30-35 years back a similar case happened in a marwadi family by the name of Rathi. I do think crime is crime and must be punished but at the same time the underlying justice and lack of opportunity for majority of people must be addressed.

---

Reason this story struck a chord was that could be any one of us a decade from now. Few months in US, winter time in India.

This is real time. Words of Congress MP Kumar Ketkar. This should worry you regardless of political inclination.

---------

*It is simply impossible to go to Parliament library. The orders to police are, any MP, MLA or congress functionary would be instantly detained. The authorities feel that all MPs are guerrila fighters!!!. For last two days, we are eithr on street, facing police or barricades. I did not get detained so far. It is not necessary to confront police, you are congress MP, taken to police station... 20 kms away and discharged late night!!. Now too I am writing this msg from AICC HQ. Can't go out.*

- *Kumar Ketkar*
14 June 2022
12.16 pm on WhatsApp.

------

I highly recommend this. This is about the death of Judge loya who was investigating cases related to Mr. Amit Shah.

Attachment 1845

Buy in India (Rs 450) - https://www.flipkart.com/killed-judg...mdaed7ed8fd7da

Buy in USA ($15 delivered) - email loya12012014 at gmail.com