Aubrey

Hello all,

I haven't posted for a long time. We moved to Houston last year, and I'm wondering if there are other VJ couples in town that might like a meetup?

Thanks to everyone for the comments and suggestions

If I have to travel again I'll definitely go in the same queue as my husband regardless of what they say. I was probably naive in thinking it wouldn't be an issue since my husband was there anyway - next time I'll know better.

Also, thank you Darnell about the information on being flagged. Thinking about it, the officer that checked my information at first did look confused and that's why he called the supervisor and discussed for a bit. I'll definitely try to get this cleared up.

Max1gk: Grazie, in bocca a lupo anche a te We actually didn't talk much about my immigration process outside of immediate family, but we did get married in the USA so I guess the "news" got out anyway somehow. Hope you guys don't have to run into anything like that!

My husband had a really nasty interrogation of sorts at the Seattle airport when he was just a visitor. I'm sorry that you endured that -- and glad you made it through in the end. If you think that harassment ends at citizenship, though, you've obviously forgotten about the pat-downs and groin grabbing at the security checkpoints...

My husband's first job here was night stocking at a grocery store. He didn't have much in the way of stuff on his resume, except a bit of volunteering at the local public library (while waiting on his EAD).

But, that didn't last long. He was hired by a popular local game company due to his bilingual skills (german-english); a well-paying job at a good company. It was a one-line anonymous listing on Craigslist. My advice -- apply for those bilingual positions and look for them. It's a growing skill that's desired in the most unexpected industries!

Also consider putting your name in at temp agencies. While hiring is still slow, many places are looking for temps, which can lead to steady work.

My marriage licence didn't have a "check box". mine had "name before" and "name after" marriage.

You CAN change your name on your SSN before you have your GC (or EAD). IQuit is the pro on this. Lots of people have successfully changed their name on their SSN before they got their GC. It's definitely EASIER when you have your GC (or EAD) but it's still possible.

Right, it depends on the state issuing it. Some show the name change, others don't. It doesn't matter either way. When you get married, get 2-3 official copies of the marriage certificate. Some agencies want their own official copy to complete a change of name. My husband and I BOTH changed our names (hyphenated ours together), and our certificate just showed our old names.

My husband waited and got his SSN card after we were married (and before his GC paperwork) so to avoid the hassle of going back in to get his name change on the card. It was not a problem at all.

Congratulations.

Beyond the heat, I also think it's unrealistic that they will be able to build the remaining NINE *9* stadiums required to host in sufficient time. They seem ill-prepared and ill-suited to host this kind of world event, imo.

we are looking into getting our first HDTV in the 500 to 700 dollar price range... we want to use it occasionally to hook the laptop to it, to watch things like Hulu and Netflix etc...

here are a couple I am looking at...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0038W35EK/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0039RRCFM/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0039RRC7U/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0039RPJ48/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0039RWAVS/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

Consider how far away you can put your TV before choosing a size. There's a minimum viewing distance for pictures to look normal. We were considered a 32", then a 37", then 40"...and wound up with a 42". We got it home and realized holy cow, this sucker is big. Great, but fortunately we had room to move the couch waaay back.

Minimum viewing distance

Also, Consumer Reports noted that there is no noticeable difference in 720p vs 1080p tvs for 32" and under screens. So that 32" on your list isn't worth the money, imo.

We bought our 42" Philips at Sam's and love it. The discount on a big purchase like a hdtv would pay for the membership fee itself.

I think that is one of the biggest problems with immigration in general.

Why the U.S. won't declare English as the national language I've never understood.

I'm not arguing against the idea. I'm all for the idea as I've said.

Comparing gays/lesbians to the struggles of blacks is absolutely disgusting though. Very different situations entirely.

Uh, yeah, they've both been hung, beaten, had laws made against them to discriminate, lost jobs and opportunities due to who they are... totally different...

First off, I understand the constitution quite well. Obviously better than you do if you think the "equal protection clause" is a part of the "Bill of Rights." So, please re-think your statemnts before posting something.

Secondly, the equal protection clause being used to defend same-sex marriage is completely erroneous. Using that makes it perfectly fine for ANY two individuals to marry then. Of course, the "gay community" will not admit this and will call your a heretic for daring to say so. - However, as it stands now as many people rightfully argue, there is already an equal protection. Any non-related man, and any non-related woman can marry already in most states. That is a "marriage" by definition in most states. Being as there's no federal definition to marriage, then the state's definition in a legal standpoint is what normally would be and should be upheld. There is no marriage clause/rules/laws on the Federal level, therefore the Supreme Court can only look at the laws on the level where they are present and decide if those laws are applied evenly. In the case of marriages they are. A gay man can marry a woman, a gay woman can marry a man. Nothing stops them from doing this. That is equal protection to have that same right under the law. - You're trying to bend it if you think otherwise.

As I've said before, I believe in equal rights and protections and think it's silly not to have civil unions for all couples, but this isn't a matter of "what's right," in my opinion, it's a matter from a lawful perspective on what's right and what is not.

The SCTOUS can delcare whatever it wants and give the opinion on whatever it wants, it doesn't make it the law of the land. That's what congress is for.

My mis-statement does not equate misunderstanding the Constitution. I was attempting to remind you that we have guaranteed rights in our Constitution, not the "right to pursue" them as you were trying to argue. I know full well that the equal protection clause is in the 14th Amendment, tyvm.

The U.S. Supreme Court's opinions do not "make" laws, but they clarify or overturn them as unconstitutional. Clarification can expand protection of a group under a law, or it could state that it does not apply to a group. It HAS made decisions on marriage before, an it CAN decide cases of this matter. It DOES matter "what's right" under the law.

Equal protection also can be considered based on the rights of people between states. When a person is considered married legally in one state and not another, that can be a foundation for an opinion by the SC. When a couple must spend $1000's to write contracts to gain the same rights as a couple allowed to marry, THAT can be considered.

I've said enough on this topic. But I think that people like you who argue against this are just as bad as those who supported segregation and opposed voting rights for women and minorities. Discriminating against gays/lesbians is equivalent and you should be ashamed for supporting discriminatory practices.

A totally stupid idea... an electric monorail would do the same job, reduce emissions and keep autos and mass transit seperate... what happens when someone hts the legs on that stilt bus? Bus comes down on the rest of the traffic....

Except you have to bulldoze buildings to build a monorail, typically. this would go over existing roadways.

I'm guessing the bus lane would be a limited merge lane or something.

Just because a judge rules on a case or even takes a case, does not make it a federal issue. Marriage is a want, not a need, not a right, not something that gives you something special in life.

Just as a 35-year old man can no longer marry a 14-year old girl, that is within the right of the states to determine who may and may not get married on various stipulations. Of course no one touches on this one. You cannot fight for certain groups to have the "right" to something, unless you fight for any and all groups/situtions to share in the same "right."

But there again, marriage is no more a right than owning your own home. You have to meet certain conditions to buy a home. You have to meet certain conditions to buy a car. You have to meet certain conditions to get a job. I mean if I walked into a Federal building and wanted to get a job as a supervisor over that building, they wouldn't hire me without appropriate education background, job experience, and even then they still may not hire me for whatever reason.

You have every right to persue your dream, persue happiness, etc. You have no right to said happiness, to said dreams, etc. That is the key to remember in any and every situation that presents itself in life. Life isn't fair. Some are born rich, some are born poor. Some marry into a rich family, others marry into a family that ends up bankrupt.

Some people file for government loans, grants, etc. some people get accepted, some people do not. Even if they are equal on every level. Some people get the shorter end of the stick, some get the life of luxury.

Welcome to the real world.

You clearly don't understand the law or our Constitution. Half-quoting the Declaration of Independence is no basis for your ridiculous attempt at an argument.

We have a Bill of Rights. In it there is a thing called the equal protection clause. This is the very basis for which Prop 8 was overturned. Read about it. Understand it. Your definitions of what you think are "rights" versus "wants" are not the same as those defined by the laws of the U.S. and the opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Marriage is considered a right according to the past opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court (see Loving v. Virginia) and protected citizens from discrimination regarding the right to marry. "Conditions" must fall within reason under the law and allow for equal protection under the law. A federal judge overturned Prop 8 based on the fact that it denied equal protection based on religious beliefs (which the government cannot discriminate by). It will now likely go to the Supreme Court, if they accept the case.

You can grant those rights to whomever you want, but there will still be plenty of groups denied that ability. That is the problem with marriage as I mentioned in my response to Steve above. If you want your best friend's sister to make your health decisions in case of an emergency, she should be able to. The problem is "marriage" in government.

People are discriminated along the lines of taxes each and every day for various reasons.

Again though, this is a state issue, not a Federal Issue. Marriage has no place in the Federal Government at this time. Sure, there might be tax breaks (or soon to be again the tax penalty) for couples who file jointly, but that has nothing to do with the actual contract of marriage itself and who it applies or doesn't apply to.

You cannot just add "same-sex couples" into a catagory without adding any other pair of people who want the same rights in entering that contract together.

It is a federal issue. Federal judges have repeatedly overturned laws that discriminate people's civil liberties regarding marriage (not just for homosexual marriages, but in the past for interracial marriages, etc). The federal government has not made a distinction between marriage and civil unions for the purpose of laws (such as in other countries, where you're in a union according the government and a marriage according to your faith), and as such, citizens are guaranteed equal protection under federal law. States may not violate equal protection.

You can continue to argue this, but the precedent on this matter is pretty clear. It doesn't become less of a federal issue just because you wish it wasn't.

China Plans Huge Buses That Can DRIVE OVER Cars

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/669166

(Go to link for more pictures)

Tue Aug 3, 4:05 pm ET

China has overtaken the United States as the world's biggest producer of greenhouse gases and biggest energy consumer.

But the country is also thinking in big and bold ways when it comes to how it will reduce pollution and a new plan to build a "straddling bus" is among the most space-age schemes yet.

In an effort to go green and relieve congestion without widening roads, the Shenzhen Huashi Future Parking Equipment company is developing a "3D Express Coach" (also known as a "three-dimensional fast bus").

The innovation will allow cars less than 2 meters high to travel underneath the upper level of the vehicle, which will be carrying passengers (PHOTOS).

According to China Hush, the 6-meter-wide 3D Express Coach will be powered by a combination of electricity and solar energy, and will be able to travel up to 60 kilometers per hour carrying some 1200 to 1400 passengers.

The first 115 miles of track is set for construction in Beijing's Mentougou district starting in late 2010. The Chairman of the Huashi Future Parking Equipment company boasts it will take only a year and 500 million yuan (around $73 million) to build the futuristic transportation system.

A state today could stand up and say, "we are no longer going to have marriage in our state." and there's not a damn thing the Feds could do about it without creating a Federal Marriage Law.

It's not that simple. The equal protection clause would still be a valid point against a law like that, too. Marriage isn't just a religious function; it effects federal taxes, spousal privileges to inherit and make health decisions, and much more. Denying marriage to any particular group of people denies people of those privileges, and the court has regularly ruled that those are actually civil rights.

Who you looking at in november? If you dont mind me asking. Im leaning Clint Didier.

Well... I'm definitely not voting for Patty or Dino.

I have to agree about the OT forum to those who say it's a cesspool. I regularly see racist or sexist comments that are clearly intended to flame someone. And that attitude spills into other subforums. I get so tired of the people who spam VJ all day and are part of their little clique dominating the forums and being so rude to anyone that dare respond to them.

I think that the community feel of VJ falls flat because of the treatment that's allowed to persist towards newer members and the hate that fills OT. Rather than calling older members to post in OT, I think that moderation efforts need to zap topics much more frequently that are filled with these inflammatory comments and threads started only for that purpose. Not just because OT is an ugly place to try to visit, but because members feel that they can mistreat others in immigration-related forums because it's allowed in OT.

It's a lot like a classroom. Crazy stuff can happen outside the classroom, but once you step inside it should be a safe learning environment for everyone, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, or what clique you belong to. Good schools create that environment. Bad ones allow the cursing, teasing, and harassment to happen openly in their classrooms.

Agreed, they don't look at you that closely unless you give them a reason to. Wear it and forget it.

You can argue all you want about whether the tax cuts are working or not... but it doesn't change the fact that we can't continue to borrow from China, Japan, and other countries without harming our own national security. It's pretty hard to bully them around when we owe them so much money. Our national debt is a train wreck waiting to happen. On our current course, we're headed straight for the inability to pay for anything beyond the interest on our debt, Social Security, Medicare, and other programs we're obligated to pay for. Eventually people have to pay for these government services.

Learn more about this threat to our country. A group of economists have created a wonderful documentary to explain it: I.O.U.S.A. Here's a 30 minute version of it:

Maybe since the top 1% has 50% of the income we should consider taxing them a bit more and paying off our debt. Our "progressive" tax system treats people making ~$350,000/yr the same as those making $1 million a year. Screwy imo.

Oh yeah. I'm a geek. I play PC games (online). I build my own computers too.

Right now I'm playing :

Battlefield Bad company 2

Left 4 Dead 2

Alien Swarm (free through steam)

Medal of Honor (beta)

I've also played (online)

Battlefield 2

Battlefield 1942

Battlefield 2142

Counterstrike (1.6 and source)

left 4 dead

Point of Existence (mod for BF2)

COD4

Keep up the good work. My husband works for Valve.

In the middle of "Radiata Stories" for PS2

Play regularly PC:

COD: Modern Warfare 2

Guild Wars

Battlefield 2

Waiting for Guild Wars 2, Starcraft 2, Diablo 3.

Oh and the new Deus Ex game of course!

I build my own systems as well.

Loved Guild Wars (it's where my husband and I met). Though I don't seem to find anyone else on the board that GvG'd regularly. I still have my set of GW geek pins that I won in a tournament when I played with Legion of Losers. Can't wait to play the GW2 demo at PAX in ~month!

Thanks guys!

We're going to Austin next week, and we're planning on going. If anyone knows of the best places to park, or any other helpful hints, I'd love a PM. We've been to Austin a couple of times but really don't know it at all.

Some of my Austin favs:

Country music/dancing: The Broken Spoke

Irish pub: B.D. Riley's

Best overall food: Magnolia Cafe

Best burgers: Hut's Hamburgers

Best Indian food: Sarovar Indian Cuisine

Best Asian food: 888

Best vegetarian: Mother's Cage & Garden

Best dessert: Amy's Ice Cream

Coolest funky coffee house: The Spider House near UT

Enjoy, Austin is a great place to visit!

What I haven't seen is people on unemployment taking the necessary steps to "downgrade" their lives in order to make it on a lower wage job or no job at all. They've used UE as a crutch in an attempt to maintain their standard of living.

If we're truly going to get folks off governmnet assistance (because that's what it is... it's not a "right" or "entitlement" like I keep hearing... it's free money from the government that tax payers and businesses pay for) we need them to change their lives and "step down" to a lower standard of living.

With UE being extended again and again, they have no incentive to do so and will simply wait "til the jobs come back." That may never happen.

I'd like for you to experience a layoff from your nicely paying job and then come back and say you're willing to "step down" by giving up your house, your kids good schools, groceries, etc. and take a minimum wage job to avoid staying off the UE rolls. You make it sound like UE benefits replace your old salary. They are substantially lower.

It's not as simple as you people make it out to be. Even those "no skill" jobs are hard to come by these days. Dumping people from UE will only worsen the people losing their homes, going to food banks, and seeking welfare. There are simply not enough jobs for everyone to be hired, no matter the skill level. It's simple math.

In case you are misinformed, people can't "wait til the jobs come back" as you claim. They are required to apply to jobs and keep track of all contact they have made. It's not free money to sit back and do nothing. I am so tired of reading this kind elitist garbage on this board from people who clearly don't have a clue what it is like to struggle to keep a roof over your head and food on your table.

I used to live in Austin. Stand over the bridge or nearby (at a restauraunt or cafe) near dusk. It is incredible to watch. Something that shouldn't be missed if you're in town. Some 1.5 million bats in a good year.

Although I have to say that the private-entrance only (Bat Conservation Int'l has access) to Bracken cave, which is also in the area, with some 20 million bats, was so much more amazing. There are member nights if you're interested.

Just thought I'd mention that my husband brought his DVD collection over when he moved via his suitcases with no problem. Maybe you might consider that route, since customs is no issue for your own items when moving.

This is NJ's policy, taken from the state UI website:

This means that if a suitable job is offered to you, you must take it. If you refuse the job, you may be denied benefits for the week in which you refuse the job and for the next three (3) weeks.

Because each person is not the same and has different circumstances, the definition of a "Suitable Job" is fitted to each person, depending on where he or she lives, his or her skills, experience and past salary. While you are unemployed, you will look for a job similar to your last job (distance traveled, job duties and salary). As you remain unemployed, you will be expected to revise your minimum job requirements. For example, you may have to travel a greater distance, accept a different type of job or accept a lower starting salary.

Is the policy where you live significantly different? The policy is based on the idea that if one is so unemployable that one can not find work in a similar job after a lengthy period of unemployment, that one must change ones expectations and accept work in a different field. Do you consider this to be unfair or unreasonable?

Actually, yes, it is different here. The denied benefits will be permanent.

My point was that there are not always 3 jobs/week that are even remotely similar to my qualifications or similar to my duties of my last FT employment. I even took multiple temporary contracts during my unemployment just to have income instead of unemployment payments. But finding a FT job in my field right now is next to impossible in this economy.

People should not be forced to apply for or accept work that does not use their skills and education simply because the economy is #######. There are few jobs out there. It takes longer than before to find a job because of the sheer quantity of applicants. Adjusting what you apply for is one thing (taking a cut in pay, doing simpler work), but even with those adjustments, there frequently was not 3 jobs a week in my field to apply for. That is simply due to cutbacks on hiring and less revenue coming in due to less request for services.

9.5% "official" but "real" unemployment by most figures is more like 17% or higher. Competition is worse for lower wage, lower skill positions since high wage earners are taking pay cuts. So yeah, I think what you are saying is unfair and unreasonable, because any further cut to pay or skills required would put me, a person with 2 college degrees and multiple years of work experience, taking a minimum wage job. That is ridiculous. So count me among the unofficially unemployed, knocking on doors with hundreds of others for the same job.

Hey there,

I am looking for shipping/moving companies from Germany to the US (Los Angeles). Who has any recommendations? I won't ship a lot; mainly books, dishes, silverware, towels, clothes. No furniture or anything of that sort.

I have been getting estimates, but so far all of them are outrageously expensive. I had moved a shipping company from the US to Germany before, and it only cost me 350 EUR from LA to Bavaria for 9 small book boxes. I can't seem to find anything alike for the return trip to the US...any ideas?!?

Thank you so much!

Have you considered paying the extra bag fees and bringing them in suitcases? If family comes to visit, they can also do the same. We weren't able to find reasonable prices and the extra bag fee is usually $50/bag and less likely to be lost on the way or delayed at customs.