|
Post by epeanymous on Aug 8, 2017 20:51:29 GMT
I do qualify. But someone linked this on FB and I was literally the only person on the thread who qualified. This is a fundamental restructuring of what our country means.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 8:11:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 20:51:52 GMT
Not even close. - I'm retired, small pension, don't plan on investing any more, started working right out of high school at my job that I retired from (no college degrees, just a 2-year certificate program in my field) and I can't walk and chew gum at the same time, nevermind the Olympics. WTH does the Olympics have to do with it anyway? I imagine it's to capture individuals who would currently applying under an O-1 Visa - Individuals with Extraordinary Ability or Achievement. It's not actually an unusual classification. I know Australia has a Distinguished Talent Visa as well. I'm sure other countries do as well. There are conditions on the Distinguished Talent Visa for Australia though...... an Olympic medal or two wouldn't fill the criteria that I've bolded I wouldn't think unless there was a possibility, that in the future, you had the prospect of using your skills to the benefit of the country in some way.. The DTV isn't just for sports it also includes academia too in addition to a Profession and the Arts. You need to demonstrate extraordinary and remarkable abilities, be superior to others in your field and have a record of sustained achievement that is unlikely to diminish in the future.
Your achievements need to be acclaimed as exceptional in any country where the relevant field is practised. The field would also need to have recognition and acceptance in Australia as well as international standing.
You must demonstrate current prominence in your field.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 8:11:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 20:54:30 GMT
Haha I've just tried that using Mo Farah's details:- Age 34.....1 point High Sch Dip....1 point Fluent in English...12 Jaob..no.............0 Nobel Prize.........0 Olympic medals... yes a few ....15 Investments.....no..................0 Total 36.......I've got no job and I think I'll keep my investments in the UK, I was born in Somalia but with UK citizenship and I'm Muslin ( how does that fit into Trump's ideals?)........but it's OK I can speak fluent English and I've got a few Olympic, World and European championship medals......looks as if I'm allowed to stay. My family and I already live in Oregon. With no disrespect to Mo's achievements, I think he's a wonderful person as well as an athlete but how shallow is a criteria that you are fluent in English and have a few Olympic medals as a criteria to enter a country in comparison to ..... a Doctor/surgeon under the foreign professional degree but with excellent English, no job ( as yet) no investment planned, no Nobel prize and no Olympic medals.......with 25 points I'm not allowed into the country! So if I was an excellent cancer Doctor the US would rather sacrifice all the benefits and knowledge from that person to someone who has a few medals.......That's not what the points system would do. Both an excellent cancer doctor and a former Olympian would qualify for green cards. The Doctor has only 25 points he wouldn't be allowed in though would he?
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Aug 8, 2017 21:00:11 GMT
The fact that an Olympic medal is worth more than a 'U.S. professional degree or doctorate in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics' tells me all I need to know. I'm totally unsurprised by that - I also don't think it's anything new. I'm not even sure you have to have a medal now to get a significant bump. In some sports 90% of the freaking contenders from ANY country are all training here - so they must be pretty free with those sports visas. There is a big huge between a visa and a green card though. I can understand temporary visas for training purposes, but the need to renew those means you have to continuously give evidence that you still qualify. Once someone has a Permanent Residence status there is no check on you (although you are supposed to keep ICE updated on your address). We know someone that has a green card from when they were actual issuing green paper cards and she married an American in the 70s. She was given grief coming back into the US with this card about 10 years ago because no one at the border had seen this version in real life. Current green cards are issued for 10 years but, other than paying the fees and going in for an updated photo and biometrics, there is no other paperwork required.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 8, 2017 21:06:24 GMT
I do qualify. But someone linked this on FB and I was literally the only person on the thread who qualified. This is a fundamental restructuring of what our country means. Actually the vast majority of American's wouldn't have qualified before - nor would they qualify to enter most other countries. And for the record, this is proposed legislation which doesn't appear to have much legislative support - not an actual new law or executive order. If people were somehow under the mistaken idea that the US was welcoming retired people with low income and no assets - I guess you're right it's a fundamental restructuring of our country. I find it shocking that no one is actually bringing up the REAL dramatic change - this proposal severely changed the preference for family sponsorship. This was by FAR the biggest category of visas issued and the big difference to current policies. There was ALREADY a severely limited number of visas available to non-family members and they were already essentially given out to only people with a sponsoring company - and yes, they absolutely had to have a job offer in hand.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Aug 8, 2017 21:16:19 GMT
That's not what the points system would do. Both an excellent cancer doctor and a former Olympian would qualify for green cards. The Doctor has only 25 points he wouldn't be allowed in though would he? assuming age 31-35 = 8 points, professional foreign degree = 10 points, English fluent = 12 points brings him to 30 total I don't see how he is totaled at 25? If I've miscalculated, then all the doctor needs to do before meeting the points requirement is get a job offer. Realistically that is going to give her another 13 points and be relatively easy.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Aug 8, 2017 21:21:33 GMT
I do qualify. But someone linked this on FB and I was literally the only person on the thread who qualified. This is a fundamental restructuring of what our country means. Actually the vast majority of American's wouldn't have qualified before - nor would they qualify to enter most other countries. And for the record, this is proposed legislation which doesn't appear to have much legislative support - not an actual new law or executive order. If people were somehow under the mistaken idea that the US was welcoming retired people with low income and no assets - I guess you're right it's a fundamental restructuring of our country. I find it shocking that no one is actually bringing up the REAL dramatic change - this proposal severely changed the preference for family sponsorship. This was by FAR the biggest category of visas issued and the big difference to current policies. There was ALREADY a severely limited number of visas available to non-family members and they were already essentially given out to only people with a sponsoring company - and yes, they absolutely had to have a job offer in hand. We were asked to sponsor DH's cousin when we got our green cards. His fiance didn't make enough money to sponsor him and needed a cosponsor. For a lot of reasons we declined, but the financial burden on us would be very real if we had. Families are not coming in and going on welfare.** ETA*** as is often said or implied in discussions around family sponsored immigration (I was listening to Trump in my head) but not stated or implied in the quoted post.
|
|
|
Post by papersilly on Aug 8, 2017 21:23:31 GMT
and why is the INVESTMENT in the US determined in just dollars? what about the people who tirelessly VOLUNTEER? or fundraise? or lobby for certain causes? isn't their time and commitment worth as much as just throwing money at something?
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 8, 2017 21:29:35 GMT
Actually the vast majority of American's wouldn't have qualified before - nor would they qualify to enter most other countries. And for the record, this is proposed legislation which doesn't appear to have much legislative support - not an actual new law or executive order. If people were somehow under the mistaken idea that the US was welcoming retired people with low income and no assets - I guess you're right it's a fundamental restructuring of our country. I find it shocking that no one is actually bringing up the REAL dramatic change - this proposal severely changed the preference for family sponsorship. This was by FAR the biggest category of visas issued and the big difference to current policies. There was ALREADY a severely limited number of visas available to non-family members and they were already essentially given out to only people with a sponsoring company - and yes, they absolutely had to have a job offer in hand. We were asked to sponsor DH's cousin when we got our green cards. His fiance didn't make enough money to sponsor him and needed a cosponsor. For a lot of reasons we declined, but the financial burden on us would be very real if we had. Families are not coming in and going on welfare. I never suggested immigrants coming to the US under family sponsorship used welfare. I'm saying 2/3 of all green cards last year were issued to family members not for employment and that is the dramatic change being proposed - moving to a merit based system (which ironically both Canada and Australia use and the Time article in the OP actually linked to the discussion of using their system as a basis) versus our current system dominated by family sponsorship. The actual criteria isn't actually dramatically different than what we have now for employment sponsored visas - so all this discussion about whether you could or couldn't enter the US is just bizarre - or at best for entertainment purposes only - I'm telling you - you weren't getting in before - unless you had a job (and a good one) and a degree.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 8:11:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 21:33:39 GMT
The Doctor has only 25 points he wouldn't be allowed in though would he? assuming age 31-35 = 8 points, professional foreign degree = 10 points, English fluent = 12 points brings him to 30 total I don't see how he is totaled at 25? If I've miscalculated, then all the doctor needs to do before meeting the points requirement is get a job offer. Realistically that is going to give her another 13 points and be relatively easy. I made the Dr a bit older and with excellent rather than fluent English I know realistically that the doctor would get a job offer first but used it as an example. it is rather shallow to have an Olympic medalist gaining more points than a doctor has without a job offer. I'm just looking at the disparity of the value that is put on one against the other.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Aug 8, 2017 21:43:48 GMT
We were asked to sponsor DH's cousin when we got our green cards. His fiance didn't make enough money to sponsor him and needed a cosponsor. For a lot of reasons we declined, but the financial burden on us would be very real if we had. Families are not coming in and going on welfare. I never suggested immigrants coming to the US under family sponsorship used welfare. I'm saying 2/3 of all green cards last year were issued to family members not for employment and that is the dramatic change being proposed - moving to a merit based system (which ironically both Canada and Australia use and the Time article in the OP actually linked to the discussion of using their system as a basis) versus our current system dominated by family sponsorship. The actual criteria isn't actually dramatically different than what we have now for employment sponsored visas - so all this discussion about whether you could or couldn't enter the US is just bizarre - or at best for entertainment purposes only - I'm telling you - you weren't getting in before - unless you had a job (and a good one) and a degree. No, no you didn't - sorry if my response read that way! I was hearing Trump in my head and he has made comments about immigrants coming in and going on welfare. I knew from our limited experience what I was signing up for if we sponsored a family member. For the record, my DH does not have a degree.
|
|
|
Post by annaintx on Aug 8, 2017 21:44:52 GMT
I have a PhD, but not in math/science/etc. so that doesn't count. And I only work part time so my pay is nil. I wouldn't make the cut. However, I *do* speak Russian, so maybe that might count for something??
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 8, 2017 21:44:54 GMT
assuming age 31-35 = 8 points, professional foreign degree = 10 points, English fluent = 12 points brings him to 30 total I don't see how he is totaled at 25? If I've miscalculated, then all the doctor needs to do before meeting the points requirement is get a job offer. Realistically that is going to give her another 13 points and be relatively easy. I made the Dr a bit older and with excellent rather than fluent English I know realistically that the doctor would get a job offer first but used it as an example. it is rather shallow to have an Olympic medalist gaining more points than a doctor has without a job offer. I'm just looking at the disparity of the value that is put on one against the other. And how exactly is this different than the UK's tier system that gives preference first for people with over 2 million pounds to invest or being of exception talent (Tier 1) and then to those who are highly skilled and have a job in specific fields (Tier 2 list). Again your argument that some cancer researcher is going to be denied entry is just ridiculous - this system is designed to limit employment visas to those in specific fields - or who have high assets and severely limit or deny them to low skill workers - which incidentally is EXACTLY what your country does.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 8, 2017 22:27:07 GMT
Hope he doesn't start deporting Americans who don't live up to his expectations. I only got 18 out of 30. Wonder how many he would get?I know he his Master's is from Wharton, so assume it's a business degree without a dual degree in a STEM field, so only giving him credit for his bachelor's: 6 Job over $155,000: 13 Investments of at least $1.8 million: 12 points Gives him 31 without even having to debate his English ability. He does not have a master's degree. Please do not give him more credit than he deserves. He does enough of that on his own.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 8, 2017 22:34:17 GMT
I do qualify. But someone linked this on FB and I was literally the only person on the thread who qualified. This is a fundamental restructuring of what our country means. Actually the vast majority of American's wouldn't have qualified before - nor would they qualify to enter most other countries. And for the record, this is proposed legislation which doesn't appear to have much legislative support - not an actual new law or executive order. If people were somehow under the mistaken idea that the US was welcoming retired people with low income and no assets - I guess you're right it's a fundamental restructuring of our country. I find it shocking that no one is actually bringing up the REAL dramatic change - this proposal severely changed the preference for family sponsorship. This was by FAR the biggest category of visas issued and the big difference to current policies. There was ALREADY a severely limited number of visas available to non-family members and they were already essentially given out to only people with a sponsoring company - and yes, they absolutely had to have a job offer in hand. If this is a reference to my comment on page 1 about them not counting my retirement and other income ... I didn't say anything about LOW retirement income and I also didn't say I have no assets. I don't have $1.35 million at hand to invest in a new business, it's true, but I wouldn't be a drain on society, either. My point was that I'm self-supporting, even without an advanced degree or a job offer.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 8, 2017 22:47:29 GMT
Actually the vast majority of American's wouldn't have qualified before - nor would they qualify to enter most other countries. And for the record, this is proposed legislation which doesn't appear to have much legislative support - not an actual new law or executive order. If people were somehow under the mistaken idea that the US was welcoming retired people with low income and no assets - I guess you're right it's a fundamental restructuring of our country. I find it shocking that no one is actually bringing up the REAL dramatic change - this proposal severely changed the preference for family sponsorship. This was by FAR the biggest category of visas issued and the big difference to current policies. There was ALREADY a severely limited number of visas available to non-family members and they were already essentially given out to only people with a sponsoring company - and yes, they absolutely had to have a job offer in hand. If this is a reference to my comment on page 1 about them not counting my retirement and other income ... I didn't say anything about LOW retirement income and I also didn't say I have no assets. I don't have $1.35 million at hand to invest in a new business, it's true, but I wouldn't be a drain on society, either. My point was that I'm self-supporting, even without an advanced degree or a job offer. [ My point was referencing many posters who were under the delusion that our existing immigration policies would admit them - if anyone thinks it's easy to obtain a visa - particularly a non-family visa to enter this county - you're dead wrong. And TODAY if you think you're entering without a job - it's not happening which isn't particularly surprising as we're discussing EMPLOYMENT visas
|
|
Nink
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,947
Location: North Idaho
Jul 1, 2014 23:30:44 GMT
|
Post by Nink on Aug 8, 2017 22:48:34 GMT
Nope. I only got 13. Lol but I'm beyond grateful I don't qualify to be a part of "Trumps America"
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 2, 2024 8:11:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 23:01:14 GMT
I made the Dr a bit older and with excellent rather than fluent English I know realistically that the doctor would get a job offer first but used it as an example. it is rather shallow to have an Olympic medalist gaining more points than a doctor has without a job offer. I'm just looking at the disparity of the value that is put on one against the other. And how exactly is this different than the UK's tier system that gives preference first for people with over 2 million pounds to invest or being of exception talent (Tier 1) and then to those who are highly skilled and have a job in specific fields (Tier 2 list). Again your argument that some cancer researcher is going to be denied entry is just ridiculous - this system is designed to limit employment visas to those in specific fields - or who have high assets and severely limit or deny them to low skill workers - which incidentally is EXACTLY what your country does. I'm not arguing that it isn't EXCEPT that Olympic medalist would not be on the top tier list here. Yes, we do operate a point system and we have 5 ( I think without checking) tiers. High value includes internationally recognized in science and arts, business set up or who buys into an existing business and investors. It does not include Athletes with medals. You're taking this discussion far too seriously. The Dr comparison to the athlete was done in an attempt to understand why any country would give more points to an athlete rather than a professional person who had more to offer in their contribution to society as a whole. I would ask exactly the same question if we did it. Tell me exactly what an Olympic athlete has to offer any country except pride, glory and entertainment? I wasn't comparing the US to UK you chose to do that not me!
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,408
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Aug 8, 2017 23:06:47 GMT
No, even if I figured it on my former job.
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
Jun 26, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
|
Post by sassyangel on Aug 8, 2017 23:16:13 GMT
I got 21. Not enough for the 30 requirement. Good thing I already emigrated here, I guess. I honestly am slayed by how oblivious this proposal is. To the economic realities of this country. So there is no value in the jobs that many immigrants already do in this country, simply because they're minimum wage, not requiring a nobel laureate, masters degree or having billions to invest? SMH.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Aug 8, 2017 23:18:53 GMT
I honestly am slayed by how oblivious this proposal is. To the economic realities of this country. So there is no value in the jobs that many immigrants already do in this country, simply because they're minimum wage, not requiring a nobel laureate, masters degree or having billions to invest? SMH. thanks for saying that; I thought I was the only one who was thinking this! The jobs we need filled (legally) are NOT the ones that fit their criteria. If they're so concerned about the issue of illegal immigration, they could, oh, I don't know, maybe... make it possible for THOSE people to come here and work? Two birds with one stone, and all that...
|
|
|
Post by Just Beth on Aug 8, 2017 23:34:31 GMT
I have exactly 30 points, the minimum. I am 42 with a US BS degree and since nurses in CA are well paid and I have a job I am good for the next few years until I lose points for age. I won't have nearly enough cash to offset my birthdays soon.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 9, 2017 0:34:00 GMT
If this is a reference to my comment on page 1 about them not counting my retirement and other income ... I didn't say anything about LOW retirement income and I also didn't say I have no assets. I don't have $1.35 million at hand to invest in a new business, it's true, but I wouldn't be a drain on society, either. My point was that I'm self-supporting, even without an advanced degree or a job offer. [ My point was referencing many posters who were under the delusion that our existing immigration policies would admit them - if anyone thinks it's easy to obtain a visa - particularly a non-family visa to enter this county - you're dead wrong. And TODAY if you think you're entering without a job - it's not happening which isn't particularly surprising as we're discussing EMPLOYMENT visas There are all kinds of people we need in this country. Not just those with Nobel prizes, Olympic medals, advanced STEM degrees and/or vast sums of money to invest, plus youth and complete fluency in the language to burnish their credentials. I don't think posters here believe they'd all be able to walk into the country regardless of their qualifications. I do believe most of us are pointing out the requirements are extremely capricious, stringent, and shortsighted. And really ... this dumbass proposed new law would replace the current one that allows legal immigrants to bring their family members over. So yeah, I think I might be able to get into the country today. If you think this new law would be no big deal, can you explain why most of Congress seems to think it sounds like a crap idea?
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Aug 9, 2017 0:42:28 GMT
Nope. My M.Ed. isn't a preferred field. Too old and I don't have enough to invest. I'm working on the Nobel and Olympics, but I doubt that's going to happen.
You know what's crazy? The people who DO have these qualifications aren't likely to want to live or work here. If I've got the money and education and can live elsewhere without a crazy person running the country, I'm going to stay there.
This is a way to basically cut off legal immigration to undesirables, but a lot of people who SHOULD be qualified to get in. Too bad the jobs available to fill are things like agricultural work. Not too many people with an MS wanting to do that job.
France has already called out for US scientists, researchers, educators and innovators to come to France. People with the brains are LEAVING the US, not trying to come in.
|
|
|
Post by txdancermom on Aug 9, 2017 0:49:29 GMT
I don't qualify. dh does, but barely.
the "test" is stupid
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 9, 2017 0:56:16 GMT
[ My point was referencing many posters who were under the delusion that our existing immigration policies would admit them - if anyone thinks it's easy to obtain a visa - particularly a non-family visa to enter this county - you're dead wrong. And TODAY if you think you're entering without a job - it's not happening which isn't particularly surprising as we're discussing EMPLOYMENT visas There are all kinds of people we need in this country. Not just those with Nobel prizes, Olympic medals, advanced STEM degrees and/or vast sums of money to invest, plus youth and complete fluency in the language to burnish their credentials. I don't think posters here believe they'd all be able to walk into the country regardless of their qualifications. I do believe most of us are pointing out the requirements are extremely capricious, stringent, and shortsighted. And really ... this dumbass proposed new law would replace the current one that allows legal immigrants to bring their family members over. So yeah, I think I might be able to get into the country today. If you think this new law would be no big deal, can you explain why most of Congress seems to think it sounds like a crap idea? Where in the world did I say the law was no big deal - I specifically said the big deal was moving away from family sponsorship and said in my post that this bill had no support in the legislature!?!? As I said earlier, and I'll reiterate - this bizarre preoccupation with the specific requirements is utterly ignoring that the employment based visas ALREADY had more stringent and difficult requirements (sponsored by a specific company for example) and few if any would qualify. There is no actual discussion about the benefits or harm of moving away from family sponsorship which IS the big dramatic change and secondarily if these are better or worse requirements to the EXISTING employment requirements. As well as pointing out that most other countries use a similar "point" or merit based system. There's just seems to be a whole lot of hand wringing that now America doesn't want me - if that's the depth of discussion people are interested in go for it. Oh and as a aside - don't assume your family can bring you over - it pretty much depends on where you currently are located - there's several countries where the wait exceeds 15 years - which is another issue I have with our current system, but if you think it's perfect - no problem (see how fun it is when others put words in your mouth).
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 9, 2017 1:15:28 GMT
Nope. My M.Ed. isn't a preferred field. Too old and I don't have enough to invest. I'm working on the Nobel and Olympics, but I doubt that's going to happen. You know what's crazy? The people who DO have these qualifications aren't likely to want to live or work here. If I've got the money and education and can live elsewhere without a crazy person running the country, I'm going to stay there. This is a way to basically cut off legal immigration to undesirables, but a lot of people who SHOULD be qualified to get in. Too bad the jobs available to fill are things like agricultural work. Not too many people with an MS wanting to do that job. France has already called out for US scientists, researchers, educators and innovators to come to France. People with the brains are LEAVING the US, not trying to come in. So far the H1-B visa process doesn't support your assertion. April 1st was the window for applying and the cap was exceeded in 5 days. 199,000 applied and all require a bachelor's degree and 20,000 are reserved for those with advanced degrees. All for those with at least 12 years experience in specialized fields.
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Aug 9, 2017 1:34:59 GMT
I'm an older, relatively broke, stay at home mom. I knew I wouldn't make the cut before I even tried the quiz. (And I was correct---I didn't hit the magic 30 pts.)
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 9, 2017 1:50:11 GMT
There are all kinds of people we need in this country. Not just those with Nobel prizes, Olympic medals, advanced STEM degrees and/or vast sums of money to invest, plus youth and complete fluency in the language to burnish their credentials. I don't think posters here believe they'd all be able to walk into the country regardless of their qualifications. I do believe most of us are pointing out the requirements are extremely capricious, stringent, and shortsighted. And really ... this dumbass proposed new law would replace the current one that allows legal immigrants to bring their family members over. So yeah, I think I might be able to get into the country today. If you think this new law would be no big deal, can you explain why most of Congress seems to think it sounds like a crap idea? Where in the world did I say the law was no big deal - I specifically said the big deal was moving away from family sponsorship and said in my post that this bill had no support in the legislature!?!? As I said earlier, and I'll reiterate - this bizarre preoccupation with the specific requirements is utterly ignoring that the employment based visas ALREADY had more stringent and difficult requirements (sponsored by a specific company for example) and few if any would qualify. There is no actual discussion about the benefits or harm of moving away from family sponsorship which IS the big dramatic change and secondarily if these are better or worse requirements to the EXISTING employment requirements. As well as pointing out that most other countries use a similar "point" or merit based system. There's just seems to be a whole lot of hand wringing that now America doesn't want me - if that's the depth of discussion people are interested in go for it. Oh and as a aside - don't assume your family can bring you over - it pretty much depends on where you currently are located - there's several countries where the wait exceeds 15 years - which is another issue I have with our current system, but if you think it's perfect - no problem (see how fun it is when others put words in your mouth). That's fine and I'm happy to read more about your thoughts on this subject, but I was responding to what you said to me, not everything you said in the entire thread. I'm sorry if I missed something important.
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Aug 9, 2017 2:14:36 GMT
Obama has a Nobel prize..just sayin.
|
|