Michigan Votes Forum

For your information everyone pay for unemployment every tax dollar we pay for pays for employment am unemployed now i am still paying outof the checks when we had jobs we pay for it you better hope u dont lose ur job we will see u on this web site asking about a extension soon lol jerk

GREAT comment to "cold hearted person". I hope he finds himself living in a box on the streets for his nasty comments. No one's job is secure in Michigan. If you think it is.. you're crazy!

Ben Adler 1 hour, 21 minutes ago If you’ve read enough profiles of Barack Obama, chances are you’re familiar with the name Kirk Dillard. An accomplished and articulate legislator who served with Obama in the Illinois state Senate, he is frequently called on by the national media to shed light on the presumptive Democratic nominee’s early days in politics. ADVERTISEMENT Dillard is an unabashed admirer, one whose high praise for Obama led the campaign to feature him in Obama’s first biographical television ad. All of that wouldn’t be so unusual except for the fact that Dillard is a Republican. And a delegate for John McCain. Now, as a result of his willingness to regularly offer an unvarnished take on Obama’s Springfield years, Dillard is facing some serious blowback within his own party. Much of the resentment stems from Dillard’s starring role in the Obama commercial, which aired long into the primary season and burnished Obama’s bipartisan credentials in six states, including Iowa. “Senator Obama worked on some of the deepest issues we had and he was successful in a bipartisan way,” said Dillard in the ad. “Republican legislators respected Senator Obama. His negotiation skills and an ability to understand both sides would serve the country very well.” Dillard was not a McCain delegate at the time the spot was filmed, but his appearance nevertheless rubbed GOP colleagues the wrong way. “There was some obvious concern about Senator Dillard and the fact that he was in an ad, and the comments he’s made,” said Frank Watson, the Senate Republican leader. “I just had to say I was disappointed that he was in a commercial for the candidate. That was over the top. He didn’t just hear from me. Colleagues, Republicans in general throughout the state were very disappointed in his participation.” Andy McKenna, the state party chairman, also raised the issue with Dillard. “I echoed what I’d heard from many people that they were disappointed and found it counter-productive,” he said. But it wasn’t just the commercial that landed Dillard in hot water. It was the stream of laudatory remarks in the media, including some made in a 2007 Obama conference call that he participated in. As soon as it seemed likely that Obama would be the Democratic nominee, other Republican state Senate colleagues privately complained to him that anything positive he said about Obama would hurt McCain. Besides, as they recalled things, Obama had much more modest achievements and a far less dramatic presence. “Kirk’s enthusiasm for Senator Obama is clearly an outlier,” said GOP state Sen. Christine Radogno. “Everyone agrees Barack’s an intelligent guy, but in terms of being a stupendous standout that’s a unique view.” “In fairness, [Dillard] served with Obama longer than I did,” said Dale Righter, the Republican Senate caucus chair. “But I’ve seen him refer to Obama as having done really yeoman’s work in the Illinois state Senate. I don’t know that I’d agree with that from my two years with him.” Dillard contends he was punished for by Watson for his pro-Obama remarks. Dillard, who serves in the unpaid position of party whip, said that he had been assured by Watson that he would get the next opening among the paid leadership positions, namely assistant leader. But, when an opening came, he was passed over. Dillard believes it was at least in part payback. “The partisans want to punish me,” he said. “They’ve done it through pocketbook and position.” Watson was unavailable to return a follow-up request for comment on that claim. But his spokesperson, Patty Schuh, denied that any specific position had been promised. She did not rule out the possibility that Dillard’s comments on Obama might have contributed to him not getting the job, but said it could not have been the sole reason. Dillard also appeared, to some colleagues, to be dragging his feet on a matter of importance to his colleagues—a request from McCain’s Illinois campaign chairman, state Rep. Jim Durkin, that Dillard formally ask the Obama campaign to remove the ad from the air. Durkin says that Dillard delayed for months until finally, in May, Durkin himself offered to draft a formal letter for Dillard to sign and send to the Obama campaign. “He walked the letter over to my desk on the Senate floor and stuck it under my nose and asked me if I’d sign it,” recalled Dillard. Durkin says that Dillard was not taken by surprise and that Dillard revised the letter himself. “I had talked to Kirk and I had suggested to him that I would draft the letter,” said Durkin. “I did not just show up on the Senate floor. He was pleased and relieved. I came over with a draft and he marked it up.” Durkin added that Dillard had said he was glad to bring the matter to a close. “Kirk has received a lot of flak in Illinois. I was doing this to protect Kirk and he was thankful that I did this.” Durkin said the letter was his idea, and that it did not originate from within the McCain campaign. When presented with the request in June, the Obama campaign agreed to stop airing the ad. “Senator Obama appreciates that Senator Dillard worked with him in a bipartisan way in the Illinois legislature to take on the special interests and pass campaign finance and ethics reform,” said Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan. “But he understands that Senator Dillard feels obligated to support his party’s nominee.” Dillard attributes some of the GOP pushback to reflexive partisanship. “Some of the totally partisan, more conservative legislators from Day One were not understanding of my cameo appearance in a Senator Obama ad in Iowa,” he said. “The only people I received negative feedback from initially were the partisan leaders.” Kent Redfield, a professor of political science at the University of Illinois-Springfield, and an expert on state politics, said that Dillard may have been surprised by the controversy his comments caused because state politics in Illinois are generally isolated from national partisan rancor. “Politics tends to be not very nationally or ideologically focused on the state level in Illinois,” said Redfield. But Dillard’s comments also may have touched a raw nerve by exacerbating preexisting intra-party tensions. “The Republican Party in Illinois has a huge ideological split between the moderate wing and the hard right,” said Redfield. “Dillard is seen as part of the moderate suburban crowd so there’s a ‘there he goes again’ kind of reaction from the people who brought you Alan Keyes [the conservative activist who Republicans nominated to run against Obama in 2004].” Dillard said he will continue to speak up about Obama, though he favors McCain for president because he agrees with the presumptive GOP nominee on the issues. He contends that there are other Republicans who hold Obama in high regard, though they will not say so publicly for partisan purposes. “None of my colleagues who admired Obama will return the reporters’ phone calls,” said Dillard. “And that’s the problem with this country. No one is willing to say something nice for 10 seconds about someone of a different race, party, and location. In this case Barack is from Chicago and I’m from the suburbs of Chicago.” “Very few suburbanites would work closely with city of Chicago Democrats,” he added. “Also, there’s the racial component. It’s a testament to Senator Obama that he was able to work with people who were different than he.” But, he hastened to add, “John McCain has those same qualities.”

Ben Adler 1 hour, 21 minutes ago If you’ve read enough profiles of Barack Obama, chances are you’re familiar with the name Kirk Dillard. An accomplished and articulate legislator who served with Obama in the Illinois state Senate, he is frequently called on by the national media to shed light on the presumptive Democratic nominee’s early days in politics. ADVERTISEMENT Dillard is an unabashed admirer, one whose high praise for Obama led the campaign to feature him in Obama’s first biographical television ad. All of that wouldn’t be so unusual except for the fact that Dillard is a Republican. And a delegate for John McCain. Now, as a result of his willingness to regularly offer an unvarnished take on Obama’s Springfield years, Dillard is facing some serious blowback within his own party. Much of the resentment stems from Dillard’s starring role in the Obama commercial, which aired long into the primary season and burnished Obama’s bipartisan credentials in six states, including Iowa. “Senator Obama worked on some of the deepest issues we had and he was successful in a bipartisan way,” said Dillard in the ad. “Republican legislators respected Senator Obama. His negotiation skills and an ability to understand both sides would serve the country very well.” Dillard was not a McCain delegate at the time the spot was filmed, but his appearance nevertheless rubbed GOP colleagues the wrong way. “There was some obvious concern about Senator Dillard and the fact that he was in an ad, and the comments he’s made,” said Frank Watson, the Senate Republican leader. “I just had to say I was disappointed that he was in a commercial for the candidate. That was over the top. He didn’t just hear from me. Colleagues, Republicans in general throughout the state were very disappointed in his participation.” Andy McKenna, the state party chairman, also raised the issue with Dillard. “I echoed what I’d heard from many people that they were disappointed and found it counter-productive,” he said. But it wasn’t just the commercial that landed Dillard in hot water. It was the stream of laudatory remarks in the media, including some made in a 2007 Obama conference call that he participated in. As soon as it seemed likely that Obama would be the Democratic nominee, other Republican state Senate colleagues privately complained to him that anything positive he said about Obama would hurt McCain. Besides, as they recalled things, Obama had much more modest achievements and a far less dramatic presence. “Kirk’s enthusiasm for Senator Obama is clearly an outlier,” said GOP state Sen. Christine Radogno. “Everyone agrees Barack’s an intelligent guy, but in terms of being a stupendous standout that’s a unique view.” “In fairness, [Dillard] served with Obama longer than I did,” said Dale Righter, the Republican Senate caucus chair. “But I’ve seen him refer to Obama as having done really yeoman’s work in the Illinois state Senate. I don’t know that I’d agree with that from my two years with him.” Dillard contends he was punished for by Watson for his pro-Obama remarks. Dillard, who serves in the unpaid position of party whip, said that he had been assured by Watson that he would get the next opening among the paid leadership positions, namely assistant leader. But, when an opening came, he was passed over. Dillard believes it was at least in part payback. “The partisans want to punish me,” he said. “They’ve done it through pocketbook and position.” Watson was unavailable to return a follow-up request for comment on that claim. But his spokesperson, Patty Schuh, denied that any specific position had been promised. She did not rule out the possibility that Dillard’s comments on Obama might have contributed to him not getting the job, but said it could not have been the sole reason. Dillard also appeared, to some colleagues, to be dragging his feet on a matter of importance to his colleagues—a request from McCain’s Illinois campaign chairman, state Rep. Jim Durkin, that Dillard formally ask the Obama campaign to remove the ad from the air. Durkin says that Dillard delayed for months until finally, in May, Durkin himself offered to draft a formal letter for Dillard to sign and send to the Obama campaign. “He walked the letter over to my desk on the Senate floor and stuck it under my nose and asked me if I’d sign it,” recalled Dillard. Durkin says that Dillard was not taken by surprise and that Dillard revised the letter himself. “I had talked to Kirk and I had suggested to him that I would draft the letter,” said Durkin. “I did not just show up on the Senate floor. He was pleased and relieved. I came over with a draft and he marked it up.” Durkin added that Dillard had said he was glad to bring the matter to a close. “Kirk has received a lot of flak in Illinois. I was doing this to protect Kirk and he was thankful that I did this.” Durkin said the letter was his idea, and that it did not originate from within the McCain campaign. When presented with the request in June, the Obama campaign agreed to stop airing the ad. “Senator Obama appreciates that Senator Dillard worked with him in a bipartisan way in the Illinois legislature to take on the special interests and pass campaign finance and ethics reform,” said Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan. “But he understands that Senator Dillard feels obligated to support his party’s nominee.” Dillard attributes some of the GOP pushback to reflexive partisanship. “Some of the totally partisan, more conservative legislators from Day One were not understanding of my cameo appearance in a Senator Obama ad in Iowa,” he said. “The only people I received negative feedback from initially were the partisan leaders.” Kent Redfield, a professor of political science at the University of Illinois-Springfield, and an expert on state politics, said that Dillard may have been surprised by the controversy his comments caused because state politics in Illinois are generally isolated from national partisan rancor. “Politics tends to be not very nationally or ideologically focused on the state level in Illinois,” said Redfield. But Dillard’s comments also may have touched a raw nerve by exacerbating preexisting intra-party tensions. “The Republican Party in Illinois has a huge ideological split between the moderate wing and the hard right,” said Redfield. “Dillard is seen as part of the moderate suburban crowd so there’s a ‘there he goes again’ kind of reaction from the people who brought you Alan Keyes [the conservative activist who Republicans nominated to run against Obama in 2004].” Dillard said he will continue to speak up about Obama, though he favors McCain for president because he agrees with the presumptive GOP nominee on the issues. He contends that there are other Republicans who hold Obama in high regard, though they will not say so publicly for partisan purposes. “None of my colleagues who admired Obama will return the reporters’ phone calls,” said Dillard. “And that’s the problem with this country. No one is willing to say something nice for 10 seconds about someone of a different race, party, and location. In this case Barack is from Chicago and I’m from the suburbs of Chicago.” “Very few suburbanites would work closely with city of Chicago Democrats,” he added. “Also, there’s the racial component. It’s a testament to Senator Obama that he was able to work with people who were different than he.” But, he hastened to add, “John McCain has those same qualities.”

More lies by Obama to obscure his radical collectivist history: During Obama's campaign for the 2008 Democrat nomination he portrayed his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, as a conservative girl from Kansas; however in reality her family moved to Washington state when she was 12. She grew-up a radical leftist and cutural Marxist; spending her teenage years in Seattle's coffee shops with other young radical leftists before graduating from Mercer Island High School (not some school in Kansas) in 1960. Obama claims his mother's family was conservative Methodists or Baptists from Kansas. However his mother's parents were members of a Unitarian church located in Bellevue, Washington nicknamed 'the little red church,' because of its radical leanings. Mercer Island High School, was a hotbed of pro-Marxist radical teachers as attested by John Stenhouse, a board member, before the House Un-American Activities Subcommittee. He admitted that he had been a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and this school, Mercer Island, had a number of Marxists on its staff. Two teachers in particular at this school, Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman, both Frankfurt School style Marxists, taught a critical theory curriculum to students which included rejection of societal norms, attacks on Christianity, the traditional family, and assigned readings by Karl Marx, among other radical thinkers. The hallway between Fouberts and Wichterman classrooms was sometimes called 'anarchy ally.' Dunham has been described by her friends as 'a fellow traveler...' meaning a communist sympathizer. Barack Obama referred to his mother as 'the dominant figure in my formative years... The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics.' Fortunately for her she passed away in 1995 and he can't throw his radical momma under the bus too....

Ben Adler 1 hour, 21 minutes ago If you’ve read enough profiles of Barack Obama, chances are you’re familiar with the name Kirk Dillard. An accomplished and articulate legislator who served with Obama in the Illinois state Senate, he is frequently called on by the national media to shed light on the presumptive Democratic nominee’s early days in politics. ADVERTISEMENT Dillard is an unabashed admirer, one whose high praise for Obama led the campaign to feature him in Obama’s first biographical television ad. All of that wouldn’t be so unusual except for the fact that Dillard is a Republican. And a delegate for John McCain. Now, as a result of his willingness to regularly offer an unvarnished take on Obama’s Springfield years, Dillard is facing some serious blowback within his own party. Much of the resentment stems from Dillard’s starring role in the Obama commercial, which aired long into the primary season and burnished Obama’s bipartisan credentials in six states, including Iowa. “Senator Obama worked on some of the deepest issues we had and he was successful in a bipartisan way,” said Dillard in the ad. “Republican legislators respected Senator Obama. His negotiation skills and an ability to understand both sides would serve the country very well.” Dillard was not a McCain delegate at the time the spot was filmed, but his appearance nevertheless rubbed GOP colleagues the wrong way. “There was some obvious concern about Senator Dillard and the fact that he was in an ad, and the comments he’s made,” said Frank Watson, the Senate Republican leader. “I just had to say I was disappointed that he was in a commercial for the candidate. That was over the top. He didn’t just hear from me. Colleagues, Republicans in general throughout the state were very disappointed in his participation.” Andy McKenna, the state party chairman, also raised the issue with Dillard. “I echoed what I’d heard from many people that they were disappointed and found it counter-productive,” he said. But it wasn’t just the commercial that landed Dillard in hot water. It was the stream of laudatory remarks in the media, including some made in a 2007 Obama conference call that he participated in. As soon as it seemed likely that Obama would be the Democratic nominee, other Republican state Senate colleagues privately complained to him that anything positive he said about Obama would hurt McCain. Besides, as they recalled things, Obama had much more modest achievements and a far less dramatic presence. “Kirk’s enthusiasm for Senator Obama is clearly an outlier,” said GOP state Sen. Christine Radogno. “Everyone agrees Barack’s an intelligent guy, but in terms of being a stupendous standout that’s a unique view.” “In fairness, [Dillard] served with Obama longer than I did,” said Dale Righter, the Republican Senate caucus chair. “But I’ve seen him refer to Obama as having done really yeoman’s work in the Illinois state Senate. I don’t know that I’d agree with that from my two years with him.” Dillard contends he was punished for by Watson for his pro-Obama remarks. Dillard, who serves in the unpaid position of party whip, said that he had been assured by Watson that he would get the next opening among the paid leadership positions, namely assistant leader. But, when an opening came, he was passed over. Dillard believes it was at least in part payback. “The partisans want to punish me,” he said. “They’ve done it through pocketbook and position.” Watson was unavailable to return a follow-up request for comment on that claim. But his spokesperson, Patty Schuh, denied that any specific position had been promised. She did not rule out the possibility that Dillard’s comments on Obama might have contributed to him not getting the job, but said it could not have been the sole reason. Dillard also appeared, to some colleagues, to be dragging his feet on a matter of importance to his colleagues—a request from McCain’s Illinois campaign chairman, state Rep. Jim Durkin, that Dillard formally ask the Obama campaign to remove the ad from the air. Durkin says that Dillard delayed for months until finally, in May, Durkin himself offered to draft a formal letter for Dillard to sign and send to the Obama campaign. “He walked the letter over to my desk on the Senate floor and stuck it under my nose and asked me if I’d sign it,” recalled Dillard. Durkin says that Dillard was not taken by surprise and that Dillard revised the letter himself. “I had talked to Kirk and I had suggested to him that I would draft the letter,” said Durkin. “I did not just show up on the Senate floor. He was pleased and relieved. I came over with a draft and he marked it up.” Durkin added that Dillard had said he was glad to bring the matter to a close. “Kirk has received a lot of flak in Illinois. I was doing this to protect Kirk and he was thankful that I did this.” Durkin said the letter was his idea, and that it did not originate from within the McCain campaign. When presented with the request in June, the Obama campaign agreed to stop airing the ad. “Senator Obama appreciates that Senator Dillard worked with him in a bipartisan way in the Illinois legislature to take on the special interests and pass campaign finance and ethics reform,” said Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan. “But he understands that Senator Dillard feels obligated to support his party’s nominee.” Dillard attributes some of the GOP pushback to reflexive partisanship. “Some of the totally partisan, more conservative legislators from Day One were not understanding of my cameo appearance in a Senator Obama ad in Iowa,” he said. “The only people I received negative feedback from initially were the partisan leaders.” Kent Redfield, a professor of political science at the University of Illinois-Springfield, and an expert on state politics, said that Dillard may have been surprised by the controversy his comments caused because state politics in Illinois are generally isolated from national partisan rancor. “Politics tends to be not very nationally or ideologically focused on the state level in Illinois,” said Redfield. But Dillard’s comments also may have touched a raw nerve by exacerbating preexisting intra-party tensions. “The Republican Party in Illinois has a huge ideological split between the moderate wing and the hard right,” said Redfield. “Dillard is seen as part of the moderate suburban crowd so there’s a ‘there he goes again’ kind of reaction from the people who brought you Alan Keyes [the conservative activist who Republicans nominated to run against Obama in 2004].” Dillard said he will continue to speak up about Obama, though he favors McCain for president because he agrees with the presumptive GOP nominee on the issues. He contends that there are other Republicans who hold Obama in high regard, though they will not say so publicly for partisan purposes. “None of my colleagues who admired Obama will return the reporters’ phone calls,” said Dillard. “And that’s the problem with this country. No one is willing to say something nice for 10 seconds about someone of a different race, party, and location. In this case Barack is from Chicago and I’m from the suburbs of Chicago.” “Very few suburbanites would work closely with city of Chicago Democrats,” he added. “Also, there’s the racial component. It’s a testament to Senator Obama that he was able to work with people who were different than he.” But, he hastened to add, “John McCain has those same qualities.”

By EILEEN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 39 minutes ago WASHINGTON - European terrorists are trying to enter the United States with European Union passports, and there is no guarantee officials will catch them every time, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Thursday. ADVERTISEMENT Chertoff's comments on Capitol Hill comes as the country is entering a potentially vulnerable period with the presidential nominating conventions coming up next month; the presidential election in November; and the transition to a new administration in January — all of which may be attractive targets for terrorists. In his last scheduled appearance before the House Homeland Security Committee, Chertoff said that the more time and space al-Qaida and its allies have to recruit, train, experiment and plan, the more problems the U.S. and Europe will face down the road. "The terrorists are deliberately focusing on people who have legitimate Western European passports, who don't appear to have records as terrorists," Chertoff told lawmakers. "I have a good degree of confidence we can catch people coming in. But I have to tell you ... there's no guarantee. And they are working very hard to slip by us." Chertoff and other intelligence officials have delivered similar warnings before, and he offered no new information about specific threats or an imminent attack. Chertoff reiterated his concern that terrorists could sneak radiological material into the country on small boats or private aircraft. This material could be used to create an explosive device known as a "dirty bomb." The Homeland Security Department has a strategy to protect against this small boat vulnerability and is testing radiation detection equipment in Seattle and San Diego ports. Chertoff said that getting out a regulation to prescreen and enhance security of general aviation aircraft coming to the U.S. from overseas is one of his top priorities. He also said he expects to approve new radiation detection technology this fall. Responding to a question from Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, Chertoff dismissed any rumor that he is on a list of potential running mates for Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. Chertoff quipped that the only list he has for next year is a list of vacations. Chertoff's term as the country's second Homeland Security Secretary ends when a new administration takes over the White House in January.

if B. Hussein Obama justs sits down and talks to them they will play nice..... Let me know how that works out for you.

you said "I don't think it's made up. It's in the news." Do you ever read what you write? Most of the so called news media is just a giant obama campaign outfit. The only republicans that they will say anything good about are the ones that shouldn't even be republicans. What do you think would happen if one of McCain's good buddies used to set off bombs in government buildings?????The news doesn't even mention all the shady crooks that mr. hussein obama hangs with.

cry me a river. I think he's a great guy, but...as a political reporter, I simply keep that in mind. I think he's a hard worker, and I'm glad to have him as other stations don't seem to have the expense account for a political reporter, but... just don't even start on liberal media bias around these parts

i return my application last tuesday have anyone been approve yet

Hatters!!!!!!!!!!!Stop hatin on my boy obama!he gone win and that that!! HA

I sure hope he not gone win. We wil b in troble. This is why we need a poll test.

He's our only hope.

Yeah, thats what we need. Some Muslim that hasn't done anything in his political life. That will solve everything. Can you say TAX MAN?

he's also for change.

No word yet

qzkyld zdcls wyjep squdxrfem mjvg okamcrlt clbueryh

Sent my paper in on July 17th. Called marvin on my call in date Monday July 21st. My check will be direct deposited on July 23rd. Hope this helps everyone.

Sent my paper in on July 17th. Called Marvin on my call in date, Monday July 21st. My check will be direct deposited on July 23rd. Hope this helps everyone.

I SENT MY APPLICATION IN ON JULY 17TH, TRIED CALLING MARVIN ON MY SCHEDULED DAY WEDNESDAY JULY 23 AND MARVIN WOULD NOT TAKE MY CERTIFICATION. I TRIED CALLING THE UIA PHONE LINE 2 OR 3 TIMES, WAS ON HOLD FOR ABOUT 30 MINUTES, AND HAD TO HANG UP. SO I TRIED CALLING MARVIN AGAIN TODAY, THURSDAY JULY 24TH AND MARVIN WOULD STILL NOT TAKE MY CERTIFICATION. SO I CALLED THE UIA LINE AGAIN AND WAS BUSY FOR THE LONGEST TIME, WHEN I FINALLY GOT THRU I WAS ON HOLD AGAIN. I FINALLY TALKED TO A PERSON AND EXPLAINED TO HIM WHAT WAS GOING ON. HE TOLD ME, THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN ALL THE APPLICATIONS PROCESSED IN THE COMPUTER YET AND TO TRY CALLING MARVIN BACK ON MY NEXT CALL IN DATE WHICH IS WED, AUGUST 6TH, AND IT SHOULD BE IN THE COMPUTER BY THEN

That's exactly what happened to me! They just need time to process all the app's....I'm sure we will receive our checks befor the next call date!

I mailed my exension App in on Monday July 21. On Wednesday the 23rd I went to my local MWA office as requested. My call in days are Wednesdays. I did not call MARVIN bucause I was waiting for the OK to do so. Well Late Friday afternoon I went ahead and called MARVIN and I will be getting my check diredt deposited on Monday the 2th........

I received my approval very fast. I will be getting 9 weeks. Called in to Marvin on Tuesday July 22. Having it direct deposited but today is Friday and it is not there yet. Surprised me I thought it would have been deposited. It was hard to get through had to redial over and over and you will get through.

Same thing happened to me. I promptly filled out my application and mailed back the same day I received it - July 17. Did everything they asked me to do - went to Mich Works, etc. My call in day is Tuesday but when I called MARVIN he told me I couldn't certify until after July 27. I could never get through on the phones to anyone to ask why so I apprciate your post. Does everyone automatically get 13 weeks more of unemployment? My 26 weeks ran out on July 5th.

vlFXmF hi! hice site!

QnvRpk hi! hice site!

mg6Ix3 hi! hice site!

Td3rDv hi! hice site!

All depends on the income you made. It says up to 13 weeks. I am only getting 9 weeks.

jZHsr1 hi! hice site!

jZHsr1 hi! hice site!

jFiLEr hi! hice site!

S5loBj hi! hice site!

cymL24 hi! hice site!

I have yet to receice anything on my extention. Although I have gotten in touch with the enemployment office, they say to just wait, is anyone else had this happen? Rose

CFYW32 hi! hice site!

aCACaT hi! hice site!

Yes, Rose, it is happening to me. Unfortunately, I took a job for 2 weeks. The place closed up! Because of that, Unemployment has to take more time to review my claim. They are so overwhelmed because of the extensions, they are doing all the easy claims first. I guess we just wait for the mailman... Grrrr Sarah

Yes Rose, same thing with me. I sent in app. on 7-18,went down to MichWorks same day, made the call for options and called on my call date which was 7-23 and no certification, so I called and talked to a HUMAN and she did the same thing MARVIN does and told me to call on my next call date, which is Aug. 6th and that I could call the Marvin number and select "2" to inquire, I have done that daily, still no response. I too worked for 4 days and that's probably what's holding everything up!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR! :(