GlobeHopperMama

The USA is not a democracy either. They are a republic...quite a different thing...just an FYI.
Being able to come over and adjust our status without an I-94 ect does not preclude us from being required to follow the law. In other words we cannot lie at the border about our intentions.
So would it be a violation of TOS to recommend it to all Canadians? Yes...because it is not the route for all Canadians. It is only an option for those that have come here and decided after entry to stay. That same thing applies to all those who AOS regardless of country...

No no no. You are a little confused. Per USCIS memo, unlawful presence doesn't begin UNTIL USCIS or an immigration judge decides you are out of status. No USCIS officer can retroactively decide that you were out of status as of a particular date and start counting unlawful presence. This is explicitly stated in the foreign affairs manual and the most recent USCIS memo on unlawful presence.
Canadian citizens who are not issued I-94s are in "non-controlled status", which means they don't accumulate unlawful presence and are treated EXACTLY like D/S cases. D/S cases also do not accrue unlawful status UNTIL USCIS or a judge determines they are out of status--it can't be retroactive.
Here's the quote from the memo:
"If USCIS finds a nonimmigrant status violation while adjudicating a request for an immigration benefit, unlawful presence will begin to occur on the day after the request is denied. . . It must be emphasized that the accrual of unlawful presence neither begins on the date the status violation occurs, nor on the day on which removal proceedings are initiated."
This is on page 25 of this memo, under the section applying to D/S cases. The very next section says that "non-controlled nonimmigrant" Canadian citizens are treated exactly the same: http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/Static_Files_Memoranda/2009/revision_redesign_AFM.PDF
Canadian citizens are "non-controlled" and can stay in the U.S. as long as they maintain B1/B2 status, meaning they are temporary visitors and not immigrants.

Like I said, Canadians are special.
You can see a basic reference to what I was talking about here (and what DandT14 was trying to clarify):
This is all irrelevant now that AOS has been filed anyway, but yeah. Canadians are admitted under D/S and don't accrue unlawful presence until declared so by USCIS or an IJ. And therefore, if she leaves, she actually hasn't accrued unlawful presence to activate a ban unless declared out of status. I've known several Canadians who did consular filing after periods of very long stay in the US, and they were able to successfully get their visas without a waiver. One was told to file the waiver, but later produced the policy memo related to this, and got the consulate to admit that there was no unlawful presence. This only really applies to Canadians, though.

I'm glad that things worked out for you guys without any issues, though my husband and I did things differently.
OP, I also cancelled my K-1 application (originally filed last August) to apply for the CR-1 instead. I had called USCIS to ask about how to handle this issue, as I told them (at that time) that I was thinking about to leaving for India to get married instead of getting married over here. They told me that the best way of avoiding confusion was to FIRST cancel the K-1, then wait about 1 month until they mail me an acknowledgement letter of the K-1 cancellation, before submitting the CR-1.
We thought about canceling the K-1 before I left for India, then us getting married in India and filing the CR-1 when I got back. But then we were worried that what if we cancel the K-1 only to find out that we couldn't get married in India (for some odd reason) and then we have to start the K-1 all over from scratch again (as we were already 3 months into the process). So that's why I waited to get married, THEN I came home and cancelled the K-1 immediately afterwards, saying that I was now ineligible for the K-1 due to marriage. It took about 4 weeks to get the confirmation letter of K-1 cancellation from them, and afterwards we were free to apply for the CR-1. Of course I wasn't thrilled to have to wait a month on standstill before I could file for CR-1 (although we anyway ended up delaying the process for other family reasons), we still wanted to do things the right way and not take chances with doing things wrong and having our visa delayed indefinitely. This was just my experience, having followed the instructions that I was told from the USCIS about canceling the K-1 before applying for CR-1. Good luck!

I do not think Obamacare is perfect, but I think it is a big step in the right direction.

That seems logical. Ignore Congress and the Supreme Court in an effort to demonstrate what American democracy is all about.
Dear USA: please sort out your issues before my family returns. I love you, but whoa, you can be kinda scary.
Until then, I'll enjoy being able to take my son to the doctor when he's sick and walk out 30 minutes later with a reliable diagnosis and prescribed medication for less than $10 US, based on my and my employer's contribution to a reasonable nationalized system that works. South Korea has figured this out. You can, too.

If you're going through Mexico, absolutely do not bother filing I-129f. It is far more of a hassle and time-waster than it's worth. Mexico schedules IR1/CR1 visa interviews very quickly, and the added benefit of that visa is that once you enter the US, you're a permanent resident and can start working and establishing your life in the US almost right away.
If you get the K3 visa, you're stuck in the US with no employment authorization (EAD) and no Social Security Number (which means no ability to get a job or driver's license) until the adjustment of status packet is filed and the documents have been issued, which for some takes several months. K3 visas used to be a faster way to reunite spouses. But now, at least through Mexico, they're obsolete and unnecessary, not to mention more expensive!
Also, the process for IR1/CR1 through Mexico is mostly electronic now, and just zips along quite quickly if you have all your documents in order. However, if you do K3 and it happens to reach the consular level, you're likely to be kicked out of the electronic process and then CDJ gets really confused, they give you misleading or conflicting information, and it's just not a pleasant thing. Do I-130 and just I-130, is my suggestion.

It is very frustrating, no doubt about it, but immigration laws are in place for a very good reason. Almost everyone on this board has gone through or is going through exactly what you are going through right now. No better place to find out what it's like and what to expect than from the people that have lived it.
It is very tough to keep a long distance relationship going. It's very expensive and stressful, and it takes it's toll on both people. But most people that truly love each other find their way through it. Thanks to the world getting smaller it easier to stay in touch via e-mail, phone calls and skype. My wife and I found skype to be the best of all when we needed that fix of seeing each other but couldn't be together.
If you are both truly in love with each other, have you thought of marriage?
I wish you luck!

I only suggested those specific lawyers because I have seen too many people with tricky cases go to a "general immigration lawyer" who turns out to know little more than what most experienced users of VJ know, and who screws up terribly due to an incomplete knowledge of the INA and its implications. To the tune of deportations and bans that didn't need to happen if the lawyer had understood the law in the first place. My purpose in recommending those particular lawyers was because I know them personally and trust them to understand and care about situations exactly like this, and they don't charge for an initial consultation, all of which are things I can't say of most immigration lawyers out there.
As far as my thought on the domestic violence arrest, while it may sound alarmist, again, in the 4 1/2 ridiculous years I've been living on immigration forums, I've known people who had this turn out badly (long battle with USCIS) under the exact same circumstances. Disputes between spouses that result in a night in jail and no charges are sadly too common and even so, this can be cause for a holdup or even worse when it comes to naturalization. I feel like it's a very bad idea to under-estimate possible consequences, as someone who is typing from a less-than-desired life in another country because of under-estimated consequences in my husband's case.

Carlos and Amy is a long time member and an asset to VJ. Her post does not violate the TOS as it is not advertising... just a recommendation. You will see numerous recommendations for specific people and websites on the board. VJ is fine with it.

I was unable to get any favor for getting my husband to the US in time for the baby's birth, so yeah, unfortunately, regular pregnancy is not usually an expedite-worthy request. However, sometimes, in a few rare cases, I've seen people granted expedites because their pregnancy became complicated (i.e. mandated bedrest, risky surgery needed to maintain baby's or mom's health). Just this week a friend was denied an expedite on the grounds of a pending C-section and the need to have her husband there to help with recovery, so unfortunately that isn't usually enough.
As far as filing for assistance, this can't specifically affect your husband in any way and really might be necessary if you're facing hardship. However, you'll want to make sure that you have someone (family? friend?) who can sign the documentation (I-134?) to pledge to support him financially if he is unable to support himself in the US. If you're facing financial difficulty now, it's likely you wouldn't qualify to be his financial sponsor anyway, with or without filing for assistance, so just make sure to get someone who is willing to stand as a financial sponsor.

The others are correct, for an overstay of 8 years, he is under the 10-year ban of entry under INA 212a9B. This means that he will be unable to enter the US under any visa (fiance, spouse, visitor, student, etc.) for 10 years without an approved waiver. For the Fiance or Spouse visa, this is the I-601 waiver.
No, under the law there is no difference whether he applies for the I-601 waiver on a Fiance or Spouse visa. The waiver is adjudicated exactly the same way in either case. However, in rare cases, some consular employees get confused and attempt to tell K1 applicants that they aren't eligible for the waiver. If this happens, you simply need to print up the legal statutes or even the I-601 instructions which clearly state that fiances are eligible.
As far as I know, Colombian waivers (which get sent to Panama's DHS office for processing) are being processed in 9-12 months right now, plus several more months for transfer between offices and other procedures. Yes, it's a long time, but there's really no other way with a prior overstay.
For more info and support, I suggest visiting immigrate2us.net, which is a forum full of people going through the waiver process and dealing with the heartache that comes with it!