Elaine Chow, puppet of the New World Order, is now preparing to throw out laws designed to encourage U.S. companies to hire U.S. workers first.
Do not be fooled, the New World Order is relentless, vicious and smart. Conservative blogs managed to shut down the Dubai ports deal and the amnesty package. But that doesn’t mean we won. If anything, like poking a stick into a hornets nest, we may have made the situation much, much worse.
Let me explain. The amnesty bill essentially had 8-9 parts, all of the them, minus constructing a fence at our border, were highly offensive. Conservatives rightly organized and got the public involved to shut the bill down. But now, as demonstrated above, the entire amnesty bill plus some is being implemented, one ‘regulatory ruling’, one ‘administrative rule’ at a time. The only solution we have to bad government in a democracy is to get involved. And it appears the solution is worse than the problem, organizing a successful opposition to 10-20 new ‘regulations’ would be nearly impossible. And that, my friends, is exactly what they are betting on.
Quite simply, incrementalist social policy is the single greatest threat to freedom and liberty that exists today. The people do not have control over anonymous agency heads whom only have to hold faux public hearings in order to implement their agenda. The only solution may well be a radicalization of democracy. The solution may well be to realize what the Founders always intended, that the powers of the Executive branch are to be limited.
I am calling for every Executive Department head and Supreme Court justice to be elected. It is the ONLY way that the public voice could carry the level of legitimacy needed to demand real chance. Think it wouldn’t work? That is how most States’ Executive branches are set up. You may already be living in such a situation.
Here is a chart that lists all Departments of the Executive branch.
Do you realize how much social policy is ram-roded through these branches of government? And do you realize that in all of this morass of regulatory power the only person whom has to answer to you at election time is the President? Quite simply, the scope of power that is in the people’s control is way too far removed from that which the Founders intended. By putting Department heads up for election, we can ensure that the proper amount of scrutiny and public weight is put on all matters of social policy and regulation.
By the time President Bush leaves office, nearly every single element of the Amnesty bill will be de-facto federal law. Introduced not by legislation into the House or Senate and signed into law by the President, these laws are merely put into existence at the whim of the Agency head whom claims the most authority.
As this article notes, what Elaine Chow is proposing to do goes directly against the laws that her agency is supposed to enforce. Her ‘regulation’ is completely unconstitutional and Congress, which has adjudicated their power to these branches, will just sit on their ass and do absolutely nothing about it. And that is because they completely support it, they just don’t want to have to answer to their constituency by having had an actual public vote on the issue of amnesty.
Stripping the President of the ability to nominate his or her own cronies for Department heads is the only way to restore Constitutional public representation of federal laws. And unless we drastically reconsider how our leaders answer to the public in this democracy, we may well be powerless to stop any legislation that we are opposed to. Even some of the most important issues like that of blanket amnesty for illegals.
