Transcription
Photocopied magazine clipping:
'crap.'
Glenn Beck to Sarah Palin,
who answered "all of them"
when asked, "Who's your Daddy?"
===
Photocopied newspaper clipping:
THE LAW [Harmon's insert: crosses out "law" for "False-doctrine"] OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES rears its head in Juneau again.
Almost daily, some lawmakers offer compelling arguments for a 90-day (or shorter) legislative session, even though they didn't mean to do so.
Rep. Carl Gatto's offering, House Bill 88, is an example. It doesn't contain the word "Shariah", or Islamic law, but that's what it is aimed at, according to Gatto.
Officially, HB88 prohibits courts, agencies, and the like "from applying a law, rule, or provision of an agreement that violates an individual's rights under the Constitution of the State of Alaska or the United States Constitution."
Our constitutions, state and federal, already trump any law, rule or provision. Why write a law that says so?
Harmon's comments:
WTF? Good point, actually.
First of all, I've never heard of the so-called unintended consequences, so how did it become a law? Secondly, they don't explain what they mean by "again", that's a vagary; real journalists aren't supposed to be vague.
Lastly, I looked up the word "consequence" and Webster's defines it as: "the natural result of a previous action or condition." So there's no such thing or certainly on such law of U.C. This is just one of many thousands of instances of this false-doctrine being spread.
Other posts by this author
|
2024 apr 30
|
2024 apr 14
|
2024 apr 11
|
2024 apr 9
|
2024 feb 21
|
2023 nov 23
|
More... |
RSS
Replies