August 17, 2018

Deliberate Legal Jury-rigging in Maine’s Right to Hunt Proposal

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

At the onset of the discovery, one might ask how can any government entity be so damned stupid. But if we could only be honest with ourselves, we might just discover that the stupidity is deliberate, dishonest jury-rigging by some with the knowledge that the ignorant casting the votes don’t know the difference…or not.

I’ve often commented that we live in a “Post-Normal” world – down is up, left is right, black is white, etc. It is nothing new to discover that law proposals contain confusing language. I say confusing as it only applies to the lazy, automatons that don’t take time to read and understand what they are voting for. In many instances, it doesn’t matter anyway. Ballots will be cast according to how the representatives were told (threatened) to vote…or else.

Some in Maine have been trying to pass an amendment to the Maine Constitution sold as a means to guarantee a Maine citizen the right to hunt, trap, and fish. Even though I have said this effort comes years too late, it hasn’t stopped some from trying to get something passed even if it is mostly a worthless amendment. With each passing year, voters become more deeply brainwashed into the Environmentalism’s way of thinking, complete with animal perversion perpetuated by misguided scientism and an immoral, off-track society.

It now appears that the proposed vote on the amendment went to both the Maine House and Senate but was presented with different wording in each case. I.e in one instance a “yes” vote meant no and a “no” vote meant yes.

In a “clarification” sent out by the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, it reads: “The majority report for the House is “ought not to pass”, a yes vote means you are against the constitutional amendment a no vote means the legislator was for the amendment.  Confusing I know. 

*The opposite is true for the Senate.  The motion in the Senate was the minority, ought to pass report.  A yes vote in the Senate is for the constitutional amendment.”

Deliberately confusing I would say.

Perhaps there is lots of stupidity to go around to the fact that someone(s) couldn’t do a better job with how a proposal was worded. And then again, maybe it was intended to be that way.

The truthful question is, who can be trusted anymore? Governments are worthless. Governments are corrupt – at all levels. And you put your faith and trust in them? Shame on you!

You decide whether this “failure” is due to ignorance, stupidity, laziness, ineptitude, corruption or a combination of any and all. One thing is certain, it didn’t have to be handled this way. Would the vote have been different? We may never know.

Shame on the many!!

Share