Crack. They're On Crack. All Of Them.

I'm shocked. I'm shocked, awed, and appalled at the level of crack-headedness that Katherine Harding, who allegedly wrote this paragraph in today's Globe and Mail, exhibits:

Mr. Klein's comments are the latest in a string of public pronouncements on the matter. Besides suggesting a national referendum on the issue, he has said that if same-sex legislation is passed he will urge federal politicians to demand that the government invoke the notwithstanding clause to stop it.

The shocker is the back half of the last sentence, which claims that Ralph's said that if same-sex legislation is passed, then he will urge federal politicians to demand that the government invoke the notwithstanding clause to stop it. There are two separate fundamental problems with this claim.

First, presumably it would be the government forcing this hypothetical same-sex legislation through Parliament, so it's rather odd that the government would then notwithstand its own legislation. Not only that, but presumably the government could just, you know, repeal legislation it doesn't like. But that's the less serious error in this claim.

The real shocker is the claim that the notwithstanding clause is effective against legislation. Anyone who's actually, you know, bothered to read the Constitution will recall that the notwithstanding clause is only useful for preventing legislation from having constitutional impairments. It doesn't have any effect against any other piece of legislation; all it does is stop some parts of the Charter from being in effect.

Le grand sigh.