Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Canadian Political Free-for-All -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gulo who wrote (245)	11/10/2000 2:03:26 AM
From: marcos	Respond to of 37041

Ok, you're right of course, the BNA act did function as would a constitution if we had had one ... but i thought the wording a bit funny especially since it was directed at Duceppe ... and it just wasn't a constitution, there's more than a semantic difference imho, never mind who wrote or passed it. Notice how Day and Duceppe both carefully specified how they would not enter a coalition government? ... the logical coalition is between the two of them, they could form a national government easily and their views on increased provincial power lean the same way, if not in the same terms, lol .... but they must placate the hard-liners within their own parties. No, as i've said before, i don't think Day being an evangelical disqualifies him from office, not at all ... but it does qualify me to comment on the fact until all threat of him imposing on me his own personal tenets are removed ... can't deny i'm uneasy with it ... the reason i am most critical of Day is that i see the Alliance as the least of the evils on economic grounds, so will likely be inclined to vote that way, but the 'keep your religion in your pants' message will need to be stated loud and clear and continually throughout the campaign and the rule of the party, should it come to that.