sharkman

No. We already have it in place with RevenueCanada. They can say: "Everybody below a certain income X gets the subsidy or tax credit." Nothing, and I mean nothing, involving money and a level of government would be that simple. And what about my other comments concerning the inflationary effect this would have? As well, at any time there are businesses that are on the bubble, and something like this would send them into bankruptcy. Also, I agree with Riverwind's concern about those homes having electric heat. They would pay more than everyone else for something that is an essential need. Homes with electric heat would no doubt go down in value.

And yet the question remains unanswered about what Harper pays to have a make-up artist travel with him and what her job description is. So, are you involved in politics? I noticed you've only been a member on this board for less than a year, and yet you've made over 6400 posts, or about 22 posts a day 7 days a week. They say politicians love to talk and most of your comments seem pretty political, which is why I'm curious.

That can be solved by giving them a subsidy to their income. Ah, now you're talking about a whole new level of bureaucracy, to decide who gets what kind of subsidy for how long, etc.

I went back and read the comments again, and I don't see why you are being so stubborn. And in the above remark, you infer Greg is a jerk. That is rude. Also rude is the flippant question about him not being subject to his own rules. I see you are relatively new here. I suppose either you will figure this out or not.

However, it is the consumption of the electricity which is identified as the problem. Thus, if the price of electricity was raised, there is no need to ban anything. Everything (incancescent, fluorescent, LED, toasters, micro-wave ovens, air conditioners, vacuum cleaners, fans, stereos, video games, etc. etc.) will be targetted more effectively without the need for any bureaucracy. I find that concept to be problematic. The poor, who can't afford any new expenses, would suffer the most with this idea. Most other people would moan and pay up, just like we do with the outrageous gas prices. And the government would find a brand new cash cow to milk. And this would have an inflationary affect on our economy as companies would have to pass on their higher costs to the customers. Raising taxes on cigarettes is one thing because of the health issues, but to raise the costs of electricity is rather heavy handed.

Wow J, you really know how to string out a debate on nothing. You must be involved in politics.

Well, the reffing for the Canuck game was close, not letting too much go, and the Canucks get spanked. The Canucks are in trouble. Their injuries to Cooke, Kessler, Salo and Bieksa will be their downfall.

You are asking the wrong question. You might as well ask, how does a guy murdering his wife affect MY marriage, and my children's upbringing. Answer, it doesn't affect either. The questions need to be along the lines of how will fundamentally changing the institution of marriage affect society in 30 or 40 years.

I figure as soon as an election is looming, the Tories will crank up the attack ad machine and kick ass. They really have an advantage there.

I must have missed that one, who had a fight with Geraldo?

What about her statements that the Brit arrests in Iran were somehow a conspiracy as well? Add to these her continued diatribes on Trump, AND the Murdoch mockery and you have someone who's cheese is in danger of sliding off her cracker. I don't see alot of venom from the right around here, we're actually happy that she's no longer going to be on The View, and I'm sure Babs is too.

A voice of reason that believes in conspiracy theories? That's no voice of reason.

this is a lie A lie is when you willingly say something you know to be untrue. Since I can't read your mind, I don't know for sure if what I'm assuming in this matter is true. Therefore I'm not lying, I'm saying what I think.

Why wouldn 't she want to anymore? She obviously loves the attention, she loves to talk and she loves controversy. I just don't buy that after only one season, she's tired of it.

So, two Canadian teams left, and Vancouver looks like the one that has the tougher road with Anaheim. Any sports reporter I've heard is picking Anaheim, but there are some thiings that could help the Canucks. One, the referees. If they call it anything like the previous Vancouver series, it will be Van's advantage. Even in game 7, the phantom penalties were obvious. If the Ducks try to get physical on the Canucks they could end up in the box regularly. The other thing I've heard is after Pronger and Neidermayer, their defense gets pretty unexceptional, and could be beat. But the Canucks will need Cooke back soon, and as of yesterday, he's not even skating yet. Also, Bieska is getting blood tests done! If he goes down, so goes the series.

Rosie is not coming back to The View, which is odd considering how they claim an upswing in viewer share. The official line being handed out is that they could not come to a contractual agreement to bring her back for another year. In the press statement ABC gushes at her, Barbara gushes at her and Rosie gushes back. Rosie's folly Here's what the ABC suit said: "Going in we knew we would have an amazing year with her, and that anything beyond that would be gravy. But we were willing to take the chance because we understood what a coup it was to entice Ro back to daytime television. So here we are a year later, and while we've tried to come to terms on a deal that would extend her co-hosting duties on 'The View,' we find ourselves unable to agree on some key elements." This raises at least two questions. Why, if it was such a coup to get Rosie back to daytime television, did they only sign her to one year? Two, If it's been such an amazing year, why didn't they open the cheque book and give her whatever those 'key elements' were? Let's face it, this press release is full of holes. She's not coming back because she was such a pain in the neck, and kept showing amazing lack of judgement on what came out of her pie hole. They just don't want to admit they were wrong to bring her in. Barbara's comments were so over the top, it's like she's making it obvious she's b.s-ing.

In post one, newbie introduced the topic and tillman's death. In post 2 Guthrie commented on how bad things were in Iraq, which showed he thought it happened in Iraq. He later accused us of being nit picking buffoons, which is as close to an admission as you're going to get.

I hope you had a nice vacation Liam, good to see you're back.

Uh, get a grip G. If there was a snowballs chance that Bush could be impeached, the Dems would be all over it like white on rice. The impeachbush crowd is going to have to keep dreaming.

Should he cover his ass in Afghanistan or Iraq?

You've got a point, Drea, a normal Cdn majority government amounts to a soft dictatorship. At least in the States, the congress and senate can provide balance. In Canada, we have no such mechanism.

Ahem...Corporal Pat Tillman died from friendly fire in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Prepare for the dancing reply. Hey, don't you dare confuse guthrie with the facts! He has enough trouble already lol

How do you know they know nothing about the topic? I suggest to you that the following list of celebrities don't necessarily know everything about the firearms they promote. link: In your link, they don't appear to be promoting firearms, but anti firearm efforts. Am I missing something? As for Sheryl, she can have my 6 squares of tp when she pries it from my cold, dead hands! (With apologies to Heston)

Of course they had, and have an exit strategy. Even if you use the word never four times on one line. Things went to hell over there and like anybody would, you have to change your plans. And it will come to an end alright. Americans will get tired of it like they got tired of Viet Nam, and will make the politicans bring the army home probably within a few more years if they aren't home by then.

This is way past dumb. It would be funny if it wasn't so... anal!