KipWellsFan

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 09:48 AM) He hasn't since Hillarity cried in New Hampshire. What's it like to be bitter all the time? I don't see anything from the past few days that indicates Obama's any less likely to win than the day he won South Carolina.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 09:20 PM) ahhh good call. yea, he's done.. and so is Obama. Obama needed edwards to draw votes from hillary. Wow guys keep your pants on.

Well if I'm thinking about this right, Obama didn't even receive that many less votes than Hillary in Florida, so if the votes are eventually transformed into delegates it won't be a major shift anyways.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 01:42 PM) Conflicted... I like Obama, HATE Kennedy. What to do? It's not like Obama, or anyone, can be particularly picky about who endorses him or her.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 26, 2008 -> 08:24 PM) Oh yea. You have to understand that the media is creaming their pants for Hillary. After Obama "HAD A GIGANTIC WIN" and Hillary won, she got the "comeback kid" label Billy had. They got their wish, and you have to understand that the media has already WAAAAAAAAAY factored in an Obama win in SC purely because of the race factor, which is sad. Hillary might win but it won't be because of some media conspiracy to annoint her.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 09:06 AM) So who would he go with? The "secret meeting" between Clinton and Edwards last weekend now looms larger, doesn't it? I'd imagine if he endorses anyone it will still be Barack. I remember a similar situation in Canada where a lower candidate had a secret(everyone knew about it) meeting with one candidate who he didn't seem as friendly with but still ended up being the kingmaker for the more logical choice.

Kind of off topic but I saw this brought up in the imdb message boards. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/06/13/bloop/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloop

Pic #1 Pic #2 Yah these are some pictures of the splash.

I thought this was one of the most fun movie experiences I've ever had in the theater. I wasn't overly impressed with the monster or anything but it was just so damn thrilling, and the love story intertwined into the film worked too. Very well done. 10/10 for now, but we'll see how it holds up in further viewings. Great stuff. Oh, and I wish I had seen this apparent splash at the end. I was actually looking at the water for something to happen there, but I didn't catch anything. This whole part kinda reminds me of The Sopranos ending. People claiming they saw Meadow...

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 14, 2008 -> 09:22 AM) Congratulations! You've just been marketed! Yah, I for one am proud to admit to being a sucker.

Comes out this Friday right? Definitely going to try and see it.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 10, 2008 -> 10:58 AM) Seriously, what has anyone done in the office of president since Reagan that makes that much of a POSITIVE difference? It's (our government) a cesspool of s***. Totally random but I just thought of two things Bill Clinton did that made a positive difference. For one I am thankful for his subtle but perhaps crucial intervention warning against Quebec's separation from Canada in the 1995 referendum, and his other words in favor of Canadian federation. Also many people seem to think Bill Clinton played a key role in the Northern Ireland peace deal.

Did anyone, and I mean anyone, predict this?

QUOTE(Reddy @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 08:03 PM) right. Edwards beating Clinton is what we're hoping for - and it may just become a reality. all day i've been canvassing and convincing people to go from Clinton to Edwards and it's been working. She's been doing a number on herself on her own - crying and such - and most people i talk to, edwards supporters or no, have said "anyone but hillary!" the newest poll has us within 6 of clinton and with the way she's going down and the way we're shooting up around here... it'll be interesting. Strongly doubt it.

QUOTE(Reddy @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 07:06 PM) news from the NH front - look for some interesting results tomorrow night... that's all i'm gonna say. Possible that Edwards might beat Clinton again?

I saw Charlie Wilson's War tonight. Apparently conservatives have some problem with the historical accuracy but I still thought Hanks and Hoffman made this a really fun movie to see.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 11:30 AM) The true conservative will tell you that there needs to be incentive for people to succeed. Why should I go and get the education levels to work in a highly technical field, if the government will just hand me everything anyway? That's one thing I give Billy "BJ" Clinton credit for, and that was welfare reform. You have to incentivize people to get off their lazy ass, and actually DO something to earn what they get. Otherwise, we all become mindless drones and just do enough to make the state continue to feed us all. I'm sorry, I'm totally against that. Dignity and humanity is a basic tenet and should be respected as such by all humans, not my government telling me what the definition of dignity and humanity should be. It's not their place. I don't think many people in a rich country like Canada hope that by working hard one day they'll be able to afford proper health care. The government isn't providing nice apartments or a Lexus. It's something provided because Canadians in general seem to think it's humane, beneficial, and feasable. But that's us.

Getting way off topic now but what the heck... This isn't that complicated. The liberal agenda is that the rights of the individual to equal opportunity(not conidition) is paramount. This can be transferred to the health care issue in that everyone should have equal opportunity to health care with reasonable exceptions acceptable in a democratic country. I think some conservatives make the mistake of thinking that people of lesser means are neccessarily that way because they have failed in life for this reason or that reason. But not all people of lesser means are that way and deserve to be treated with dignity and humanity.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 09:34 AM) Why, then, are we getting reports of Canadiens coming across the border in droves to get health care? From what I've been hearing is that they can't get to specialists when needed for months upon months at a time. No thanks, you keep your 'universal health care'. I want no part of it whatsoever. Like I said, wait times are an issue. But I doubt "droves" would be an accurate description of the amount of Canadians crossing the border to see specialists, particularly in life threatening cases.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 07:58 PM) Why does the GOVERNMENT have to do this for you, Balta? I find it to be better if government leaves us the hell alone. Now, not to the levels that RP is talking, but... certainly, I don't want my government telling me what doctors I can or cannot see, for example. And if you think that is not what is going to happen, don't kid yourself. In Canada we have universal health care and no one in my immediate family has been told what doctor to see. Wait times are often an issue here but I don't ever hear people complaining about being forced to see a particular doctor. Perhaps in situations where a specialist is required. Oh, and as for predictions I don't think the local Des Moines paper will be far off. Obama will win tonight.

I coulda sworn I've seen that very picture years ago, or at least one just like it.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 1, 2008 -> 07:02 PM) In 2004, the Iowa Caucuses for the Dems determined how the convention votes of 45 of the 4,366 voting delegates to the party convention will vote. As a practical matter, that is what is on the line, roughly 1% of the convention delegates. Interesting. Does whomever with the most convention votes become the Presidential nominee or does a candidate need 50% of the delegates? From my example selecting the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, a candidate needed 50% of the delegates, ie candidates who were last place in delegates kept dropping out freeing their delegates to go to the other candidates, until someone had 50%. And who are these voting delegates? And do they actually vote at the final convention?

What exactly is on the line at the Iowa caucuses? Obviously momentum, but what is actually happening here that helps make someone a president. Are people being elected as delegates who will go to the convention at the end? I tried looking on wikipedia for an explanation of all this but it was still confusing.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 29, 2007 -> 10:15 AM) And again, that running average includes an ARG poll that is worthless, and an LA Times poll that is using half the normal pool size. You have to throw those out to feel any sort of confidence in the numbers. Run the average without them and tell me what you see. I know that since you are working for Edwards, you are getting all that positive hype from the camp... but take a look at the real numbers. Clinton is not that high. Edwards is surging no doubt, but, I think you're delusional if you choose to focus on polls that are clearly flawed. I don't really like Edwards either but wouldn't any pollster tell you that sample size isn't really the issue, but whether its a good representation of that population.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...71211.wkosovo11