Of course it is our civic duty to use our intellect to DECIDE which candidate we think is best and vote accordingly. But here we really should consider what "best"means. Do we really want only to vote for the candidate that is "best" for our own personal interests? Could it be possible that what WE want for our own personal interests could be in conflict with what would be "best" overall for everyone in the whole country? How about considering what would be "best" for the whole world?

The Maverick, while touting his plan to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, wants to implement a 50 cent per gallon gas tax to curb emissions. A plan that was originally brought up by lefty Carl Levin and backed by every Al Gore fan boy.

Does anyone outside of political pundits, advertisers, polling services, and dato ramanan ramakrishnan biodata others profiting from the spectacle really believe that these long mind-numbing campaigns result in a more informed voter?

But the real damage came from the lack of surrogate control; the surrogates were going after Sarah in ways no other candidate had ever been attacked. The hope was they could quickly discredit Sarah or cause her to quit.

But McCain's campaign advisers stood up and made their candidate face a hard reality; something the Obama campaign has had difficulty. McCain not only listened to the feedback but based his decision on it.

malaysia election The ranking demonstrates how the democrats have been able to poison McCain. Nancy Reagan once advised, "Just say no," the same applies to the Arizona senator. He needs to simply turn the other cheek when pressured by the left to co-sponsor a bill or to come up with flashy new bipartisan ideas.

The idea is absurd, tax the American people more in an effort to stop something that is unstoppable. It's just another example of how McCain gives up his ground to the left in the name of bipartisanship.