Hot Air blog points out, "When Barack Obama needed to win Pennsylvania, what villain did he use in his populist rhetoric? In the below video he chose Countrywide Finance. Countrywide, Obama said, paid off its executives while leaving homeowners with foreclosure notices." He particularly criticized the company's CEO for his excessive compensation and more generally "infecting the economy and helping to create a home foreclosure crisis," which he linked not only to the 2 million who lost their houses but to school districts that couldn't purchase supplies and pay teachers.



When it came time to selecting his VP, what hero did Obama choose? Jim Johnson, who got millions in loans from Countrywide. According to John Dickerson at Slate.com, "Now the man Obama has entrusted with what he has called the most important decision of his campaign is wrapped up in Countrywide and tied to the CEO. There are lots of unanswered questions about the Johnson deal, though no evidence as yet that he did anything wrong. But the Obama standard isn't wrongdoing. It's mere connection to the company. By that standard, this is bad news."

This week Obama was forced, due to media and public pressure, to throw Jim Johnson under the train. How many more people will Obama throw under the train? The list is long and growing.

Now we learn about two other prominent Democrats who are on the Countrywide take. According to Bloomburg.com, "[Democrat] Senator Kent Conrad said he was given preferential treatment on a mortgage from Countrywide Financial Corp. and will write a $10,500 check to charity. "It appears Countrywide waived one point on my mortgage,'' Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat, said in a statement today in Washington."

"Conrad and [Democrat] Senator Christopher Dodd, who [since 2006 and before the current housing crisis] oversees the U.S. mortgage industry as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, were among those who received loans through Countrywide's "V.I.P.'' program, which waived points, fees and borrowing rules for prominent people, Portfolio magazine reported June 12. Dodd has denied receiving preferential treatment." according to Bloomberg.com.

So much for Obama's rhetoric and promise of change. Obama, his party's leadership and his closest advisers are part of the old guard liberal Democratic machine.

What is that old saying, "Do as I say not as I do?"

Recently Senator John McCain at a town hall meeting talked about the need to put the "Country before Party". This phrase has drawn scorn from both the left and the right.

The left calls this statement a shallow and meaningless "mantra". The right sees it as further proof that Senator McCain does not care about conservatives. As a conservative I look at it differently. I believe that the country is tired of partisan bickering and wants the "needs" of the country to take center stage. Politics is about compromise.

I believe that putting "Country before Party" is the essence of John McCain.

As Senator Joe Lieberman said in a letter to McCain supporters, "Time and time again John McCain has put his country first. He refused early release when he was held captive in Vietnam. He continued to put his country first as a national leader in the U.S. Senate. He put country before party when he fought to pass campaign finance reform, sought a bi-partisan solution to the immigration problem, and consistently supported pro-environment policies. His courage to stand up to the failed Iraq war plan of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and lead the fight for a new strategy in Iraq will go down in history, and it saved American lives. These were not always the easy things to do. In fact, they were usually very difficult, and often threatened his political career. But John McCain did what was right."

While I disagree with Senator McCain on several issues, I believe it is time for America to have a leader that truly has stood for our country before party in actions and deeds, not just words.

The liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial board is fawning over the primary victory of Senator Barack Obama in their article, "Unforgettable milestone: Primary success for Obama and America".

The editorial board makes a startling statement in its editorial when they say, "This is a nation, after all, that once enslaved blacks. The country has been bent, molded and tempered by that fact and the quest to atone for it."

There you have the sole reason why the Democratic Party and the liberal media are fawning over Senator Obama. The primary victory of Senator Obama is due to the "quest to atone for it". And what is it? That this nation "once enslaved blacks".

The depth and breath of this statement is amazing but indicative of the belief system of liberal Democrats and those in the media. This nomination is in fact the "atonement" for all liberals.

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune then points out that, "It is not the same government that once routinely denied people of color the right to vote." They are right. For you see it was Democrats who passed Jim Crow laws creating the status of "separate but equal" for blacks. It was Democrats that fought against giving blacks the right to vote and treating them equally. It was Democrats that overwhelmingly voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

How have Democrats atoned for their past evils? They created affirmative action. Promotion based on race not merit. A totally un-American concept.

The "selection" of Senator Obama by the Democratic party is based on their bedrock belief in and commitment to affirmative action. Affirmative action is the Democrats way of atoning for slavery. For Democrats and the liberal media the primary victory of Senator Obama is the "crown jewel" of affirmative action.

Americans when they apply for a job expect that their character, education, personal accomplishments and experience will get them hired, not their race or ethnicity. America was built upon the foundation of equal rights and equal opportunity. America has always been the haven for many fleeing from oppression because of religious beliefs, race or ethnicity.

My family came from Europe as have many other Americans. My family fled Communism. We never owned slaves and feel no need to atone for anything, let alone the slavery that took place in America 200 years ago. We certainly do not believe in giving any one race or ethnicity an advantage over another. Affirmative action is counter to the values and beliefs of America and Americans.

The Democratic Party in the end selected Senator Obama over Senator Clinton because they felt the need to "atone". The people who voted in the Democratic primaries did not elect Senator Obama. The Democratic Party via the Rules Committee and un-elected super delegates selected him over a highly qualified woman to be their nominee for President.

The Democrat Party has now nominated an unqualified, inexperienced but eloquent black man. As former President Bill Clinton pointed out this is the first time in history that a newly elected Senator with essentially "one year of experience in Congress" will be the Democratic Party nominee.

What we now see is the combination of achieving the "crown jewel" of affirmative action and the quest for "atonement" by the Democratic Party for their racist past. These two forces came together in the persona of Barack Obama.

But will American voters want to atone or not?

Will you vote for the next President of the United States because you feel the need to atone? Will you vote for Senator Obama because you believe in affirmative action? Will you vote for him even though he is not qualified for the position but because he must be given the Presidency to atone for past evils?

If you were picking your doctor, lawyer, financial planner or mechanic what would you base that decision on? If you were hiring someone to work in your company what would you base that decision on? When you fly and if you could pick your pilot what qualities do you want him or her to have? Would you make these decision based on the need to atone? We think not.

Most Americans do not feel a need to atone for slavery or anything else.

We believe the job of President must go to that person who has the experience, is best qualified and most accomplished. That person is John McCain.

What do you think?

In their editorial the liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune focuses on one proposal by Senator John McCain in, "Gas-tax break is a mirage".

First the liberal editorial board cherry picks what Senator McCain said. Here are the exact words he used on suspending all taxes on gasoline:

"I propose that the federal government suspend all taxes on gasoline now paid by the American people -- from Memorial Day to Labor Day of this year. The effect will be an immediate economic stimulus -- taking a few dollars off the price of a tank of gas every time a family, a farmer, or trucker stops to fill up. Over the same period, our government should suspend the purchase of oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which has also contributed to the rising price of oil. This measure, combined with the summer-long "gas-tax holiday," will bring a timely reduction in the price of gasoline. And because the cost of gas affects the price of food, packaging, and just about everything else, these immediate steps will help to spread relief across the American economy."

Secondly, what the Sarasota Herald-Tribune does not tell you is Senator McCain's vision for the economy and America's future. There are many more important points in his speech than the suspension of all gas-taxes.

The liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial board does not want you to know about them. Well we do.

Here are some of the really important things that Senator McCain said in his breath taking speech on the economy at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, PA:

"We need rules that assure fairness and punish wrongdoing in the market. We need tax policies that respect the wage-earners and job creators who make this economy run, and help them to succeed in a global economy."

"Americans are also right to be offended when the extravagant salaries and severance deals of CEO's -- in some cases, the very same CEO's who helped to bring on these market troubles -- bear no relation to the success of the company or the wishes of shareholders."

"In the end, the truest measure of prosperity in America is the success and financial security of those who earn wages and meet payrolls in this country. Many are waiting for their first homes... their first big break... their first shot at financial security. And helping them will be my first priority in setting the economic policies of this nation."

"...many in Congress think Americans are under-taxed. They speak as if letting you keep your own earnings were an act of charity, and now they have decided you've had enough. By allowing many of the current low tax rates to expire, they would impose -- overnight -- the single largest tax increase since the Second World War. Among supporters of a tax increase are Senators Obama and Clinton. Both promise big "change." And a trillion dollars in new taxes over the next decade would certainly fit that description."

"I will use the veto as needed, and as the Founders intended. I will veto every bill with earmarks, until the Congress stops sending bills with earmarks. I will seek a constitutionally valid line-item veto to end the practice once and for all. I will lead across-the-board reforms in the federal tax code, removing myriad corporate tax loopholes that are costly, unfair, and inconsistent with a free-market economy."

"...we will institute a one-year pause in discretionary spending increases with the necessary exemption of military spending and veterans benefits. "Discretionary spending" is a term people throw around a lot in Washington, while actual discretion is seldom exercised. Instead, every program comes with a built-in assumption that it should go on forever, and its budget increase forever. My administration will change that way of thinking."

"In my administration there will be no more subsidies for special pleaders -- no more corporate welfare -- no more throwing around billions of dollars of the people's money on pet projects, while the people themselves are struggling to afford their homes, groceries, and gas. We are going to get our priorities straight in Washington -- a clean break from years of squandered wealth and wasted chances."

"I will send to Congress a proposal to cut the [corporate] taxes these employers pay, from a rate of 35 to 25 percent."

"I will also send to the Congress a middle-class tax cut -- a complete phase-out of the Alternative Minimum Tax to save more than 25 million middle-class families more than 2,000 dollars every year."

"Our tax laws and those who enforce them should treat all citizens with respect, whether they are married or single. But mothers and fathers bear special responsibilities, and the tax code must recognize this. Inflation has eroded the value of the exemption for dependents. I will send to Congress a reform to increase the exemption -- with the goal of doubling it from 3,500 dollars to 7,000 dollars for every dependent, in every family in America."

"What we need is a simpler, a flatter, and a fair tax code. As president, I will propose an alternative tax system. When this reform is enacted, all who wish to file under the current system could still do so. And everyone else could choose a vastly less complicated system with two tax rates and a generous standard deduction."

"Those who can afford to buy their own prescription drugs should be expected to do so. This reform alone will save billions of dollars that could be returned to taxpayers or put to better use."

To read the full speech and the sweeping reforms that Senator McCain is proposing go here.

We continue to be amazed at what the liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune wants you to know but more importantly what it doesn't want you to know.

Their editorial is at best dis-information and at worst political pandering to the liberal view point and dishonest journalism.

Have you ever noticed the primary difference between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals attack government to get more of it.

Conservatives attack government to get less of it.

Our very liberal friend and former editor of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune Waldo Proffitt is the perfect example. In his column, "Hostile takeover of government" he remembers the good old days of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Mr. Big Government himself.

FDR gave us Social Security, which is about to bankrupt this country. If FDR had supported private savings accounts in the 1930s we would all be millionaires by now. How could FDR have known that government would take the money we put into Social Security and use it to feed more government rather than invest it in our economy? Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme ever.

Anyway, Waldo rants against the usual suspects President George W. Bush and former Governor Jeb Bush, "So, here in Florida, with a Bush as president and a Bush as governor, we got a double-strength prescription: Cut taxes, cut services, dismantle regulations. Cripple Social Security. Turn over Medicare to private companies. Make it more expensive for children to get medical care. Make it more expensive to attend college, and more difficult to fund decent public schools. Do not spend enough to maintain roads, bridges and other elements of the infrastructure."

We say fantastic, congratulations to GWB and Jeb. Let's do more of it. Less government regulation, privatize Social Security, privatize and deregulate Medicare, cut taxes, cut non-essential services, privatize our state colleges and universities, provide real school choice by providing vouchers to parents, eliminate the onerous property taxes and move them over to the fairer sales tax, and let families bear the burdens of taking care of their own by empowering them.

Take all the money saved from doing these things and give it to the people and families that pay taxes. Do not give it to those who do not pay taxes. We want to see a national sales tax and elimination of the income tax because one taxes consumption and other productivity. If we can't do this immediately then let's start with a flat tax and have everyone in America pay something toward our national defense. That is fair.

As for the S&L crisis of the 1970s we say we are glad it happened, just as we are glad we are having a sub-prime problem now. That is how the markets work. Lenders gave money to more and more people so they could buy their own homes. Some were speculators and they got burned, good. Some were honest families that stretched their budget to have the American dream, let's try to help them with lower interest rates or a temporary freeze in rates. Some were given loans to feed the greed of the market, punish the predatory lenders. Otherwise let the market correct itself. Will we all feel some pain? Yes. Will we get through this crisis? Yes.

The thing that is really is disgusting about Waldo's article is his "cheap shot" at Senator John McCain. Waldo refers to the Keating Five congressional investigation that was part of the S&L crisis. The Keating Five were 4 Democrats and one Republican.

After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Democrats Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings, while Democrat John Glenn and Republican John McCain had been only minimally involved. The Committee recommended censure for Cranston and criticized the other four for "questionable conduct."

That is it. In reality the lawyer who headed up the investigation said that he recommended that Senator McCain be dropped from the investigation. The Senate Ethics Committee disagreed because if they did that then it would only be Democrats left. They needed a token Republican - John McCain.

Waldo knows this and still slings mud. Sad that Waldo would stoop so low. But that is what former employees of the New York Times do. Sling mud without basis in fact. We call that in the blogosphere "tabloid journalism".

We agree with Ronald Reagan who said, "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other."

If we stop feeding the government baby we will get less you know what coming out the other end.