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.

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune again wants to do the same things in their editorial, "Confronting violence" and they keep expecting different results. This is called insanity.

In their editorial about growing gang and drug related violence they lament the, "brutality roaring through our communities, from Rubonia to Newtown to North Port and Punta Gorda. The stories are not uncommon in our nation, but they are happening here, in long-troubled neighborhoods, in normally peaceful public places, in streets where it was once a common assumption that a child was safe to ride his bike."

Strong words. Sound like Baghdad? This is the fear they use to demand action. But what are their solutions?

"There are marches. And forums. And candlelight vigils. And talk of building parks and basketball courts and persuading young people early in their lives to avoid gangs and drugs.

All of those efforts -- particularly, we emphasize, the call for a major reinvestment in early-childhood education -- are commendable. Each initiative sends an important message to cold-blooded killers that there are people here who care, who will demand justice, who will not cower."

Gangs will cower because we hold candle light vigils and invest in early childhood education? I don't think so. Gangs are vicious, without values and destructive. Our law enforcement must be as vicious in attacking them and we must support their efforts.

They go on to refer to a grand jury report on gangs that recommends better witness protection programs, restricting bonds on gang members and more police and prosecutors.

All of these are doing the same things and expecting different results. None address the root causes of gang and drug related violence.

We wrote two columns on gangs, "Gangs and broken families" and "Fix the flaw in Gun Datatbase".

Why do our youth join gangs?

According to Dr. Gerald L. Zahorchak in testimony to the U.S. Senate on January 19, 2007, "Research has shown two major reasons, or 'root causes,' why young people join gangs.

First, these kids seek a sense of identity and fellowship. A gang provides its members with a degree of belonging the members think they cannot achieve outside of the gang’s culture. In essence, the gang functions as an extension of, or substitute for, the family or the community.

Second, and perhaps ironically, these kids seek safety. Kids who live in an area that is already overrun with gangs and who are subjected to gang violence often join gangs in an attempt to obtain safety and protection from the violence."

We believe that the solutions presented by the Herald-Tribune article, which will most probably be embraced by our politicians are off target and address the symptoms and not a cure.

The cure is long term, requires a total change in our social behavior, is against the current socially liberal mind set and requires a total rethinking of our government programs.

The solution is build strong traditional families. It is that simple and that complex.

Here are a few ideas on how we can strengthen our families:

Mandate that there is a father and mother in every home with a child.

Subsidize traditional families at all levels of government - socially, morally and economically.

Implement government rules, processes, procedures, regulations, laws and taxes that support traditional families.

Repeal any government rule, process, procedure, regulation, law or tax that does not support traditional families or subsidizes/rewards single parenting or divorce.

Punish single parenting and divorce - socially, morally and economically.

Celebrate marriage, traditional families, stay at home moms or dads, in wedlock child bearing, and healthy and safe homes.

Mandate we have in each family household with a child one of the parents work a full time job.

Mandate couples be counseled by a church, synagogue, public or private counselor on the roles and responsibilities of marriage before issuing a license.

Mandate applicants for marriage licenses be tested for drugs and sexually transmitted diseases.

Mandate sending every child to preschool at the church, synagogue, public or private school that parents choose and pay for. For married couples tuition is free.

Mandate every child in every school be tested randomly for drugs, including steroids.

Do these sound draconian? Do they go against the grain of our current social values? Or will they, and other ideas you may have, re-establish the fundamental building block of our communities and our society - the traditional family?

Strong families, fathers and mothers in every home, drug free schools, churches and a community that completely supports all four will eliminate our violence problem. Continuing to do what we are doing will simply lead to more violence.

What do you think?